Okay, let's just ignore day-to-day encounters, because they're the effects of objectification and misrepresentation, not causes (although they add to and perpetuate the culture--whatever).
Why is male sexuality seen as such a bad thing? It's not. It's just that so much has been made to appeal to men and to satisfy their pleasures for the past hundred generations that it's a bad thing. I'm tired of it. Female sexuality and desires haven't been tended to in any media until recently (people started to care about female appeal what, 30-40ish years ago?). Feminists who are offended by this over-sexualized representation that overtly means to appeal/sell to straight men, otherwise known as objectification, are more concerned with the lack of proper and realistic representation than we are men's reactions. We don't damn men for their sexuality. Everyone is entitled to that. It's a biological fact. We are lashing out against the system and society's absurd demands of us as a result of this rampant objectification. It's a greater issue that these things are than what they do.
Here, have a video in return. I don't remember where I saw the whole documentaries, so you'll have to make do with a trailer.
Do you believe in male priveledge? If so, could you explain? Also, could you give a list of injustices towards women that could have been prevented had _______ been implemented and also a list of things you or common feminists would hope to achieve?
This video by thunderfoot brilliantly responds to a recent video by feminism frequency.
Yeah, male privilege was and is a thing. Instead of explaining, I'll give you some examples and you can draw the conclusions for yourself:
- A gal makes 70-90c to every dollar a guy makes
- A gal is more likely to face sexual harassment in the workplace
- Female celebrities are expected to cake their faces while males are allowed to (literally) let it all hang loose
- A guy’s “I’m in a bad mood” is caused by events, not hormones
- Guys are less likely to be assaulted in any way if they’re alone (Here’s a fun fact: a guy spent 20 minutes trying to get me into the backseat of his car once while I was waiting for my train. He didn’t approach any of the guys standing much farther off from the main platform. He picked the girl with headphones and a book, who obviously didn’t want to interact with other humans. Why? Because vagina.)
- A guy is allowed to have a family and career without being blamed as an irresponsible or selfish person
- How many men are in Congress and the House? How many women?
- What percentage of higher-level corporate positions belong to men?
- A guy’s potential role in religion isn’t limited by his sex
- It’s more scandalous to see a woman breastfeeding than a shirtless man (whose nipples provide little to no practical function)
- Nice-guy complex exists. That sense of entitlement is a thing. (I take no responsibility for Taylor Swift and everything she singalings. She’s just….no)
- Female fashion is a pain. Literally.
- A gal who strays from the media-perceived ideal is more harshly judged than a guy who does
- Slut-shaming is a thing
Feminism to me isn’t just about the forward movement of female interests, in terms of political, cultural/social, or economical grounds, but the promotion of forward thinking for the benefit of all sexes and genders. It’s more about the breaking down of the patriarchal and discriminatory hegemony we have today and leveling out the playing field. Feminism started as a movement for the empowerment and equality of women in a world of men, but that binary system of thinking isn’t practical anymore so I’m extending the arguments to encompass all gender groups that have been in want of representation, consideration, and respect.
I'm not sure what exactly could be implemented except for earlier recognition of the disparity between genders and sexes. That would probably have evened things out a lot quicker. That's kind of all that I'm going for. And basically everything I listed could have been prevented/made less of an issue if there were greater awareness, sooner.
Video was too long and I already spent too much time writing this during finals week. Sorry. Maybe next time.
I never know if things are on topic or not anymore. If I stray, let me know.
It's just that so much has been made to appeal to men and to satisfy their pleasures for the past hundred generations that it's a bad thing. I'm tired of it. Female sexuality and desires haven't been tended to in any media until recently (people started to care about female appeal what, 30-40ish years ago?).
So you're tired of ... what exactly? Something that stopped 30-40 years ago? How many of those past hundred generations of supposedly strictly male-oriented marketing of "so much" to "satisfy their pleasures" have you been a part of? That's like a black American saying that they're tired of slavery in the United States.
