Search forums

Forums

Export thread

Do you identify as a feminist?

Limit: 500

Sep 14, 2010#1

The Lovely Boehner

I will use the wikipedia definition, knowing that "feminism" is a broad term.

Feminism refers to political, cultural, and economic movements seeking greater, equal, or, among a minority, superior rights and participation in society for women and girls. These rights and means of participation include legal protection and inclusion in politics, business, and scholarship, and recognition and building of women's cultures and power.

Now, I imagine people will say, "Of course I support equal rights for women," and I'll assume that a few of the people here do. I'm putting a finer point on the question by asking whether you identify as a feminist.

That is, do you have a vested intellectual or political interest in feminism? Is it something that shapes or guides your political or intellectual pursuits? Do you follow news related to feminist issues?

Here are your options. The poll will be split along gender lines.

I do not identify as a feminist - even if you support equal rights for women, you don't devote any special time or thought to women's issues - at least no more than you do any other issue. You would balk or feel uncomfortable labeling yourself a 'feminist' in conversation, and may not have a strong understanding of what feminism really entails.

I identify as a feminist - being a 'feminist' is a part of your personal ideology, and you would freely label yourself as such.

I identify as a radical feminist - you adhere to a branch of feminism that would be considered extreme or even controversial in normal society.

Sep 14, 2010#2

Dave

This passage right here, "superior rights and participation in society for women and girls", means that anyone who identifies themselves with this definition of a feminist in my opinion is an idiot.

Sep 14, 2010#3

The Lovely Boehner

Dave said:
This passage right here, "superior rights and participation in society for women and girls", means that anyone who identifies themselves with this definition of a feminist in my opinion is an idiot.

These people are feminists the same way Phelps is a Republican and Osama is a Muslim.

Sep 14, 2010#4

Krisken

I support the equal rights of women and the treatment of both sexes to be on the same playing field, but do not identify myself as a feminist.

Sep 14, 2010#5

Hylian

Krisken said:
I support the equal rights of women and the treatment of both sexes to be on the same playing field, but do not identify myself as a feminist.

↑ this

Sep 14, 2010#6

Dave

Fine said:
This passage right here, "superior rights and participation in society for women and girls", means that anyone who identifies themselves with this definition of a feminist in my opinion is an idiot.

Sep 14, 2010#7

The Lovely Boehner

Dave;436826][QUOTE=Fine said:
This passage right here, "superior rights and participation in society for women and girls", means that anyone who identifies themselves with this definition of a feminist in my opinion is an idiot.

These people are feminists the same way Phelps is a Republican and Osama is a Muslim.[/QUOTE]

Yes, but as you are using this as your definition of the word to which you want to know our affiliation, the answer is and should always be "No."

Now, if the definition is for equality and the same rights for all I'm all for it. But using your definition you answer, it would be insane to agree.[/QUOTE]

or, among a minority, superior rights and participation in society for women and girls.

Sep 14, 2010#8

Espy

Hylian;436825][QUOTE=Krisken said:
I support the equal rights of women and the treatment of both sexes to be on the same playing field, but do not identify myself as a feminist.

↑ this[/QUOTE]
Puh-reaty much this, but I suppose according to the OP even though I've never personally thought of myself as one I suppose I do "identify" as one according to his options.
I suppose being the husband of a strong, successful woman who has had to deal with some very hard stuff in both the workplace and the military as well as someone who works almost completely with women they have taught me about what women deal with I value those relationships so much for that.. It has influenced very positively my work, my Masters thesis and assumed PhD work, my teaching and I suppose my life and the choices I make in general.

Sep 14, 2010#9

drifter

Fine said:
This passage right here, "superior rights and participation in society for women and girls", means that anyone who identifies themselves with this definition of a feminist in my opinion is an idiot.

Sep 14, 2010#10

Chazwozel

I support the baking of pies in kitchens.

Sep 14, 2010#11

MindDetective

I would say I do identify myself as one. I actively support the success of female students and encourage them to break stereotypes (particularly with things like learning math and that science is hard for women). I don't follow an ideology or attend rallies or get riled up when people note pay disparities (hey, it is a complex issue) but I acknowledge that women are capable members of society in almost every conceivable way and adhere to that philosophy in my daily interactions.

Sep 14, 2010#12

Espy

Re re re re re opened!

Sep 14, 2010#13

SpecialKO

In the sense how actively I assert it, I can't claim to be a feminist, though its undeniable how much the viewpoint has influenced my life and worldview in positive ways.

Sep 14, 2010#14

Gusto

Chazwozel said:
I support the baking of pies in kitchens.

Me too. Baking pies in garden sheds is almost impossible.

Sep 14, 2010#15

Chibibar

Gusto;436842][QUOTE=Chazwozel said:
I support the baking of pies in kitchens.

Me too. Baking pies in garden sheds is almost impossible.[/QUOTE]

baking pies in a camp fire is hard but doable

Sep 14, 2010#16

blotsfan

Chazwozel said:
I support the baking of pies in kitchens.

You son of a bitch! Clearly it should be cakes that are baked there!

Sep 14, 2010#17

North_Ranger

I consider myself a humanist.

Sep 14, 2010#18

Chibibar

I personally believe equality across the board. I do not believe there should be any restriction base on gender, color of your skin, religion, sexual preference or ideology.

Sep 14, 2010#19

Gusto

I consider myself a human.

Sep 14, 2010#20

Morphine

I think feminism is as dangerous as its counterpart. No extremes are right from my point of view. I believe in equal rights and opportunities only.

Sep 14, 2010#21

The Lovely Boehner

Morphine said:
I believe in equal rights and opportunities only.

Surprise! that's feminism!

Sep 14, 2010#22

Morphine

Fine said:
I believe in equal rights and opportunities only.

Surprise! that's feminism![/QUOTE]

Well there's a lot of controversy about what feminism literally means but let's not get so technical.
Believing in equal rights and opportunities isn't really feminism, the opposite (not believing in equity) would be sexist.

Sep 14, 2010#23

Sara_2814

I'm not a Feminist, because I'm not only interested in the rights of women. When anyone asks, I always say I'm egalitarian (this does not make Feminists very happy, for some reason

). Everyone deserves a fair chance and respect, whether it's a woman wanting to be a fighter pilot or a man wanting to be a nurse. I'm not ignoring the fight for equality women have had -- I'm old enough to have seen the struggles women had with getting equal treatment and barely missed having to deal with it -- but Feminism seems to have turned from "equal rights for women" to "our way or the highway".

Some of the most misogynist people I've encountered have been Feminists (with a capital F). If you dare stray from The Feminist Way and, say, choose to stay at home to raise your children, you are automatically a worthless, stupid cow who has been brainwashed by the patriarchy. Feminism was supposed to open up choices to women, but apparently we just traded Chauvinists for Feminists telling us what we can and cannot do. Oh, yay. :rolleyes:

They demonize traditionally female roles (such as nurses or secretaries): how is that "pro woman" in any way, shape or form? Why would they not try to stress the importance of these roles (just try having a hospital stay without good nurses!), so that either sex would be respected as a nurse or secretary? It's like how the radical Left and radical Right come full circle to the point you can't tell them apart: Chauvinists and Feminists can both be misogynist assholes (and the Feminists are often far more vicious about it, in my experience anyway.)

And I also support the baking of pies! My husband makes excellent pie. Which is good, because my pie crusts are barely edible! :lol:

Sep 14, 2010#24

The Lovely Boehner

It's really annoying when people think the loud fringe parts of a group of people are representative of the whole.

Sep 14, 2010#25

Chibibar

Fine said:
It's really annoying when people think the loud fringe parts of a group of people are representative of the whole.

but isn't that what America is all about?

Sep 14, 2010#26

ThatGrinningIdiot!

Fine said:
It's really annoying when people think the loud fringe parts of a group of people are representative of the whole.

I doubt she was referring to the group as a whole, she seemed to be outlining her own personal experience with a few individuals.

Sep 14, 2010#27

Adammon

Fine said:
I believe in equal rights and opportunities only.

Surprise! that's feminism![/QUOTE]

That's like saying "Affirmative Action" isn't racism. Just because it's 'good', doesn't mean it's 'equal'.

Sep 14, 2010#28

The Lovely Boehner

Adammon;436887][QUOTE=Fine said:
I believe in equal rights and opportunities only.

Surprise! that's feminism![/QUOTE]

That's like saying "Affirmative Action" isn't racism. Just because it's 'good', doesn't mean it's 'equal'.[/QUOTE]

I am not really sure what you're saying at all.

Sep 14, 2010#29

Covar

Feminists killed the gentleman.

Sep 14, 2010#30

The Lovely Boehner

Covar said:
Feminists killed the gentleman.

The Gentleman that thinks women are silly little fools that can't handle the world on their own should be drug out behind a shed and beaten to death with a shovel.

Sep 14, 2010#31

Covar

Apparently I'm rude because I don't hold the door open for female soldiers the same rank as me or below. I've also been called a sexist because I believe that women and men should have to meet the same PT standards if they want to hold active combat jobs.

So I guess I'm not a feminist, because I believe in treating men and women equally when the situation demands it.

Sep 14, 2010#32

Sara_2814

Fine said:
It's really annoying when people think the loud fringe parts of a group of people are representative of the whole.

You know what's even more annoying? When people are passive-aggressive and don't directly deal with whatever they have a problem with.

Considering the reactions I get to "I'm Egalitarian", it certainly does seem to be "our way or the highway". Feminism is no longer a goal to be accomplished, it's become a label as much as "Liberal" and "Conservative" to identify as a group, and if you are Other, you are considered suspect. It's even worse if you're a woman who "betrays the sisterhood". :rolleyes:

If you mean the second part, which part of "Some of the most misogynist people I've encountered are Feminists (with a capital F)" implies the whole group? I'm saying that this idea that Feminism is always "pro woman" is false, and some of the cruelest, most hateful misogynist crap I've ever experienced has come from Feminists. How does that make any sense, to claim to stand for the rights of women, yet spew bile at any woman who doesn't lock-step with your agenda? To claim that women have the right to choose their own destinies, but then sneer at them when they make a "wrong" choice?

To me, the whole group is being spoiled by some bad apples. Since the radicals use the label "Feminist", and that's also the stereotype, that's enough to poison the name for me. I do not at all want to be associated with that.

And the name is divisive anyway. It creates an "Us vs Them" mentality. If you truly believe in equal rights for every person, no matter what their sex or gender, then why use a label that only specifies females?

Sep 14, 2010#33

Sara_2814

ThatGrinningIdiot!;436875][QUOTE=Fine said:
It's really annoying when people think the loud fringe parts of a group of people are representative of the whole.