Feminists who are offended by this over-sexualized representation that overtly means to appeal/sell to straight men, otherwise known as objectification, are more concerned with the lack of proper and realistic representation than we are men's reactions.
Lack of proper and realistic representation ... You mean, like Barbie dolls? (For those of you who may not know, if Barbie was a life-size woman, she would be prettymuch anorexic, with a 39FF bra size. This has been used by feminists to claim that Barbie dolls give young girls unrealistic expectations and goals of physical appearance, leading to eating disorders. These measurements are also verying and highly disputed.) On the other end of the spectrum, if a G.I. Joe doll was life-size (at six feet tall), he would have a 55-inch chest and 27-inch biceps. It could be argued that this extremely unrealistic image of a hero might drive a young child to participate in sports, weightlifting, and other activities so that he can achieve a more attractive body, and that any injury or disorder that might occur would be the fault of the improper and unrealistic representation of what a man's body is supposed to look like. Could be argued ... by somebody that wants to blame others for their own lackings.
Originally Posted by Bleachfangirl
Yeah, male privilege was and is a thing. Instead of explaining, I'll give you some examples and you can draw the conclusions for yourself:
"Male privilege" is no more "a thing" than "female privilege". While I will explain with a simple statement, I will also present counter-examples and facts, and you can draw the conclusions for yourself:
Recognizing differences between sexes is not sexism. Period.
Men and women are different. This is not to say, in the least bit, that one sex is better than the other. However, the fact remains that we vary greatly. Because of these differences and variations, men and women are better suited for different roles in society and life, including the workplace. One could claim that we have evolved into what we are now -- males better suited to take some specific roles, females better suited to take other specific roles. Recognizing these differences -- not ignoring them or pretending they don't exist -- is what makes us a stronger civilization.
- A gal makes 70-90c to every dollar a guy makes
A "gal" is also much more likely to miss work. The vast majority of parents who handle the day-to-day issues with their children -- such as taking them to the doctor when they're sick or talking to their teachers when they're in trouble -- are mothers. Women may be less effective at their jobs for part of every month because of menstrual cramps -- certainly not all women or even a majority, but it does happen. And then there's the whole pregnancy thing, and to my knowledge, the ratio of women to men who get pregnant has got to be pretty lopsided -- many employers are forced to provide maternity leave, but not paternity leave. So if you are an employer, and you employ two people, and one of them may be less effective for a few days a month, may take an extra week or so off every year, and may even be out for twelve weeks if they get pregnant ... would you pay them the same?
- A gal is more likely to face sexual harassment in the workplace
And then sue the pants off (figuratively, of course) their dirtbag employer. A "gal" is also more likely to use her physical appearance as another persuasion point for benefits, privileges, or wages.
- Female celebrities are expected to cake their faces while males are allowed to (literally) let it all hang loose
I don't expect anything from any "celebrities", and I don't care what they do. And since the majority of followers of popular culture are females, if you need to blame one gender for that, blame your own.
- A guy’s “I’m in a bad mood” is caused by events, not hormones
... how is this a bad thing? Are you referring to the fact that a male's attitude is a result only of actual events that might logically affect one's attitude, and that a woman's attitude may be affected by her hormones, and saying that it's somehow man's fault? Or are you complaining about the perception that women's moods are solely affected by their hormones, and thus not the responsibility of the woman herself?
- Guys are less likely to be assaulted in any way if they’re alone
That's partly because of sexual attraction, and partly because females are typically smaller, physically weaker beings.
- A guy is allowed to have a family and career without being blamed as an irresponsible or selfish person
... by whom?
- How many men are in Congress and the House? How many women?
How many qualified women as compared to qualified men have run for Congress? We've never had an albino Senator, that doesn't mean that albino people can't do the job or is at a societal disadvantage.
- What percentage of higher-level corporate positions belong to men?
Again, correlation does not equal causation. But also, children.
- A guy’s potential role in religion isn’t limited by his sex
And everybody is forced into a specific religion? There are no female religious leaders at all?
- It’s more scandalous to see a woman breastfeeding than a shirtless man (whose nipples provide little to no practical function)
It's also more "scandalous" to see a man in a thong or extremely short shorts than it is to see the same articles of clothing on a woman. Or a guy in makeup, or earrings, or with long hair.
- Nice-guy complex exists. That sense of entitlement is a thing.
I'm not sure what "sense of entitlement" is supposed to go along with "nice guy complex", which is the idea that some males will slowly forfeit their masculinity to win affection, other than the "sense of entitlement" that states that "women should give me a chance because I'm not a complete asshole, instead of continuing to date complete assholes".
- Female fashion is a pain. Literally.
There are women who are shallow enough to care more about their appearance than their comfort and stupid enough to intentionally wear articles of clothing that cause them pain. They get no pity from me.
- A gal who strays from the media-perceived ideal is more harshly judged than a guy who does
Yet again, you are looking elsewhere for a gender to blame, when you should be looking at your own.
- Slut-shaming is a thing
So are sluts. And some guys also get bad reputations from being "players". (Oddly enough, they continue to enforce this bad reputation by continuing to use women for sex, because some women are stupid enough to open themselves to the possibility of sex with somebody they know has a habit of using women for sex and dumping them.)
Feminism to me isn’t just about the forward movement of female interests, in terms of political, cultural/social, or economical grounds, but the promotion of forward thinking for the benefit of all sexes and genders.
Somehow, I highly doubt that current feminism -- in its "men are responsible for all evil" mentality -- benefits men at all. Or women, for that matter.
Sig courtesy of Plastik Assassin.
Greater love hath no man than this; that he lay down his life for his friends.
John 15:13
I'm so happy that the whole tag thing in the posts hasn't changed :')
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
So you're tired of ... what exactly? ...Could be argued ... by somebody that wants to blame others for their own lackings.
There's a residual effect of these past happenings on our current society’s view of people, places, things, and events. There are still negative stereotypes that were built on this past discourse. I’m tired of it taking so long to go away. Black people are too. But I guess they should just stop complaining that there are so many discourses around their behavior and perceptions that influence their substantially higher-than-any-other-racial-group’s incarceration rates.
I was talking more about advertisements and film…never really mentioned toys. There are so many arguments made about toys nowadays…I always thought toys are supposed to be fun to play with. I see now that they do have plenty of complicated and messy subliminal influence on kids (especially about gender roles and body image), but whatever. Too much to get into for my uneducated behind. I played with Lego blocks and Play-Doh to avoid all that (thanks, Mom )
Originally Posted by Sasqatch
Recognizing differences between sexes is not sexism...is what makes us a stronger civilization.
You’re right, recognizing the differences between men and women is good. Especially when you need professionals and specialists to provide top-quality services and goods. But we have technologies that bridge those gaps now. Where a guy was obviously better suited to blacksmithing than a woman was before, we have awesome shit that’s connected to a computer where you just need to type a bunch of code stuff (Hi, I know technology real goodly).
But I will admit that women are much better at lactating and making babies. In general. Sometimes it doesn’t work out so well. Let’s not go there. I’m pretty sure I'm already being insensitive and politically incorrect by even hinting at this. (Think Ellie in the Up opening)
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
A "gal" is also much more likely to miss work...would you pay them the same?
Out of principle, I’d pay them the same. But since it’s all about the money, I guess no one would. It’s irksome, though, that we have to be sort of penalized for this biological fact. We’re sorry we’re having your babies and keeping our species alive.
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
And then sue the pants off (figuratively, of course) their dirtbag employer. A "gal" is also more likely to use her physical appearance as another persuasion point for benefits, privileges, or wages.
That you said a gal would do that hurts me. It hurts me deep in my chest cavity.
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
I don't expect anything from any "celebrities", and I don't care what they do. And since the majority of followers of popular culture are females, if you need to blame one gender for that, blame your own.
That wasn’t the point, but okay. I’ll blame myself for something that doesn’t necessarily have to be followed to be known because of its ubiquity.