I doubt she was referring to the group as a whole, she seemed to be outlining her own personal experience with a few individuals.[/QUOTE]

I guess I should have ended it with "My Fault, I'm Female".

Sep 14, 2010#34

Frankie Williamson

Covar said:
So I guess I'm not a feminist, because I believe in treating men and women equally when the situation demands it.

Yup, especially in the PT department. Only I think it should hold for jobs such as firefighting and the like as well.

Sep 14, 2010#35

The Lovely Boehner

Sara_2814 said:
If you truly believe in equal rights for every person, no matter what their sex or gender, then why use a label that only specifies females?

Because women are the only ones being held down and marginalized on a systemic level?

Sep 14, 2010#36

Cajungal

Fine said:
Feminists killed the gentleman.

The Gentleman that thinks women are silly little fools that can't handle the world on their own should be drug out behind a shed and beaten to death with a shovel.[/QUOTE]

Wow, that's really unfair. To me, that's about as unfair as saying that all feminists are flannel-wearing [rhymes with "bikes"] who want rid the world of the evil penis and are only bitter because they can't get a man.

A gentleman, to me at least, is simply someone who treats people with gentility and class, usually especially women. Maybe some guys who behave that way have an unenlightened view of woman. But to say that all men who open doors, pull out chairs, or say "ladies first" do so because they believe women are weak is ridiculous. I'll admit, there are some things I hate that guys do out of "politeness" or just trying to take care of a lady. Ordering for a girl at a restaurant... obnoxious. Calling a girl with whom you're unfamiliar "sweetheart" or "sugar".... sometimes obnoxious. Depends on the person and the tone.

Anyway, my point is that painting any group with that broad a brush is counterproductive to your cause, because it makes you sound silly. And then other silly people will go painting feminists with a broad brush as well. It's a cycle, you see.

As for me, I don't spend any special time on feminist issues, really. I just walk into a room and assume equality silently. So far everyone has rolled with it.

^Quick edit: I stand by what I said but now see that I read what Charlie wrote wrong. I thought he was calling out all "gentlemen." Should've read more carefully.

Sep 14, 2010#37

Philosopher B.

Gusto said:
I consider myself a human.

Me too, but I'm still occasionally asked for proof.

Sep 14, 2010#38

The Lovely Boehner

But to say that all men who open doors, pull out chairs, or say "ladies first" do so because they believe women are weak is ridiculous.

I never said that. I said the ones that " thinks women are silly little fools that can't handle the world on their own". If you do those nice things because you just are a nice person and do them for everyone, that's awesome. But doing it only to one sex or the other is kind of dumb and inherently sexist. It's just the basic uh, tenet of feminism: treat people like people, not like boys or girls.

Sep 14, 2010#39

Adammon

Fine said:
If you truly believe in equal rights for every person, no matter what their sex or gender, then why use a label that only specifies females?

Because women are the only ones being held down and marginalized on a systemic level?[/QUOTE]

This isn't the 60s, bub.

On average, women CEOs paid more than male chiefs | NJ.com

Sep 14, 2010#40

Cajungal

Eh, I don't know. I treat men and women a little differently from one another--kindly, but differently. I don't think it's inherently wrong. I guess that's why I don't think that men who treat women a little differently automatically think they're weak or can't handle the world. That's just kind of how boys are raised down here. Don't hit girls (of course), be as polite as possible to them, etc etc. Frankly, I don't care if parents don't teach this, but I don't think there has to be anything wrong with it, either. My father taught my brother that way--to treat women a little specially. At the same time, he's the guy who laughed off the other men in the maternity ward when I, his second daughter, was born. They said they were sorry he wouldn't have a "little boy." My dad just said, "My little girl will be able to do everything your little boy can. Maybe better."

There's most definitely a line where it stops being nice and becomes putting women on an unfair pedestal or thinking less of them. I just find that that's rarely the case. I don't know. Maybe we agree but just say it differently. I think we both think it's best to be kind and fair.

Sep 14, 2010#41

North_Ranger

Cajungal;436938][QUOTE=Fine said:
Feminists killed the gentleman.

The Gentleman that thinks women are silly little fools that can't handle the world on their own should be drug out behind a shed and beaten to death with a shovel.[/QUOTE]

Wow, that's really unfair. To me, that's about as unfair as saying that all feminists are flannel-wearing [rhymes with "bikes"] who want rid the world of the evil penis and are only bitter because they can't get a man.

A gentleman, to me at least, is simply someone who treats people with gentility and class, usually especially women. Maybe some guys who behave that way have an unenlightened view of woman. But to say that all men who open doors, pull out chairs, or say "ladies first" do so because they believe women are weak is ridiculous. I'll admit, there are some things I hate that guys do out of "politeness" or just trying to take care of a lady. Ordering for a girl at a restaurant... obnoxious. Calling a girl with whom you're unfamiliar "sweetheart" or "sugar".... sometimes obnoxious. Depends on the person and the tone.

Anyway, my point is that painting any group with that broad a brush is counterproductive to your cause, because it makes you sound silly. And then other silly people will go painting feminists with a broad brush as well. It's a cycle, you see.

As for me, I don't spend any special time on feminist issues, really. I just walk into a room and assume equality silently. So far everyone has rolled with it.[/QUOTE]

Thanks, Seej. You put the matter far more eloquently than I ever could have.

I consider myself a gentleman in the sense that I open doors, I try to be polite and helpful, and treat people respectfully. I've yet to run into anyone calling me a chauvinist for it, luckily, but I'm sure that there's people out there who would if I did open a door for them. And I had some measure of an idea where I was going with all this, but I just lost it. Feh, that's what you get for arguing at 2am. I'm going to bed, good night y'all.

Sep 14, 2010#42

Krisken

As of 2004, Adammon, women were averaging 75% pay of men for the same job.

Sep 14, 2010#43

Cajungal

To be fair, NR, I think I might have partially misunderstood Charles.

That's just one of my triggers--people flying off the handle when a guy opens a door for a girl. It's not fair to assume that they think you're weak because of that. I open doors for guys. They say thanks and move the hell on... not fall into a crumpled ball and talk about feeling emasculated.

I kind of equate a lot of gentlemanly stuff with the archaic ritual of asking a father for his daughter's hand in marriage. I think that if someone else wants to do this, that's fine. I personally think it's dumb, but I don't (any longer) assume that it means the guy considers his girlfriend a possession. It's a relic that once suggested something and is now just "one of those things." A tradition that you can take or leave.

Incidentally, if a woman truly takes issue with those little gentlemanly gestures, she could smile and politely say, "Thank you, but I'd prefer to do this myself." Which... is, well, weird to me. But knock yourself out. Nothing wrong with a polite, but firm, decline of someone's assistance.

---------- Post added at 06:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:04 PM ----------

Krisken said:
As of 2004, Adammon, women were averaging 75% pay of men for the same job.

See, now this is the stuff that pisses me off.

Sep 14, 2010#44

Krisken

Sorry CG. Didn't mean to upset you

Sep 14, 2010#45

Cajungal

Krisken said:
Sorry CJ. Didn't mean to upset you

:laugh: Well that's too bad. I blame YOU AND ONLY YOU for these salary discrepancies!

Kriskens: The Enemy of Women

Sep 14, 2010#46

MindDetective

Krisken said:
As of 2004, Adammon, women were averaging 75% pay of men for the same job.

Sep 14, 2010#47

Krisken

Sorry Mind Detective, I don't have all that information. I figure no one really does though, since you're asking for a comprehensive set of data on millions of people which would require multiple sources. They don't exactly cover all that you requested in the Census.

Sep 14, 2010#48

drifter

MindDetective;436994][QUOTE=Krisken said:
As of 2004, Adammon, women were averaging 75% pay of men for the same job.

Raw data without any consideration of the factors involved is useless. Utterly. Did they authors hold job experience constant? What about years with the same company? Is it true of all occupations? Just some? There is literally no way to assess just how bad it is with such a ridiculously raw and sparse data point. There is no context whatsoever. I bet you 1000 halbucks that if you factored in job experience, length with the company, amount of time off for child rearing, etc. that the gap would narrow considerably. But we cant even have that discussion when these kinds of useless factoids are bandied about. I'm not saying there is no wage gap. I wouldn't be surprised if there was. I just get annoyed when trivial observations (meaning those without context, not those that are irrelevant) are shotgunned at us point blank like those authors did.[/QUOTE]

Good guess. This article quotes a study that says factoring in experience, education, industry, occupation, and union membership, women earned 91% of men in 1998 (in the US).

There are some other interesting tidbits in that article as well. One thing that caught my eye is that men who transitioned into women earned 32% less after surgery. Paradoxically, women who transitioned to men earned 1.5% more after surgery.

Sep 14, 2010#49

Sara_2814

Fine said:
If you truly believe in equal rights for every person, no matter what their sex or gender, then why use a label that only specifies females?

Because women are the only ones being held down and marginalized on a systemic level?[/QUOTE]

You're right! We should all continue to denigrate men who want to be nurses and pre-school teachers and stay-at-home dads! Because according to comparative victimology, women have more victim points than they do! So screw you, men interested in caregiver careers! No more Egalitarianism! It's only Feminism from now on!

:rolleyes:

Sep 14, 2010#50

MindDetective

Krisken said:
Sorry Mind Detective, I don't have all that information. I figure no one really does though, since you're asking for a comprehensive set of data on millions of people which would require multiple sources. They don't exactly cover all that you requested in the Census.

Which is why we use samples in the social sciences, since they are easier to get and still allow us to generalize to the population at large. The point is, if we genuinely want to be fair to women and men, we need to understand why a wage gap exists. Simply pointing at it implies society in general is to blame or that employers have some inherent sexism. Those things are vague, at best, and do nothing to actually help the cause of ensuring fairness.

Sep 14, 2010#51

SpecialKO

According to the US Census data, it looks like women make 80% of what men do totaled across the top 200 industries with more than 50,000 people in them.

Sep 14, 2010#52

MindDetective

*facepalm*

Sep 14, 2010#53

crono1224

It's funny that Charlie tends to end up with a bit of a Meathead complex every once and a while when he is white knighting.

Sep 14, 2010#54

Espy

lol

Poor MindDetective. Guy just can't catch a break.

Sep 14, 2010#55

SpecialKO

Espy said:
lol

Poor MindDetective. Guy just can't catch a break.

True. I was hoping that there was a better summation at the Census, but none of the summary reports that I found combine experience with gender. They do provide their complete data tables so you can mess with it yourself if you want, but re-tweaking MD's nose is more fun than spending hours looking at the BLS website.