... how is this a bad thing? ... and thus not the responsibility of the woman herself?
Sometimes I forget that not everyone knows how I am (lol such effective communication skills) and insert sarcasm when it’s not obvious and inappropriate. Read that original bullet with the heaviest sarcasm you can muster. I meant it to mean that half the time, when a woman has a bad day and acts it out, people assume it’s because she’s hormonal. That’s probably partially true, but writing it off as that all the time is so annoying.
[QUOTE=Sasquatch]That's partly because of sexual attraction, and partly because females are typically smaller, physically weaker beings.[QUOTE]
Practical targets. Makes sense.
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
... by whom?
By my mother and every other old-fashioned person who thinks it's a woman's responsibility to have babies. And why does “old-fashioned” matter here? Because it refers to that old line of thinking that isn’t so old because it’s still biting me in the bum today.
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
How many qualified women as compared to qualified men have run for Congress? We've never had an albino Senator, that doesn't mean that albino people can't do the job or is at a societal disadvantage.
I’ve actually never seen an albino person, period. There aren’t that many of them, so it makes sense if they’re not all up in da bizniz. This has to do with the discourses surrounding the idea of a leader and how people stereotypically assign these roles to males. Women aren’t not reaching that level of qualification coincidentially. They’re expected to go for other roles in society because it’s still gently suggested from every direction that their strengths don’t align with these kinds of positions of power.
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
Again, correlation does not equal causation. But also, children.
Ugh, children. Why do we even have them? We should just stop. That’d be good.
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
And everybody is forced into a specific religion? There are no female religious leaders at all?
Some people are forced, yeah. And there are, but that’s like me asking, “There aren’t still rainforests?” in argument to the facts of deforestation.
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
It's also more "scandalous" to see a man in a thong or extremely short shorts than it is to see the same articles of clothing on a woman. Or a guy in makeup, or earrings, or with long hair.
It’s actually friggen scandy to see anyone out in the streets in a thong. Holy hell. Please cover more of your junk, whichever kind that may be. Also: not scandy for a guy to wear makeup for earrings. Been there, seen plenty of that.
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
I'm not sure what "sense of entitlement" is supposed to go along with "nice guy complex", which is the idea that some males will slowly forfeit their masculinity to win affection, other than the "sense of entitlement" that states that "women should give me a chance because I'm not a complete asshole, instead of continuing to date complete assholes".
I’m not sure what’s going on up until the last line, so I’ll just address that until you clear me up (I even left the whole quote to make it easier). The lady wants what she wants, yo.
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
There are women who are shallow enough to care more about their appearance than their comfort and stupid enough to intentionally wear articles of clothing that cause them pain. They get no pity from me.
Again, not the point. The point is that women have to go to much more extensive lengths to attain that ideal beauty that has been manufactured for them/us. It’s a personal choice, of course, of whether or not you participate in this culture industry, but there is a social pressure women feel that compels them towards it.
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
Yet again, you are looking elsewhere for a gender to blame, when you should be looking at your own.
I thought I understood, but apparently not. Can you explain this to me again? :/ I don’t know how to respond until I understand.
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
So are sluts. And some guys also get bad reputations from being "players"....sex and dumping them.)
There are also more “sluts” than there are “playboys” with bad reputations. It’s easier to get a bad reputation as a sexually active female than it is when you’re a male. This is something people tell me constantly as well as something I’ve observed in day-to-day observations. People are so much quicker to judge a girl for losing her virginity than they are with a boy. Maybe it’s because I hang around church people who follow the rules of a God who says that a woman cannot lead and blames women for the original sin (and thereby all of them thereafter). Maybe that’s the reason for all these sexist discourses I’m hearing and am so used to.
Zomg. I gotta get out of church.
Somehow, I highly doubt that current feminism -- in its "men are responsible for all evil" mentality -- benefits men at all. Or women, for that matter.
That’s not the mentality that all of us have. That’s what I was implying in explaining my position in that way. I’m not blaming any one gender, sex, or group. I’m blaming the discourses, traditions, and stereotypes.
I’m being vague where I am because I’m lazy. You can fault me for that and look into it on your own if you think what I’m saying isn't valid. I won't leave the responsibility on you though, because that's not fair. Just know that I'm lazy and that not every feminist is as big a shit as I am.
I’m tired of it taking so long to go away. Black people are too. But I guess they should just stop complaining that there are so many discourses around their behavior and perceptions that influence their substantially higher-than-any-other-racial-group’s incarceration rates.
Maybe they should worry about their higher-than-any-other-racial-group's crime rates (and drug rates, and teen pregnancy, and divorce, and violence, and single-parent, and high-school dropout, and ...), instead of simply sitting back and pointing fingers. It must be much easier to simply say, "look, we're being mistreated", but the facts get in the way of that argument.
I see now that they do have plenty of complicated and messy subliminal influence on kids (especially about gender roles and body image), but whatever.
Or, instead of whining about how everything and everybody has a "subliminal influence", we can raise our children so that something as simple as looking at a friggin' doll -- or an actress or actor -- isn't enough to make them starve themselves. We rely on television to raise the next generation, and the next generation will base their lives off television. That's not the fault of television itself, or societal roles or stereotypes, that's the fault of mediocre parenting.
Out of principle, I’d pay them the same.
That's why there aren't as many female Fortune 500 CEOs. Emotion over logic. You would pay two people the same wages, with full knowledge that you won't get the same production out of them, because that's your "principle"? It's my principle that every person earn what they are paid, and if two people end up with different production levels, those two people earn different salaries.
We’re sorry we’re having your babies and keeping our species alive.
I didn't realize that you could do that by yourself, or that it doesn't take two people for that, and one person is stuck paying for those babies even if he didn't want them.
You complain that females are stereotyped because of their physical attributes and biological differences, then seek pity for the same things?
I meant it to mean that half the time, when a woman has a bad day and acts it out, people assume it’s because she’s hormonal. That’s probably partially true, but writing it off as that all the time is so annoying.
You have a built-in excuse for a bad attitude, and that annoys you?
Practical targets. Makes sense.
Unfortunately, yes.
By my mother and every other old-fashioned person who thinks it's a woman's responsibility to have babies. And why does “old-fashioned” matter here? Because it refers to that old line of thinking that isn’t so old because it’s still biting me in the bum today.
Your mother thinks one thing, so automatically everybody thinks the same thing, and it's man's fault? You're gonna be in for a rough awakening when you move out.
This has to do with the discourses surrounding the idea of a leader and how people stereotypically assign these roles to males. Women aren’t not reaching that level of qualification coincidentially. They’re expected to go for other roles in society because it’s still gently suggested from every direction that their strengths don’t align with these kinds of positions of power.
How many women are even interested in politics in relation to men? (I mean to the point of running for office, not a "let-me-kill-my-children-but-make-other-people-pay-for-my-birth-control" protest)? Correlation does not equal causation. If women choose to pursue that field, they have every opportunity to do so.
And again -- men and women are different. If men are better suited to be political leaders than women, so what? I know you support equal pay for unequal work in the name of "equality" -- should we support less-qualified leadership because they're a different sex?
Some people are forced, yeah. And there are, but that’s like me asking, “There aren’t still rainforests?” in argument to the facts of deforestation.
No adult is forced to participate in religion in the civilized world today. So no, you are not forced into a religion in which your career choices as clergy are limited.
And, no -- it would be like me bitching and whining about how I can't live in a rainforest, and you pointing out that there are rainforests that I could move to.
I’m not sure what’s going on up until the last line, so I’ll just address that until you clear me up (I even left the whole quote to make it easier). The lady wants what she wants, yo.
You claim "nice-guy complex exists". I know "nice guy complex" as one thing -- where the nice guy keeps getting screwed (figuratively) -- but apparently, to you, it's a bad thing for women. I don't follow.