Sep 14, 2010#56

Chazwozel

Sara_2814;436900][QUOTE=Fine said:
It's really annoying when people think the loud fringe parts of a group of people are representative of the whole.

Sep 14, 2010#57

makare

I call myself feminist because I believe women should be treated as being the same worth as men. I think saying you are just for equality period is kind of naive. I mean, who isn't? But a large portion of society doesn't have to fight for the same worth and recognition as other parts. There is nothing wrong with acknowledging that fight.

Covar said:
Apparently I'm rude because I don't hold the door open for female soldiers the same rank as me or below.

How about you just hold the fucking door for people and not make such a big deal about it? It is kind of rude to walk in front of people or shut a door in someone's face regardless of who they are.

Sep 14, 2010#58

Chazwozel

So wait I'm confused. Am I sexist because I let women in through the door first, and pinch their bottoms whilst making a "honking" noise?

Sep 14, 2010#59

Espy

SpecialKO;437012][QUOTE=Espy said:
lol

Poor MindDetective. Guy just can't catch a break.

[/QUOTE]

So wait, you were posting it to be funny? Because it looked like you had missed his points about census numbers and posted them anyway. Which is what *I* was laughing about. If you were just picking in MD, well, I approve of that

Sep 14, 2010#60

makare

Chazwozel said:
So wait I'm confused. Am I sexist because I let women in through the door first, and pinch their bottoms whilst making a "honking" noise?

no it makes you a lech.

Sep 14, 2010#61

Cajungal

We prefer "beeps" to "honks" these days. Keep up, you caveman asshole.

Sep 14, 2010#62

Chazwozel

makare said:
I call myself feminist because I believe women should be treated as being the same worth as men. I think saying you are just for equality period is kind of naive. I mean, who isn't? But a large portion of society doesn't have to fight for the same worth and recognition as other parts. There is nothing wrong with acknowledging that fight.

Covar said:

Apparently I'm rude because I don't hold the door open for female soldiers the same rank as me or below.

Click to expand...

How about you just hold the fucking door for people and not make such a big deal about it? It is kind of rude to walk in front of people or shut a door in someone's face regardless of who they are.

I gotta agree. It's just a fucking door. Personally, I think guys that consider themselves to be "gentlemen" are the biggest douchebags of all. You can hold a door open for a woman... want a prize?

Sep 14, 2010#63

Krisken

Espy said:
lol

Poor MindDetective. Guy just can't catch a break.

Sep 14, 2010#64

Chazwozel

makare;437019][QUOTE=Chazwozel said:
So wait I'm confused. Am I sexist because I let women in through the door first, and pinch their bottoms whilst making a "honking" noise?

no it makes you a lech.[/QUOTE]

:eyebrows: sup toots.

Sep 14, 2010#65

Espy

makare said:
I call myself feminist because I believe women should be treated as being the same worth as men. I think saying you are just for equality period is kind of naive. I mean, who isn't? But a large portion of society doesn't have to fight for the same worth and recognition as other parts. There is nothing wrong with acknowledging that fight.

See this? This is so very, very true. This is what 7 years of marriage and working with women has taught me. Something I never really honestly understood.
Of course, that doesn't mean men don't have to fight for recognition in their own way, but it's not the same thing nor nearly as prevalent as with women, at least from my experience. Anyone see Sunday nights MadMen and Joan's brilliant and honestly just crushing talk with Peggy in the elevator?

Sep 14, 2010#66

Chazwozel

Krisken;437023][QUOTE=Espy said:
lol

Poor MindDetective. Guy just can't catch a break.

Not quite sure how to please him, really. Either we come up with the impossible amount of data he is asking for, or just give up looking for any numbers. Either way, the conversation is effectively dead.[/QUOTE]

He's just thinking empirically and logically. 14% percent of all people know that.

Sep 14, 2010#67

makare

The worst feminist thing i ever encountered was about that door thing. This woman in my class was asked if she thought it was sexist for a guy to hold a door open for a chick and she was all snotty, "yeah i can hold the door for MYSELF I've fought my battles blah blah"

what battles? You stupid twat! You haven't done shit! I wanted to punch her in the face. Holding a door is common courtesy. It is not condescending in anyway to not slam a door in someone's face. I looked at her and I know she is raising two little boys and I thought, you must be raising two of the biggest assholes who have ever lived. Well done.

Sep 14, 2010#68

Chazwozel

So when we talk about holding the door for women are we talking about letting her through first, or doing the "I go through first and lean my arm across the door so it doesn't slam in yo' face" door hold? Cause I'm guilty of the second for both men and women, but I'll be damned if any motherfucker gets in before my ass (except my dog, cause he just rolls like that).

I goose my wife on a daily basis. Am I sexist?

Sep 14, 2010#69

Krisken

Basically holding the door for anyone, male or female, is common courtesy. I'm on board for that

Sep 14, 2010#70

Chazwozel

Krisken said:
Basically holding the door for anyone, male or female, is common courtesy. I'm on board for that

I gotta admit, I don't like it when other men hold the door open for me and gesture for me to go through first.

Sep 14, 2010#71

makare

I actually have a reverse problem. I don't know if it is a Sodak thing or what but people hold doors open all the time here. I have actually diverted my intended path and entered buildings I wasn't going to just because someone held a door for me. >.> Especially guys because I really don't want them thinking I'm one of those women who has a problem with that.

"No, thank you. I do not intend to enter this dwelling but I felt the need to explain myself so you don't think I'm a self-righteous bitch. kthanxbye."

Sep 14, 2010#72

MindDetective

I'd settle for treating such data with caution. Women being paid less than men is itself not inherently offensive. It can't be because we don't know why it is the case. Women getting paid less than men because women are seen as inferior IS bad. But is that actually the case? People treat $Men > $Women as though it implies something about men when it may be saying something about men AND women. Someone said earlier that women should have a choice to be homemakers, with which I agree. But those choices may play an integral role in things like wage disparities, choices made by the women themselves. I don't need all the data in front of me. Just a little respect for what that tiny little data point can tell us, maybe a little less alarms blazing. People are more complicated than a single data point can tell us. And they aren't so complicated that we can't figure it out either.

Sep 14, 2010#73

Chazwozel

makare said:
I actually have a reverse problem. I don't know if it is a Sodak thing or what but people hold doors open all the time here. I have actually diverted my intended path and entered buildings I wasn't going to just because someone held a door for me. >.> Especially guys because I really don't want them thinking I'm one of those women who has a problem with that.

"No, thank you. I do not intend to enter this dwelling but I felt the need to explain myself so you don't think I'm a self-righteous bitch. kthanxbye."

What you need to do is move to New York for a couple of months and perfect a "don't even try to bat an eye in my direction me or I'll stab you stare". But yeah, that is insanely annoying; almost as annoying as when you're like 100 feet away and they stand there like a dumb baboon, holding the door open and expect you to sprint over to it.

---------- Post added at 08:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:45 PM ----------

MindDetective said:
I'd settle for treating such data with caution. Women being paid less than men is itself not inherently offensive. It can't be because we don't know why it is the case. Women getting paid less than men because women are seen as inferior IS bad. But is that actually the case? People treat $Men > $Women as though it implies something about men when it may be saying something about men AND women. Someone said earlier that women should have a choice to be homemakers, with which I agree. But those choices may play an integral role in things like wage disparities, choices made by the women themselves. I don't need all the data in front of me. Just a little respect for what that tiny little data point can tell us, maybe a little less alarms blazing. People are more complicated than a single data point can tell us. And they aren't so complicated that we can't figure it out either.

You there! Stop thinking critically! ...fucking scientists...

Sep 14, 2010#74

SpecialKO

Espy;437018][QUOTE=SpecialKO;437012][QUOTE=Espy said:
lol

Poor MindDetective. Guy just can't catch a break.

[/QUOTE]

It was mostly frustration that the BLS website is such a chore to navigate/use. I posted the link because it's mildly more informative, and it points directly the BLS website, as opposed to some guy on about.com linking to himself. Making MD *facepalm* was just a bonus, but he is quite right.

Sep 14, 2010#75

MindDetective

Sorry, I don't know what got into me. Maybe I'm still reeling over the crazy student that e-mailed me with her social security number in her e-mail signature (who was clueless about other things as well). Now I'm trying to overcompensate here, maybe.

---------- Post added at 07:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:47 PM ----------

It IS mildly more informative. I'll grant you that!

Sep 14, 2010#76

makare

I think a lot of polite behavior can get annoying. I personally hate it when people say "yes, please". There is just something about it that grates on me. Actually I am not into please period. Ask nicely for something, may I etc but please is just dumb.

may i have a cookie please please please

wtf does please even mean!?

edit- sorry im going way off topic :whistling:

Sep 14, 2010#77

Cajungal

I thought it was short for "if you please," which sort of boils down to "if you feel like it/want." It's kind of meek when you think of it that way.

Sep 14, 2010#78

Chazwozel

makare said:
I think a lot of polite behavior can get annoying. I personally hate it when people say "yes, please". There is just something about it that grates on me. Actually I am not into please period. Ask nicely for something, may I etc but please is just dumb.

may i have a cookie please please please

wtf does please even mean!?

edit- sorry im going way off topic

Get in the kitchen, bitch and bake me some pie.

Please?

:smug:

Sep 14, 2010#79

SpecialKO

MindDetective said:
Sorry, I don't know what got into me. Maybe I'm still reeling over the crazy student that e-mailed me with her social security number in her e-mail signature (who was clueless about other things as well). Now I'm trying to overcompensate here, maybe.

---------- Post added at 07:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:47 PM ----------

It IS mildly more informative. I'll grant you that!

Eh, dead end, anyway, it seems. The dataset which includes a gender field is from one survey and doesn't include experience, while the dataset which includes an experience field (an arbitrary measure of some kind) doesn't seem to have any gender data and is from a different survey.

Sep 14, 2010#80

Chazwozel

mr_thehun said:
After moving to China I no longer hold the door for people other than my 98 year old grandmother in law.

I hate Feminism the same way I hate Chauvinism. I took three feminist courses in university and I have to say that I have never met a more disgruntled, discriminatory, biased group of people. The way I was treated in those courses has spoiled my opinion on the subject. Repeating the mistakes of the other gender is not a good idea. We both have stereotypes and oppressions that we both need to over come. The current decade is no-were near how it was in th 1920's - 1960's.

I think that women should be able to drive, vote, work, wear pants and all that jazz. I also think that men have the right to bake, become nurses and teachers, wear skirts if they want to, become lumber jacks wear suspenders and a bra and be all that.

seriously if a woman wears mens clothing thats blase, if a man wears womens clothing it is still considered weird.