Again, not the point. The point is that women have to go to much more extensive lengths to attain that ideal beauty that has been manufactured for them/us. It’s a personal choice, of course, of whether or not you participate in this culture industry, but there is a social pressure women feel that compels them towards it.
So?
Expectations are made because -- hey, this sounds familiar -- sexes are different. And as long as women keep buying into these stereotypes, they will continue to be reinforced and strengthened.
Let's get down to the extreme, 50's-style basic expectations. Men are expected to work full-time, making enough to comfortably support their entire 2+ child family. They're expected to know how to work on their own vehicles (the two -- one for husband, one for wife -- they paid for with their career). They're expected to know enough about construction to remodel their house (the one they paid for with their career), or at least maintain it and care for their land. They're expected to be a good father to their children, encouraging them at sports and school. And then they're expected to get their asses back to work, because none of this is free. Women are expected to cook, clean, raise children, and look decent. And you're bitching that the "look decent" part of that is an expectation that's too difficult to live up to?
I thought I understood, but apparently not. Can you explain this to me again? :/ I don’t know how to respond until I understand.
When women are the ones who judge each other, it's not man's fault when women are judged. Your sex controls and enhances this negativity. So if you're looking to blame someone or something for negative aspects of female fashion, etc., look in the mirror.
Sig courtesy of Plastik Assassin.
Greater love hath no man than this; that he lay down his life for his friends.
John 15:13
When asking these questions, always put youself in someone's place and ask if you'd like to be objectified or treated in such way. Then things become alot clearer.
When asking these questions, always put youself in someone's place and ask if you'd like to be objectified or treated in such way. Then things become alot clearer.
^^^ yes ok thank you
That was so much more concise than anything I could have come up with...though admittedly, I've yet to read Sasquatch's post...just kinda skimmed it...kinda. I know that it'll require much more emotional investment and effort than I am willing to give up right now.
Praise be to Odin King.
Long live the king.
Please don't make this a warning for spam.
Goodnight.
================EDIT: STUFF BELOW IS ADDED===========================
(looks like the only time I’m going to have to respond to this is in the middle of the night while I’m suffering the effects of those cappuccinos I had earlier. Still too tired to do this, but I’m a girl of my word)
Maybe they should …"look, we're being mistreated", but the facts get in the way of that argument.
You know how there’s that never-ending argument about nature versus nurture? And how everything’s been settled by “it’s nature AND nurture”, because humans are too damn complicated for simple answers? Well think of it like that, but for a people group. There’s a nature to them that exists in the logic and messages that get passed down within the group (I’m stretching this metaphor…if it counts as that. Sorry if it doesn’t make sense to you. I’ll try again if I have to with a different example if you’d like), and there’s a nurture from the culture and groups around them. The rest of us, with our stereotypes and judgments, act as the environment/nurture. And yeah, there’s all that crap about stereotypes wouldn’t exist if there weren’t facts to generalize from, but the discourses around them are negative to begin with. There’s also the factors of where black people are concentrated and how the environments are there (mentalities of lower-economic-class people are more material because their assets are liquid and it’s absurdly abstract, with their kind of income, to heavily consider the future. Like, it makes more sense to spend it now than to save for better when you know the final amount you save won’t even make it to the better that you want). It’s that ugly spiral again, where the cause is the result is the cause is the result all over.
Or, instead of whining ….t's the fault of mediocre parenting.
It’s not that people rely on TV or the culture industry to raise their kids, but that they can’t shield the kids from that stuff. It’s everywhere. It’ll have its impact, regardless of how small the exposure. Here’s a personal example: I didn’t know that homosexuals existed until I watched the episode of One Tree Hill in the 6th grade where Anna kissed Peyton. My mom tried to rein in the “damage” by explaining to me that it was wrong, not normal, not usual, blah blah blah. But you know what? That one image that one time was enough. I got curious after that and lo and behold, I believe in the freedom of love. Personal example and one-time-deal doesn’t expand to much if you don't’ want it to, but it’s a pragmatic truth for me.
That's why there aren't as many female Fortune 500 CEOs. Emotion …salaries.