Whoa whoa, slow the boat there chief. Let's not give those pie baking, baby makers any crazy ideas now.

Sep 14, 2010#81

makare

I can't cook or bake. It's quite pathetic really.

I also can't park. At least I am well rounded in my incompetence.

Sep 15, 2010#82

Chazwozel

mr_thehun said:
I can't drive but I can make a damn good butternut squash soup.

Asian drivers.... That's another thread all it's own.

Sep 15, 2010#83

makare

mr_thehun said:
I can't drive but I can make a damn good butternut squash soup.

well go make it and send it to me. I love soup. ^_^

Sep 15, 2010#84

Sara_2814

makare said:
I think saying you are just for equality period is kind of naive. I mean, who isn't?

If everyone actually believes in equality, period, then why is there a need for “feminism”?

How is it naive to think that equality must apply to both sides? If one of the contributors to the wage gap is “time off for childrearing”, and there is a social stigma against men taking time off to be the primary caregiver, combined with no paternity leave equivalent to maternity leave, then how is a family supposed to make the decision that “dad will be primary caregiver while mom maintains her career”? Until men have the same choices and support in "career vs. family", there is going to be a wage gap for women from being the most logical/economic choice for taking time off for family responsibility, and “taking time off for babies” is going to continue to be an excuse to not hire or promote women.

Sep 15, 2010#85

Officer_Charon

I hold doors for people, male and female. I let people who look like the might be in a hurry go ahead of me (caveat: does not apply to self-important schlubs on their cellphones). I say yes ma'am/miss and yes sir, but if I'm casual with someone, I'll also say darlin'/love/sweetie... once I've sounded out that they're cool with that.

Have respect for folks, and treat them how you'd want to be treated. Its that damned simple.

Also, I loves me some pie.

Sep 15, 2010#86

Adammon

I guess my experiences are biased by working in a traditionally 'attractive woman' industry but I've never really experienced the disparity between men and women in wages.

I've also seen the flip side where people aren't held back by society but by themselves. In some cases, women aren't as eager to climb the corporate ladder as men (bless 'em, I hate corporate climbers).

I also would be mocked mercilessly if I took parental leave while my wife worked.

Sep 15, 2010#87

The Lovely Boehner

Adammon said:
I also would be mocked mercilessly if I took parental leave while my wife worked.

In a world where feminism 'succeeds', this wouldn't happen. It is kind of terrible that this would happen!

Sep 15, 2010#88

Disconnected

Adammon said:
I also would be mocked mercilessly if I took parental leave while my wife worked.

then your co-workers/friends are douchebags.

Sep 15, 2010#89

Adammon

Fine said:
I also would be mocked mercilessly if I took parental leave while my wife worked.

Sep 15, 2010#90

makare

What difference does it make if you are mocked as long as you would be allowed by the business to do it? Dictating how people act is pretty much impossible. Endeavoring to create a more fair business apparatus is more realistic.

When women weren't allowed to work in most professions the problem wasn't that they would be mocked if they did, it was simply that they weren't allowed to. Same with attending male only (the best) schools. It wasn't mockery that was the issue it was opportunity.

Adammon;437202][QUOTE=Fine said:
I also would be mocked mercilessly if I took parental leave while my wife worked.

In a world where feminism 'succeeds', this wouldn't happen. It is kind of terrible that this would happen![/QUOTE]

Really? Because it's not the feminists that have fought for that right. (in fact, quite the opposite)[/QUOTE]

The issue organizations like NOW have with father's rights is a legal one not really a philosophical one. Most feminists are in support of equal rights in this issue. If a woman has the right to work men should have the right to stay home. That's pretty much one of the basic tenets of feminism; if one, than the other. So the white knight is right. If feminism did "succeed" and there was equality the issue you are discussing would not be an issue at all. Businesswise of course. Individual people will still be assholes.

Sep 15, 2010#91

Adammon

makare said:
What difference does it make if you are mocked as long as you would be allowed by the business to do it? Dictating how people act is pretty much impossible. Endeavoring to create a more fair business apparatus is more realistic.

When women weren't allowed to work in most professions the problem wasn't that they would be mocked if they did, it was simply that they weren't allowed to. Same with attending male only (the best) schools. It wasn't mockery that was the issue it was opportunity.

Sep 15, 2010#92

crono1224

Lady's night... That is all.

---------- Post added at 12:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:07 PM ----------

Adammon;437204][QUOTE=makare said:
What difference does it make if you are mocked as long as you would be allowed by the business to do it? Dictating how people act is pretty much impossible. Endeavoring to create a more fair business apparatus is more realistic.

When women weren't allowed to work in most professions the problem wasn't that they would be mocked if they did, it was simply that they weren't allowed to. Same with attending male only (the best) schools. It wasn't mockery that was the issue it was opportunity.

A stigma is still sexism, regardless of gained opportunity. It's the same with child custody cases. Men are simply given the short end of the stick when it comes to custody battles again and again. The stigma that only women do X and only men do Y is harmful to both sides yet at the same time, we have to acknowledge that generally women CAN do X better and generally men CAN do Y better.[/QUOTE]

Something slightly related I think here, if the woman cheats while married and gets knocked up that baby becomes the husbands problem too, aka child support.

Sep 15, 2010#93

makare

People are assholes. You can't change them through politics or reform or anything else. All that you can do is change the law. If you change the law for equality but people are still jerks, well that just gets a big fat DUH.

---------- Post added at 11:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:09 AM ----------

crono1224 said:
Something slightly related I think here, if the woman cheats while married and gets knocked up that baby becomes the husbands problem too, aka child support.

The assumption of legitimacy has been overturned in most states. Progress right? Doesn't happen overnight.

Sep 15, 2010#94

The Lovely Boehner

I'm never going to say that men have absolutely no sexism directed at them. I'm going through the becoming-a-teacher process, and I've heard a lot of "oh, you just don't have that nurturing quality" and other things. I've been mocked for liking "girly" things/movies/tv shows. Feminism is about equality between the sexes, and about removing the stereotypes and assumptions about someone because of their gender. How do you not see how this is beneficial to everyone (including men)?

Sep 15, 2010#95

Adammon

Fine said:
I'm never going to say that men have absolutely no sexism directed at them. I'm going through the becoming-a-teacher process, and I've heard a lot of "oh, you just don't have that nurturing quality" and other things. I've been mocked for liking "girly" things/movies/tv shows. Feminism is about equality between the sexes, and about removing the stereotypes and assumptions about someone because of their gender. How do you not see how this is beneficial to everyone (including men)?

Racism is about equality between the races.

Sep 15, 2010#96

The Lovely Boehner

Adammon said:
Racism is about equality between the races.

go on

Sep 15, 2010#97

Adammon

Fine said:
Racism is about equality between the races.

go on[/QUOTE]

Let's take abortion, one of the most controversial reproductive 'rights' that feminism has fought for. If I, being pro-life, impregnate a woman who choose to abort, my rights are zero. I have no say in the procedure despite my beliefs. That's not equality.

Sep 15, 2010#98

makare

So what's your solution there? Force a woman to have your child grow INSIDE HER BODY for 9 months. How the hell would that be fair?

News flash life isn't fair. We can just do the best we can.

Sep 15, 2010#99

Sara_2814

Fine said:
I'm never going to say that men have absolutely no sexism directed at them. I'm going through the becoming-a-teacher process, and I've heard a lot of "oh, you just don't have that nurturing quality" and other things. I've been mocked for liking "girly" things/movies/tv shows. Feminism is about equality between the sexes, and about removing the stereotypes and assumptions about someone because of their gender. How do you not see how this is beneficial to everyone (including men)?

Because the label "feminism" is gender-specific and implies exclusivity in its goals? What is so wrong with calling myself "egalitarian", which is gender-neutral and inclusive of everyone by definition?

Sep 15, 2010#100

Adammon

makare said:
So what's your solution there? Force a woman to have your child grow INSIDE HER BODY for 9 months. How the hell would that be fair?

News flash life isn't fair. We can just do the best we can.

You answered your own question. Life ISN'T fair. If you didn't want to have a child growing inside of you, you shouldn't have had sex with me (Despite how drop dead sexy I am)

Sep 15, 2010#101

MindDetective

makare said:
So what's your solution there? Force a woman to have your child grow INSIDE HER BODY for 9 months. How the hell would that be fair?

News flash life isn't fair. We can just do the best we can.

So true. And I think it is important to recognize the limits of equality as well as what CAN be made equal.

Sep 15, 2010#102

makare

what's wrong with acknowledging that women have been getting the short end of the stick since time immemorial and are trying to do something about it?

Adammon;437220][QUOTE=makare said:
So what's your solution there? Force a woman to have your child grow INSIDE HER BODY for 9 months. How the hell would that be fair?

News flash life isn't fair. We can just do the best we can.

You answered your own question. Life ISN'T fair. If you didn't want to have a child growing inside of you, you shouldn't have had sex with me (Despite how drop dead sexy I am)[/QUOTE]

And if you didn't want your child aborted you shouldn't have had sex with a woman who would abort it.

Sep 15, 2010#103

The Lovely Boehner

Consent to have sex is not consent to raise your child.

Sep 15, 2010#104

makare

eh forget the raising, I am much more concerned about the growing inside me thing. GROWING INSIDE. pregnancy is repulsive. Spending 9 months with this thing floating around inside of you in a giant pool of mucus. Gah.

Sep 15, 2010#105

ScytheRexx

Oh man, I hope I am not making a mistake here. Figured I would give my two cents on the issue.

"Feminism" as a principle is very valid, it is about equality, but the word has over the years become tarnished by bad experiences with self-proclaimed "Feminists" that have take the term away from equality and more about better rights for woman (not equal, better). It sucks, because those are the people that others remember, I know it was always the ones I remembered.

Here is an example of what I mean. You may have a company owned by a man. Another man and a woman apply for a job, but the boss decides to hire the other man saying he thinks the man would be better for the job. This is pure fuel for a feminist rally and I have seen those happen in the past. Now switch the event, and have a woman hire a woman because she thinks a woman would be better for the job over the man that applied, and you will probably barely see a whisper from "Feminists" about such gender profiling, because it is in a woman's favor.

There was one story recently about a reporter entering the locker room of a NFL football team for an interview. A few of the guys whistled at her, which has lead her to sue the team for sexual harassment. While I don't agree with the whistling, it made me realize, what would happen if a male reporter entered the female locker room for a WNBA event? Oh, that wouldn't happen, because it's considered bad taste. But still, if they whistled at him would he be able to sue for sexual harassment? Would anyone support him in that claim? Sadly, I don't think most "Feminists" would, it would be his fault for even being there.

Once again, I value "feminism" as a principle, but I can't call myself a feminist because the word has become tarnished in my mind are nothing but a misguided label, and way to specialized to gender issues alone. I prefer to say that I am in support of equality for all people, regardless of race, gender, or creed, because equality is not just about gender.

Sep 15, 2010#106

The Lovely Boehner

Err, raising was the wrong word. Carrying to term.

Sep 15, 2010#107

makare

ScytheRexx said:
Oh man, I hope I am not making a mistake here. Figured I would give my two cents on the issue.

"Feminism" as a principle is very valid, it is about equality, but the word has over the years become tarnished by bad experiences with self-proclaimed "Feminists" that have take the term away from equality and more about better rights for woman (not equal, better). It sucks, because those are the people that others remember, I know it was always the ones I remembered.

Here is an example of what I mean. You may have a company owned by a man. Another man and a woman apply for a job, but the boss decides to hire the other man saying he thinks the man would be better for the job. This is pure fuel for a feminist rally and I have seen those happen in the past. Now switch the event, and have a woman hire a woman because she thinks a woman would be better for the job over the man that applied, and you will probably barely see a whisper from "Feminists" about such gender profiling, because it is in a woman's favor.

There was one story recently about a reporter entering the locker room of a NFL football team for an interview. A few of the guys whistled at her, which has lead her to sue the team for sexual harassment. While I don't agree with the whistling, it made me realize, what would happen if a male reporter entered the female locker room for a WNBA event? Oh, that wouldn't happen, because it's considered bad taste. But still, if they whistled at him would he be able to sue for sexual harassment? Would anyone support him in that claim? Sadly, I don't think most "Feminists" would, it would be his fault for even being there.

Once again, I value "feminism" as a principle, but I can't call myself a feminist because the word has become tarnished in my mind are nothing but a misguided label, and way to specialized to gender issues alone. I prefer to say that I am in support of equality for all people, regardless of race, gender, or creed, because equality is not just about gender.

I think you are missing a main point here. Women report and complain about inequality in the workplace as it happens to them. So the feminists rally around them. If a man would report and complain about inequality the feminists would probably rally around him too. It has to do with the likelihood of actually raising the issue. Same with the sexual harassment. Could he sue? yeah. Will he? not likely. There is no denying that feminists focus on women getting crapped on because that is what is brought to them. If men or a group of men make a stink about those issues then they would be rallied for too.

Sep 15, 2010#108

Chazwozel

Fine said:
I'm never going to say that men have absolutely no sexism directed at them. I'm going through the becoming-a-teacher process, and I've heard a lot of "oh, you just don't have that nurturing quality" and other things. I've been mocked for liking "girly" things/movies/tv shows. Feminism is about equality between the sexes, and about removing the stereotypes and assumptions about someone because of their gender. How do you not see how this is beneficial to everyone (including men)?

Why is it called feminism then? Shouldn't it just be called gender equality? The word feminism itself implies and means that the cause is prominently directed towards the plight of the female.

---------- Post added at 01:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:58 PM ----------

MindDetective;437221][QUOTE=makare said:
So what's your solution there? Force a woman to have your child grow INSIDE HER BODY for 9 months. How the hell would that be fair?

News flash life isn't fair. We can just do the best we can.

So true. And I think it is important to recognize the limits of equality as well as what CAN be made equal.[/QUOTE]

This is why feminism is stupid.

Sep 15, 2010#109

ScytheRexx

makare said:
There is no denying that feminists focus on women getting crapped on because that is what is brought to them. If men or a group of men make a stink about those issues then they would be rallied for too.

Sep 15, 2010#110

makare

I'm not going to change the name of my ideology which has a long, illustrious and proud history, just because I do not agree with some of the people who also hold that banner. I do not agree with Charlie or that nimrod from my class. I don't give a damn about objectifying women in playboy or Sin City, I don't care that a woman can open a door for herself. These are not the kinds of issues that I care about. I care about equality in business and under the law.

The real problem that feminism has now is that sexism against women is no longer fueled by misogyny as it had been for hundreds of years. Now it is more the product of ignorance or apathy. The problem is that it is a hell of a lot easier to fight hatred than it is to fight ignorance. It is hard today because the issues are not as simple and the results not as grandiose. That is why a lot of feminism is directed towards the middle east these days. A woman was doused with acid because she wanted to go to school? That's wrong! It's obvious. It's right there. Get out the old big red stamp, WRONG. It's easy.

Here, nothing is easy. Women are paid less then men. Well, that's wrong. Women take time off for child rearing and men, even if allowed by company policy, are much less likely to do so. Oh so men are more consistent workers maybe that consistency warrants some kind of pay acknowledgment. But it is still a bias based on gender which is wrong. It's hard! It takes thought and it isn't a problem that can be solved with marching or yelling or the burning of undergarments.

And that's where feminism has lost its stride. For so long we had it easy we were safe and secure in the bubble knowing we were absolutely right and those who were against us were absolutely wrong. Now, nothing is like that anymore. Does a woman have a right to abort a child? Does a man have the right to force her to carry it? It's not an easy issue and anyone who looks at it as easy is just plain blind.

Feminism is a good thing but it has been around for a long damn time and that means there are many schools of thought under the same label. Some I agree with, some I'm ashamed exist. That doesn't mean you throw away the label or the ideology. Women have suffered for a long time and I don't want anyone to forget that they still suffer. Not so much here but around the world. The "fem" in feminism is a constant reminder of that struggle. I'm not throwing it away for a generic title for a generic ideal.

I'm proud to be the feminist that I am and I will continue to be so for the rest of my life.

ScytheRexx;437235][QUOTE=makare said:
There is no denying that feminists focus on women getting crapped on because that is what is brought to them. If men or a group of men make a stink about those issues then they would be rallied for too.

While I would like to believe you, my own experiences have not been so kind in that regard. If you can show me proof of a "feminist" movement gathering around a man who has been wronged for gender issues, I would love to see it. However, I have seen nothing but the opposite, while the few times men have been "left out" for gender reasons, it was either ignored by "feminists" or was deemed "his fault" in favor of the women in the situation.

Please, prove me wrong. I want to be wrong on this.[/QUOTE]

Honestly, I don't know of any instance where a man has enlisted the help of a feminist group or someone has done so on his behalf. But that is just a further example of the unwillingness to elicit such help, not an example of unwillingness to help.

Sep 15, 2010#111

The Lovely Boehner

I don't have any documented/official things other than anecdotes (which admittedly don't mean much) but I know from personal experience that my feminist friends really hate all the football game beer commercials that make men out to be the biggest morons and sex-crazed lunks on earth.

Sep 15, 2010#112

Adammon

I think in the end it's just best to acknowledge that there are different schools of Feminist theory and that attempting to ask "Are you a feminist?" doesn't do the label justice. A better question (And probably more precise with regards to the point trying to be made) is "Are you for equal rights between men and women?"

I also quickly want to add that Makare's point about the BIG wrongs being righted is spot on. We're at a point in our civilization where the real, damning forms of discrimination have, for the most part, been corrected. We now have the time and resources to look into the overlooked and under-represented forms of discrimation and move forward together to a better future.

Sep 15, 2010#113

crono1224

Adammon said:
I think in the end it's just best to acknowledge that there are different schools of Feminist theory and that attempting to ask "Are you a feminist?" doesn't do the label justice. A better question (And probably more precise with regards to the point trying to be made) is "Are you for equal rights between men and women?"

I still think that is broad, yes and no questions rarely elicit any true information. Asking what is your stance on gender equality would be best.

But how can we really be suprised that such a large group could possibly have differing opinions? Is it surprising that women can have differing thoughts? GOSH.

Sep 15, 2010#114

ScytheRexx

Just to continue the discussion, as I am curious to see if my opinion can be altered, I decided to do further research. I found this on wikipedia about pro-feminism, which is basically a term used by those that support the "feminist movement" but are not a part of it themselves.

Some feminists and pro-feminists believe that it is inappropriate for men to call themselves "feminists". This argument takes a variety of forms, including the following: Feminism is a movement and a body of ideas developed by, for, and about women. Men can never fully know what it is like to be a woman. By calling themselves feminists, men could preempt and take over the feminist movement, thus stifling women's concerns and voices.

I also attempted to do a google search of any feminist or pro-feminist movement ever helping a man during an equality issue. I have yet to find one through the dozens of word combination I have used. Most of the hits are either woman equality issues, being taken advantage of by men, talk about how men can help support feminists (rather then the other way around), or how much feminists love Sarah Palin. I will keep looking to see if I can find an article of a man that has been supported by feminists for having a woman chosen over him for gender reasons.

Honestly, I don't know of any instance where a man has enlisted the help of a feminist group or someone has done so on his behalf. But that is just a further example of the unwillingness to elicit such help, not an example of unwillingness to help.

Now, I loved that last post you did, and I was with you and your sentiments up until you answered my post. My issue? You are assuming a man under that situation simply wouldn't report that he is being discriminated and would be unwilling to ask for help, which it itself is an assumption that makes the man look at fault. It also does not take into account that in the situation where a woman is chosen by a man (from my own experiences and information), most men claiming discrimination would be the ones demonized in that situation. "What? You don't think she can do a better job then you? You sexist!" The world is a large place, and I would assume if the feminist movement was are vast as I expect it to be, I would hear about at least one man standing up, and thus being supported by them, during a gender equality issue. I have yet to see that.

I am not trying to denounce "feminism" as I believe its original meaning is part of my belief, I just don't like using the word as I feel it is to limited to one side of the discrimination issue and has been warped by groups that take it to far and keep it to specialized. I am happy to hear feminists like you support equality of both genders, but you (and Charlie) are the first group of feminists I have met that have even put across that sentiment to me. I admit, it at least makes me hopeful that maybe the groups I have endured out in California were not as representative of the "movement" as I thought they were.

Sep 15, 2010#115

makare

As far as I know when a feminist group rallies around a woman who has been discriminated against it is because she has told them about it or because it was reported in some manner. If it isn't reported how are they supposed to know? I really don't think men are going to ask feminist groups for help even if they would give it.

Also, they are more likely to rally in instances of repeated discrimination so it would have to be an ongoing thing or so extremely blatant that it was undeniable. I mean these days it is harder and harder to prove bias against women I honestly have no idea how you would prove bias against men.

Sep 15, 2010#116

Adammon

crono1224 said:
But how can we really be suprised that such a large group could possibly have differing opinions? Is it surprising that women can have differing thoughts? GOSH.

Replace 'women' with any political, religious or other group ideology and suddenly life gets a lot more complicated.