Ouch. You’re hurting my chest cavity again.
I’m talking about that though. Women who do produce as much as men aren’t paid the same amount as men are. It’s the fact that women are automatically paid less, on account of the possibility of their getting pregnant, that I’m irked. Wouldn’t it make more sense to pay a woman who does the same work as a man the same wages until she gets pregnant and takes maternity leave? Then pay her that crap and deduct that amount, spread out over a given amount of time? Why doesn’t that happen? Instead, the system is based on speculation instead. My mother holds the same position as her male friend who started working one month after her (at the same workplace), and he makes 5k more than her a year. Why? I don’t know. They do the same things, from what I can tell from the job descriptions, and get the same bonuses. I guess because she’s a woman. Doesn’t matter that she’s gone through menopause and can’t have kids anymore or that she doesn’t have to take off time for her kids. She has a vagina. And so no 5k for her.
I didn't realize that you could do that by yourself, … then seek pity for the same things?
We can’t do it by ourselves, but we’re the only ones capable. Sorry that’s a biological fact. And stuck paying for babies he didn’t want? Are you talking about divorce babies or hit-and-run babies? Either way, don’t tap it if you can’t own up to it.
I’m not complaining about those stereotypes. I’m complaining about the ones that involve us being less capable in any sense besides the physiological.
You have a built-in excuse for a bad attitude, and that annoys you?
It annoys me that half the time (using this as a saying, not as an actual estimate of statistics), our reasons for having bad attitudes are downplayed as a result of this “excuse”. We have legitimate causes for emotional reactions too.
Your mother thinks one thing, so automatically everybody thinks the same thing, and it's man's fault? You're gonna be in for a rough awakening when you move out.
I don’t think you caught the part where I said every other old fashioned person who thinks the same. I’ve met more people than my mother. Jeeze man, you act like I’ve never stepped foot out the door. And it’s not “man’s fault.” How many times do I have to say it’s the culture and discourse before you realize I’m not pointing a finger at you? I’m pointing to a fact and problem that lies outside of people that I want them to notice, recognize as a problem, and do something about.
How many women are even interested in politics in relation to men? …opportunity to do so….should we support less-qualified leadership because they're a different sex?
Lolololol. I just have too many angry things to say about this that wouldn’t come out kindly, so Rowan and Sasquatch can just hate me for being a bitch about not answering this one. Take it as a sign of respect that I’m not answering. Not one of disrespect.
No adult is forced to participate in religion in the civilized world today. So no, you are not forced into a religion in which your career choices as clergy are limited.
Dude, did you really just use “civilized” to describe the difference between cultural values and traditions? And try telling that to my devout Christian (and American) friends who would love to lead and teach but don’t because God is still pissed at women for the apple incident. She holds her tongue only against men because her holy book tells her it’s her place. If you want me quote the scripture, I can get back to you in a long time after I’ve been back to church and consulted with someone (I’ve only read the first 12 chapters of the first book of the New Testament myself).
And, no -- it would be like me bitching and whining about how I can't live in a rainforest, and you pointing out that there are rainforests that I could move to.
I’m glad you see it my way then.
You claim "nice-guy complex exists". I know "nice guy complex" as one thing -- where the nice guy keeps getting screwed (figuratively) -- but apparently, to you, it's a bad thing for women. I don't follow.
I don’t mean it where the nice guy gets figuratively screwed over in a serious way, but in the sense that a guy feels entitled to a reward (usually in the form of a female and her affections) for being a perfect gentleman to her. There are some guys with that mentality, who think that girls are obligated to love them if they treat them right and give them the time of day. That’s not how it works.
We understood the term differently. Sorry about the mix up.
Expectations are made because -- hey, ………..expectation that's too difficult to live up to?
It is when women no longer fulfill only that role and men aren’t expected to fulfill the old role either. Things have changed. Times have changed. Roles have changed. Expectations have too. But not all of them. And it’s the ones that haven’t that are dumb.