Sep 15, 2010#117

makare

oh ideologies how you build us up only to know us down. :blue:

Sep 15, 2010#118

crono1224

Adammon;437250][QUOTE=crono1224 said:
But how can we really be suprised that such a large group could possibly have differing opinions? Is it surprising that women can have differing thoughts? GOSH.

Sep 15, 2010#119

Adammon

crono1224;437252][QUOTE=Adammon;437250][QUOTE=crono1224 said:
But how can we really be suprised that such a large group could possibly have differing opinions? Is it surprising that women can have differing thoughts? GOSH.

Replace 'women' with any political, religious or other group ideology and suddenly life gets a lot more complicated.[/QUOTE]

Fair enough I was merely trying to imply sexism in this thread because it would be slightly ironic.[/QUOTE]

In a 'traffic jam when you're already late' kind of way? Or a 'ten thousand spoons when all you need is a knife'?

Sep 15, 2010#120

makare

oh I HATE that song.

Sep 15, 2010#121

Krisken

crono1224 said:
I still think that is broad...

Haha, you said 'broad' in a feminism thread.

Sep 15, 2010#122

ScytheRexx

makare said:
As far as I know when a feminist group rallies around a woman who has been discriminated against it is because she has told them about it or because it was reported in some manner. If it isn't reported how are they supposed to know? I really don't think men are going to ask feminist groups for help even if they would give it.

Well I ask, how do you know such has never been reported? You seem to be under the assumption that every man on the planet wouldn't report discrimination. You know, maybe you are right, maybe a man wouldn't report discrimination to a feminist movement, but then I ask, why not? It the feminist movement itself is all about equity on both side of the fence, why are they not going out saying "Did your female boss discriminate versus you, and hire a woman over you because you were a man? Come tell us! We will help!"

You assume men just wouldn't look for help, I ask the question why are men not looking for that help? Is it the mans fault for not thinking feminists, a term defined by supporting female equality, would help him in a discrimination case? Or is it because most feminist movement don't care that a man lost a job because the other person was a woman rather then a man?

As a man, can I even ask those questions?

Also, they are more likely to rally in instances of repeated discrimination so it would have to be an ongoing thing or so extremely blatant that it was undeniable. I mean these days it is harder and harder to prove bias against women I honestly have no idea how you would prove bias against men.

I am not arguing that discrimination is not hard to prove in this day and age. I am arguing that men, in the same situation a woman may be in, most likely would not be treated equal by feminists when it comes to support of his plight. I want to be proven wrong on that, but all we got is experience with the groups, and those experiences can be limited and painted. I admit I learned a lot today, but I still would never call myself a feminist.

Sep 15, 2010#123

makare

I don't know such a thing has been reported because I don't know. I am not a member of a feminist group so I am not privy to what they know or don't know. I also don't know of an instance where a man asked for help and was denied. I'm not saying that doesn't happen either. I am simply admitting my own ignorance.

But I will say, as a feminist, I am just as likely to be concerned about equality for men as I am for women and I would personally assist a man in his complaint against a company as much as I would a woman.

Sep 15, 2010#124

ScytheRexx

makare said:
But I will say, as a feminist, I am just as likely to be concerned about equality for men as I am for women and I would personally assist a man in his complaint against a company as much as I would a woman.

Then I respect you as a feminist, and I hope I meet more like you in the future.

Sep 15, 2010#125

Piotyr

This is not an attempt to hijack this thread, but a side thought based on something I read a couple months back that is slightly related:

For years, advocates led by Billie Jean King have railed on Wimbledon for unequal treatment of women, because the women athletes receive less money than male athletes for competing in Wimbledon. Now, they argue that they are performing the same task, and should get the same compensation. However, it's pretty clear that the men are playing at a much higher level on the court than the women (speed of play being the primary indicator). Should they get equal compensation just because they are both tennis players, or should the men get paid more for playing at a higher level?

Sep 15, 2010#126

ScytheRexx

Piotyr said:
However, it's pretty clear that the men are playing at a much higher level on the court than the women (speed of play being the primary indicator). Should they get equal compensation just because they are both tennis players, or should the men get paid more for playing at a higher level?

Sep 15, 2010#127

Chazwozel

Piotyr said:
This is not an attempt to hijack this thread, but a side thought based on something I read a couple months back that is slightly related:

For years, advocates led by Billie Jean King have railed on Wimbledon for unequal treatment of women, because the women athletes receive less money than male athletes for competing in Wimbledon. Now, they argue that they are performing the same task, and should get the same compensation. However, it's pretty clear that the men are playing at a much higher level on the court than the women (speed of play being the primary indicator). Should they get equal compensation just because they are both tennis players, or should the men get paid more for playing at a higher level?

If they want the same compensation as men, they have to compete against men i.e. get their asses kicked.

---------- Post added at 03:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:03 PM ----------

ScytheRexx;437268][QUOTE=Piotyr said:
However, it's pretty clear that the men are playing at a much higher level on the court than the women (speed of play being the primary indicator). Should they get equal compensation just because they are both tennis players, or should the men get paid more for playing at a higher level?

Are the men really playing at a higher level though? While we all deserve equal opportunities, there is no denying that men and women have different bodies. Just because the men are playing at a "higher level" overall does not mean the women are playing any less hard then the men do.

They should be paid the same since both the men and the women are putting in lots of effort, often times as much they they can handle. The fact the men can often handle "more" shouldn't become a factor of the pay-grade.[/QUOTE]

Dude, no. That's like saying a group doing push ups on their knees, in a competition, is on equal grounds with a group doing full push-ups and therefore should be paid the same amount of the purse.

Anyway, isn't the purse amount based on how much the event brings in for any sport? I'm sorry but men's sports tend to bring in mo' money.

Sports are one thing I am absolutely one-sided about and that is that men and women are NOT equal in terms of physicality. There is no way in hell that men and women can ever compete on an equal level together, nor should salaries be adjusted otherwise. If a women's sport is more popular, and gets more money then so be it. Those athletes get paid more. I see nothing wrong with paying female pro-athletes less.

Sep 15, 2010#128

Sara_2814

Piotyr said:
However, it's pretty clear that the men are playing at a much higher level on the court than the women (speed of play being the primary indicator). Should they get equal compensation just because they are both tennis players, or should the men get paid more for playing at a higher level?

Sep 15, 2010#129

ScytheRexx

Chazwozel said:
Dude, no. That's like saying a group doing push ups on their knees, in a competition, is on equal grounds with a group doing full push-ups and therefore should be paid the same amount of the purse.

I don't watch Tennis, but I have seen a few events, and I never saw the men's division being any more interesting then the women's division. The women can't compete at the same level as the men, but that is why they don't compete versus the men. The men don't "work harder" then the women for what they do. In the instance of effort, both divisions should be paid the same.

This is not NBA vs the never watched WNBA, this is Wimbledon, where both genders get a lot of exposure and spotlight from what I have seen. This is not the "big boys" versus the "kiddie division", it's two high end divisions with people putting all the effort they can to win.

I don't expect a woman's football team to suddenly take off and make as much as the NFL, but I do expect an event that prides itself on male and female divisions to treat both divisions equally and not the other one like "second class".

Sep 15, 2010#130

Piotyr

Sara_2814;437273][QUOTE=Piotyr said:
However, it's pretty clear that the men are playing at a much higher level on the court than the women (speed of play being the primary indicator). Should they get equal compensation just because they are both tennis players, or should the men get paid more for playing at a higher level?

Unless the men's "speed of play" is measured and compensated accordingly within the men's division (Bob was 20 seconds slower than George, so his prize is 20% less), then it absolutely should not be based on "speed of play" between sexes, either. The winning man and woman should get equal prizes, just as the top men's doubles, women's doubles, and mixed doubles should get equal prizes.[/QUOTE]

Who is playing at a higher level is absolutely measured and compensated accordingly within the men's division. Rafael played at a higher level than Tomas, so Tomas got paid 50% less.

Sep 15, 2010#131

Element 117

Sep 15, 2010#132

Sara_2814

Chazwozel said:
Dude, no. That's like saying a group doing push ups on their knees, in a competition, is on equal grounds with a group doing full push-ups and therefore should be paid the same amount of the purse.

Anyway, isn't the purse amount based on how much the event brings in for any sport? I'm sorry but men's sports tend to bring in mo' money.

Sports are one thing I am absolutely one-sided about and that is that men and women are NOT equal in terms of physicality. There is no way in hell that men and women can ever compete on an equal level together, nor should salaries be adjusted otherwise. If a women's sport is more popular, and gets more money then so be it. Those athletes get paid more. I see nothing wrong with paying female pro-athletes less.

If it's based on how much interest the event has, I thought women's tennis was as popular as men's? I'm not a big tennis fan, but I hear a lot about women's tennis matches in the news, and I'd be able to recognize more women tennis players than men nowadays, which is a big change from 20-30 years ago.

If it's pure "butts in seats" to determine salaries, then that could justify NBA players getting paid more than WNBA players, or even NHL players. But something like Wimbledon is more of a single big event, like the Olympics, so it makes sense to compensate everyone equally. I don't think people get tickets to Wimbledon just to watch men play.

Sep 15, 2010#133

Chazwozel

All I know is I get pretty pissed over the demasculinization of men in western society. More and more you see ads reflecting this, especially with the metrosexual bullshit being promoted. I don't mean we should all revert back to being cavemen of the 1950's or anything, but there is something really disturbing about manicures becoming mainstream for men.

Really it's the same thing as the objectification of women in past generations. Sometimes I feel like the teeter-totter balance of things is now on the rise for women and coming down for men. Ever notice how TV shows and commercials always refer to how dumb and clueless "Dad" is? Now a guy is now considered good looking if he has "female" features such as fair skin/complection, and a boy-like body build?

Personally, I feel like there's going to be a complete gender role reversal relative to the 1950's within the next few decades. It used to be "father knows best" during that era; now it's "father is best left alone in his 'man-cave' pining over manly things with his equally emasculated buddies".

---------- Post added at 03:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:39 PM ----------

Sara_2814;437277][QUOTE=Chazwozel said:
Dude, no. That's like saying a group doing push ups on their knees, in a competition, is on equal grounds with a group doing full push-ups and therefore should be paid the same amount of the purse.

Anyway, isn't the purse amount based on how much the event brings in for any sport? I'm sorry but men's sports tend to bring in mo' money.

Sports are one thing I am absolutely one-sided about and that is that men and women are NOT equal in terms of physicality. There is no way in hell that men and women can ever compete on an equal level together, nor should salaries be adjusted otherwise. If a women's sport is more popular, and gets more money then so be it. Those athletes get paid more. I see nothing wrong with paying female pro-athletes less.

Sep 15, 2010#134

sixpackshaker

Chazwozel;437021][QUOTE=makare said:
I call myself feminist because I believe women should be treated as being the same worth as men. I think saying you are just for equality period is kind of naive. I mean, who isn't? But a large portion of society doesn't have to fight for the same worth and recognition as other parts. There is nothing wrong with acknowledging that fight.

Covar said:

Apparently I'm rude because I don't hold the door open for female soldiers the same rank as me or below.

Click to expand...

How about you just hold the fucking door for people and not make such a big deal about it? It is kind of rude to walk in front of people or shut a door in someone's face regardless of who they are.

I gotta agree. It's just a fucking door. Personally, I think guys that consider themselves to be "gentlemen" are the biggest douchebags of all. You can hold a door open for a woman... want a prize?[/QUOTE]

No prize, we just want to look at their kiester on the way past.

Sep 15, 2010#135

makare

I think mainstream media has treated men/dads as dimwitted tools for a long time. I'm not saying it is a good thing, just that it isn't a new thing.

The type of men that are idolized changes just like women. 80's men were pretty well manicured and poised too. It is a cycle kind of thing. I think it has to do with the kind of tv/movies that are popular. When westerns and outlaw films are popular "manlier" men are seen as being more sexy. When romances or dramas are more popular a more sensitive man is considered sexy.

Sep 15, 2010#136

Sara_2814

Piotyr said:
Who is playing at a higher level is absolutely measured and compensated accordingly within the men's division. Rafael played at a higher level than Tomas, so Tomas got paid 50% less.

Wimbledon apparently changed the rules in 2007, so players are paid equally now.

Sep 15, 2010#137

Piotyr

Sara_2814;437284][QUOTE=Piotyr said:
Who is playing at a higher level is absolutely measured and compensated accordingly within the men's division. Rafael played at a higher level than Tomas, so Tomas got paid 50% less.

Wimbledon apparently changed the rules in 2007, so players are paid equally now.[/QUOTE]

That's correct, and it's still a topic of debate. With England, Australia and the US matching winnings (in singles, doubles are still paid less), the French Open is the only major that isn't equal across the board (winners get same, but participants in women's get less). I just think it's an interesting dichotomy between title and merit. Although merit can be measured in different ways, whether it be performance on court, revenue generation, or consumer interest. WNBA is a different beast all together, because the level of "revenue generation" and consumer interest is so different.

Plus, I know sports isn't exactly a mirror of reality (except maybe for those participating), so it's hardly something that can apply in all situations. I can see a valid argument either way.

Sep 15, 2010#138

The Lovely Boehner

Chazwozel said:
All I know is I get pretty pissed over the demasculinization of men in western society. More and more you see ads reflecting this, especially with the metrosexual bullshit being promoted. I don't mean we should all revert back to being cavemen of the 1950's or anything, but there is something really disturbing about manicures becoming mainstream for men.

Really it's the same thing as the objectification of women in past generations. Sometimes I feel like the teeter-totter balance of things is now on the rise for women and coming down for men. Ever notice how TV shows and commercials always refer to how dumb and clueless "Dad" is? Now a guy is now considered good looking if he has "female" features such as fair skin/complection, and a boy-like body build?

Personally, I feel like there's going to be a complete gender role reversal relative to the 1950's within the next few decades. It used to be "father knows best" during that era; now it's "father is best left alone in his 'man-cave' pining over manly things with his equally emasculated buddies"..

Sep 15, 2010#139

crono1224

Fine said:
All I know is I get pretty pissed over the demasculinization of men in western society. More and more you see ads reflecting this, especially with the metrosexual bullshit being promoted. I don't mean we should all revert back to being cavemen of the 1950's or anything, but there is something really disturbing about manicures becoming mainstream for men.

Really it's the same thing as the objectification of women in past generations. Sometimes I feel like the teeter-totter balance of things is now on the rise for women and coming down for men. Ever notice how TV shows and commercials always refer to how dumb and clueless "Dad" is? Now a guy is now considered good looking if he has "female" features such as fair skin/complection, and a boy-like body build?

Personally, I feel like there's going to be a complete gender role reversal relative to the 1950's within the next few decades. It used to be "father knows best" during that era; now it's "father is best left alone in his 'man-cave' pining over manly things with his equally emasculated buddies"..

I don't think you have anything to worry about. I also have no clue why you're terrified of a man taking care of his fingernails, but it's fucking hilarious. If you're going to bring ads into it, there are a billion more terrible beer ads during every football game (the most watched broadcasts!) that make women out to be fucktoys or evil shrews or something else demeaning.[/QUOTE]

Can we just agree that there maybe never an ad that has ever been a true showing of actual human interaction or human behavior. I mean just look at an informer for say a new can opener, the flash scene shows a person slamming the can on a corner trying to open it, or gnawing on it like an animal.

Also those showing women as fucktoys are just as demeaning to men, not all men are sex crazed for sluts, so there.

Sep 15, 2010#140

The Lovely Boehner

crono1224 said:
Also those showing women as fucktoys are just as demeaning to men, not all men are sex crazed for sluts, so there.

I think I said almost these exact words earlier in the thread!

---------- Post added at 06:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:10 PM ----------

Chazwozel said:
there is something really disturbing about manicures becoming mainstream for men.

Alternate joke: What the hell, it has man RIGHT there in the word, what's the problem

Sep 15, 2010#141

makare

I don't like metro guys either really but if anything comes out of this fad I hope it is guys taking care of their skin. I mean would it kill them to use some moisturizer?! I realize that exfoliate is a scary term generally associated with chicks but come on. Sometimes I see a guy and I just want to tackle him and give him a facial.

Sep 15, 2010#142

blotsfan

Sorry if this was mentioned, but women only play best of 3 while men play best of 5. Just sayin'

Sep 15, 2010#143

The Lovely Boehner

makare said:
Sometimes I see a guy and I just want to tackle him and give him a facial.

That's weird, sometimes I have the same thought when I see a girl.

Sep 15, 2010#144

Hailey Knight

In some places, you're lucky to get a guy to shower once a week.

Sadly, those dumbass guy stereotypes are still true in many places. I heard two idiots wondering why women get emotional when giving birth. I don't know, dumbass, maybe because it fucking hurts.

Sep 15, 2010#145

makare

Fine said:
Sometimes I see a guy and I just want to tackle him and give him a facial.

That's weird, sometimes I have the same thought when I see a girl.[/QUOTE]

i honestly dont know if you are making an obscene joke or if you honestly want to take care of a chick's skin.

you confuse the hell out of me. >.<

escushion said:
In some places, you're lucky to get a guy to shower once a week.

I hate it when guys (or chicks I guess I haven't encountered it but I would still hate it) think that perfume is a replacement for a shower. Dude this isn't France.

Sep 15, 2010#146

Disconnected

Fine said:
Sometimes I see a guy and I just want to tackle him and give him a facial.

That's weird, sometimes I have the same thought when I see a girl.[/QUOTE]

HA! nicely done. the squirting booby avatar helps too.

Sep 15, 2010#147

Chazwozel

Fine said:
All I know is I get pretty pissed over the demasculinization of men in western society. More and more you see ads reflecting this, especially with the metrosexual bullshit being promoted. I don't mean we should all revert back to being cavemen of the 1950's or anything, but there is something really disturbing about manicures becoming mainstream for men.

Really it's the same thing as the objectification of women in past generations. Sometimes I feel like the teeter-totter balance of things is now on the rise for women and coming down for men. Ever notice how TV shows and commercials always refer to how dumb and clueless "Dad" is? Now a guy is now considered good looking if he has "female" features such as fair skin/complection, and a boy-like body build?

Personally, I feel like there's going to be a complete gender role reversal relative to the 1950's within the next few decades. It used to be "father knows best" during that era; now it's "father is best left alone in his 'man-cave' pining over manly things with his equally emasculated buddies"..

I don't think you have anything to worry about. I also have no clue why you're terrified of a man taking care of his fingernails, but it's fucking hilarious. If you're going to bring ads into it, there are a billion more terrible beer ads during every football game (the most watched broadcasts!) that make women out to be fucktoys or evil shrews or something else demeaning.[/QUOTE]

Getting your "nails done" automatically requires you to go into the garage and chop your penis off with an axe. You have teeth. Use them to chomp through those fucking hangnails like a man.

Sep 15, 2010#148

makare

Chaz always makes me so happy I'm not a man.

And I don't care if that statement is sexist.

Sep 15, 2010#149

The Lovely Boehner

makare said:
Chaz always makes me so happy I'm not a man.

And I don't care if that statement is sexist.

We're not like that

Sep 15, 2010#150

Cajungal

Fine said:
Chaz always makes me so happy I'm not a man.

And I don't care if that statement is sexist.

We're not like that

[/QUOTE]

Oh, go groom yourself, you hygiene-loving sissy.

... :awesome:

Sep 15, 2010#151

Chazwozel

Fine said:
Chaz always makes me so happy I'm not a man.

And I don't care if that statement is sexist.

We're not like that

[/QUOTE]

ugh... You, good sir, need to keep respecting women so much so that you completely stay away from them.

---------- Post added at 11:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:42 PM ----------

makare said:
Chaz always makes me so happy I'm not a man.

And I don't care if that statement is sexist.

It's cool. Enjoy your lower wage, baby pushing, menstrual cycle dealing, catty, backstabbing friend, exfoliating self all you want. I fucking love being a white male between the ages of 18 through 64.

Sep 15, 2010#152

makare

Frankly if a guy is so insecure about being a man that he can't take care of his nails or skin, there is something wrong.

I love being female. I don't have to drink beverages that taste like turpentine to prove my womanhood. I can take care of my body without having to feel ashamed about it. I know that backwards baseball caps are lame. And most of all I can orgasm all goddamn night.

Boo... ya!

Sep 15, 2010#153

The Lovely Boehner

The whole idea that getting your nails worked on in any way is inherently male or female is just so absurd I don't really have a response other than laughter.

It's also funny how Chaz is an actual literal embodiment of privilege with pretty much every post. I used to think it was just an abstract idea!

Sep 15, 2010#154

Chazwozel

makare said:
Frankly if a guy is so insecure about being a man that he can't take care of his nails or skin, there is something wrong.

Why does absolutely not giving a shit about something as stupid as taking care of your nails automatically turn into an insecurity issue for feminists?

I don't give a shit about what my nails look like. I clip them short about once a month. That's it.

---------- Post added at 11:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:49 PM ----------

Fine said:
The whole idea that getting your nails worked on in any way is inherently male or female is just so absurd I don't really have a response other than laughter.