When women are the ones who judge each other, it's not man's fault when women are judged. Your sex controls and enhances this negativity. So if you're looking to blame someone or something for negative aspects of female fashion, etc., look in the mirror.
Really? It’s just women who judge women? Men don’t care at all how women look and present themselves? Sweet. I’ll let all the straight girls I know that they’re off the hook. I’ll let you know how that goes.
Last edited by Bleachfangirl; 03-24-2013 at 04:28 AM.
Reason: I said I would lol
I'm in absolute amazement at how Sasquatch puts all this effort in responding, and it gets completely ignored. Wait, not amazement, disgusted. It's almost like you are indoctrinated to ignore the simple truths. If you are so hell bent on convincing others of the injustices toward women, if they do in fact exist, then your response should be to respond pint by pint just as how Sasquatch has to each response to prove your point and further your cause; it would be respectful. Or doesn't it matter that guys agree with you, as long as the women do? At least make an effort to respond instead of just sitting back and 'skimming through' and disagreeing.
Yeah, I didn't have the energy to do all that earlier. My bad. I was hoping I wouldn't have to go through another round of trying to prove myself to someone who, to me, seems just as hell-bent on ignoring the truths as I saw them the same way you think I've been "indoctrinated" to by passing it off with bad humor, but no dice. You've called me out, so I'll go back and edit the other post (to avoid doubling up) when I have more time and attempt to return the favor of persuading a wall to move for me.
Just don't get offended or offensive about it. Sasquatch kept his cool about me stepping back from the podium and conceding that we have opposing views on the matter. I respect that sense honor you have regarding discussion though. Also, I don't know which women you're talking about. The only people who I think agree with me are the people who "liked" my posts (that's a cool new feature, by the by). And I have no idea what gender half of them express....I guess they're all women, from what you've said. That's a surprise. I always thought Alpha and Clint Eastwood to be men. Whoops.
Though I don't post much in ID, everytime it seems like Sassy posts, 9/10 times the thread gets derailed, closed, feelings get hurt, etc. I don't really care at all because I am humored by the diatribes that happen between him and whomever decides to step up, but that's probably why everyone else doesn't respond.
As for myself, I do think that men and women are unwillingly put into different roles at times, such as "husbands are supposed to be endless sources of income and labor and are inept at taking care of children and shouldn't get full custody of kids if they get divorced because they're wrong," or "wives should just stay at home and work because they cant keep a job and have to use sick days for kids and they have monthly times where they get all emotional!" And it's wrong to judge people like that, we shouldn't see a classification like male and female already have behavioral bias like that.
And for some reason all my examples I could think of refer to getting married, kids and divorce. My biological clock must be ticking oh lord.....
†SOLDIER† - "Yep still better than you"
CPC8: It's hard out here for a pimp.™
hahas, updated July 28th (oldie but goodie!):
Originally Posted by from the CPC8
Pete: Meier, don't even lie. I know you were going on a nice little tear before you settled down with the new gf
che: rofl <3 Meier.
Loaf: Meier is the best.
Meier: Hey Pete, I said I started to, it just didn't end the with the same number of women. Then again this one is kind of on the outs with me if she doesn't straighten up and fly right so that means I will be back in it for the thrill of the kill. Got some in the reserves. Even got a rePETEr (<---- like that ay? AYYYYY?) on the back burner.
Block: I do like the rePETEr except it kinda makes it sound like you're going to pork Pete. No homo.
(Updated April 13th 2013)Currently Playing: League of Legends, FTL, Dead Island, Borderlands 2, KotoR 2
Though I don't post much in ID, everytime it seems like Sassy posts, 9/10 times the thread gets derailed, closed, feelings get hurt, etc. I don't really care at all because I am humored by the diatribes that happen between him and whomever decides to step up, but that's probably why everyone else doesn't respond.
I hope no feelings were hurt in the making of this thread.
And for some reason all my examples I could think of refer to getting married, kids and divorce. My biological clock must be ticking oh lord.....
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Bleachfangirl
)
Bookmarks