It's also funny how Chaz is an actual literal embodiment of privilege with pretty much every post. I used to think it was just an abstract idea!

It's inherently a female socialized grooming event (same with the way girls do each other's hair).

Sep 15, 2010#155

The Lovely Boehner

Saying that other people doing it disturbs you qualifies as "giving a shit".

Sep 15, 2010#156

makare

a manicure takes care of your overall nail health. you know so you dont have to bite off those hangnails because you never get them. You are saying that they make someone less manly that is clearly a security issue.

Chazwozel said:
It's inherently a female socialized grooming event (same with the way girls do each other's hair).

what? for most people it is more like getting your teeth cleaned or getting your hair cut. It is a body maintenance thing that is it.

Sep 15, 2010#157

Chazwozel

makare said:
a manicure takes care of your overall nail health. you know so you dont have to bite off those hangnails because you never get them. You are saying that they make someone less manly that is clearly a security issue.

Thanks Dr. Freud.

---------- Post added at 11:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:53 PM ----------

Fine said:
Saying that other people doing it disturbs you qualifies as "giving a shit".

I think you're (as usual) taking something I said too far and way out of context.

Sep 15, 2010#158

makare

on a side note, it says chaz posted that at 10:55 but my compy says it is only 10:53

chaz is posting FROM THE FUTURE!

Sep 15, 2010#159

Chazwozel

makare said:
a manicure takes care of your overall nail health. you know so you dont have to bite off those hangnails because you never get them. You are saying that they make someone less manly that is clearly a security issue.

Chazwozel said:

It's inherently a female socialized grooming event (same with the way girls do each other's hair).

Click to expand...

what? for most people it is more like getting your teeth cleaned or getting your hair cut. It is a body maintenance thing that is it.

Uh, have you been to a salon? Half of the place is usually taken up by a bunch of women socializing with each other. Female socialized grooming event. Just like Chimps picking bugs out of their hair.

Sep 15, 2010#160

makare

Why yes I have. I get manicures too as well as getting my hair cut and other assorted things.

I really don't understand your point. If there are other women at the salon we do talk to each other it's not like we sit in silence but talking is not a major goal of the salon. I mean I also chat with the people in the waiting room while I get my car serviced. If there are people in a group they will most likely talk.

Sep 15, 2010#161

Chazwozel

ugh, I'm not in the mood for another Makare semantics fuckfest tonight. Sorry.

Sep 15, 2010#162

makare

This is not a semantics issue. You are stating a fact, women are social at the salon, that is completely irrelevant to the situation. People are social everywhere. Women go to salons to get their goddamn hair done or a manicure or a wax. There may be talking but that is NOT the goal of the place. If I want to talk to someone it is not the person standing over me with boiling wax.

Sep 15, 2010#163

crono1224

One thing 'Barbershop', that is a pretty social event either in the past or in certain societies/cultures.

Sep 15, 2010#164

blotsfan

Why does it have to be a security issue? Why can't it just be that men generally don't get their nails done? Men and women are different. can't think of many guys that have gotten their nails done. It does weird me out when I see a guy with perfectly cut nails and polish. That will never change, and honestly, I dont see anything wrong with that.

Sep 15, 2010#165

makare

then don't. the security issue is not allowing other MEN the enjoyment of those things. The insecurity lies in not being able to mentally handle that not all men are the same but they are still men. Just because a guy cares about his nails does not detract from his manliness and it makes no sense to conclude that it does. Different people like different things.

Sep 16, 2010#166

makare

aw yeah gettin "social" at the barber shop.

Sep 16, 2010#167

drifter

Brings new meaning to socialist.

Sep 16, 2010#168

Chazwozel

makare said:
then don't. the security issue is not allowing other MEN the enjoyment of those things. The insecurity lies in not being able to mentally handle that not all men are the same but they are still men. Just because a guy cares about his nails does not detract from his manliness and it makes no sense to conclude that it does. Different people like different things.

Sep 16, 2010#169

Covar

crono1224 said:
One thing 'Barbershop', that is a pretty social event either in the past or in certain societies/cultures.

I miss barbershops. I could go in, get my hair cut (without having to explain a high and tight or know anything about guard numbers), and get my neck and face shaved with hot lather and a straight razor.

It was nice. Cheaper than any god damn stylist in the area too.

Sep 16, 2010#170

The Lovely Boehner

Women haven't driven out barbershops. You're just lazy. I'm in Austin, which is the liberal, metrosexual, goddamn hippy-est place in the whole South (probably), and I can find several classic, old school barbershops on Yelp in just a couple minutes.

I still have no clue what it so offensive to you about a guy with healthy hands. What makes him a tool for wanting to look a certain way? What is so wrong and bad about everything feminine?

Sep 16, 2010#171

makare

Chazwozel;437443][QUOTE=makare said:
then don't. the security issue is not allowing other MEN the enjoyment of those things. The insecurity lies in not being able to mentally handle that not all men are the same but they are still men. Just because a guy cares about his nails does not detract from his manliness and it makes no sense to conclude that it does. Different people like different things.

It's nice to see they're handing out psychology degrees in law school nowadays. I can handle a man getting a manicure just fine, nor do I care if he gets one. I just think he's a tool for getting one. Hmm, should I go get my eyebrows waxed this afternoon....?[/QUOTE]

Sorry chaz I just figured since you continuously denigrate the guy's masculinity when he does that you somehow feel it detracts from his masculinity. Can't imagine how I drew that conclusion, ah well.

Sep 16, 2010#172

Sara_2814

Fine said:
I still have no clue what it so offensive to you about a guy with healthy hands. What makes him a tool for wanting to look a certain way? What is so wrong and bad about everything feminine?

I suspect the state of your fingernails is probably a class issue more than a gender issue. A person’s hands have long been used to judge them: it’s how you could instantly spot the nobleman hiding in the village because he was the only guy with soft hands.

Manicured hands have never been exclusively feminine, it’s a sign of wealth and privilege. “Dirty, chipped nails = hard day’s work” and “manicured nails = living off the sweat of the peasants”. Now it probably just translates to blue-collar vs. white-collar.

So is a metrosexual annoying because he's "feminine" or because he's pretentious? I don't see an obsession with appearance as inherently "feminine": it's a stereotype of women that we're all obsessed with nails/clothes/hair/etc. Victorian men were obsessed with appearance, too, right down to their perfectly manicured nails and waxed moustaches, and they were a pretty sexist bunch. It has nothing to do with women, and reducing "everything feminine" to manicures and fashionable clothes is shallow and sexist.

Sep 16, 2010#173

Chazwozel

makare;437459][QUOTE=Chazwozel;437443][QUOTE=makare said:
then don't. the security issue is not allowing other MEN the enjoyment of those things. The insecurity lies in not being able to mentally handle that not all men are the same but they are still men. Just because a guy cares about his nails does not detract from his manliness and it makes no sense to conclude that it does. Different people like different things.

Sep 16, 2010#174

makare

the guy who gets manicures. so any guy who does so.

I agree on the pretentious Sara. I feel the same way about women who get their hair done every week. It's just annoying. But hey they can afford it whatevs I guess.

Sep 16, 2010#175

Chazwozel

makare said:
the guy who gets manicures. so any guy who does so.

I agree on the pretentious Sara. I feel the same way about women who get their hair done every week. It's just annoying. But hey they can afford it whatevs I guess.

Fine, I'll agree that it's more the pretentious attitude that annoys me more than the fact that they're men getting their nails done.

Sep 16, 2010#176

Necronic

I don't think equal treatment of men and women is possible. Unlike racial issuese or even issues of sexuality (gay straight etc), gender has a really significant physical difference. There's also a significant mental difference, probably more significant than in those other groups (although I am not sure). You can't, for instance, ever have men and women compete in certain physical events together. I do think that more sports should be open to both genders though, some of them its clear that women can do just as well (if not better).

On a more personal level, there's also the fact that I will always treate women differently for 1 reason. I want to have sex with them. This isn't meant to be a flippant comment, its more the fact that biologically I (and most men) have a deep set reason for looking at women differently than I look at men. The same is, I'm sure true of women and how they see men (in that it is different from how they see women.)

The point is that the world can't be homogonized down to a system where we're all equal.

HOWEVER

This only applies to life outside the world of business and laws (ie your personal life). In business we have to do our best to pretend we have blinders on to anything that differentiates people other than their ability.

Sep 16, 2010#177

makare

The pursuit of sex isn't really a gender issue though. It is kind of universal.

Sep 16, 2010#178

MindDetective

But the way that pursuit occurs is different, I would say inherently so, for men and women.

Sep 16, 2010#179

makare

Sure but if you are talking about perceiving the opposite gender in the frame work of sex it is pretty much the same. Women assess men for those purposes and oggle guys too. So women treat men differently than they would women within that framework (assuming they aren't gay of course).

Sep 16, 2010#180

MindDetective

So very true. And that does underscore I think the fundamental problem with many equality issues. Not all, obviously.

Sep 16, 2010#181

makare

curse our human desire for sexy times!

Sep 16, 2010#182

Adammon

There would be no way in hell you'd catch me getting a manicure. That kind of pretentiousness exceeds even my bullshit meter. It's called 'nail-clippers'. It's not like nails are going to look like

but nails that look like this

don't require a manicure. They just require looking after yourself (Much like taking regular showers, combing your hair, shaving, etc. None of which require a woman or an effeminate man to groom me)

Sep 16, 2010#183

Chazwozel

Adammon said:
There would be no way in hell you'd catch me getting a manicure. That kind of pretentiousness exceeds even my bullshit meter. It's called 'nail-clippers'. It's not like nails are going to look like

but nails that look like this

don't require a manicure. They just require looking after yourself (Much like taking regular showers, combing your hair, shaving, etc. None of which require a woman or an effeminate man to groom me)

Obviously you're insecure about yourself because you don't want to go to the local salon and get a manni and pedi. OOOHHHHHHhhh MAKEOVER TIME! I'm coming up to Canada, and we can get our nails done together! WHAT FUN! While we're there we can get a bikini wax and have them curl our eyelashes. It'll be so much fun.

Sep 16, 2010#184

makare

Guys seem to like getting a professional shave, straight razor, blah blah blah you can shave at home. Why is getting your nails done professionally any different? Sure I can get a manicure at home, in fact I do because I be po' but I dont have the same equipment or talent as the manicurist at a shop.

Chaz his argument has nothing to do with being insecure. Stop being a spaz.

Sep 16, 2010#185

Chazwozel

makare said:
Guys seem to like getting a professional shave, straight razor, blah blah blah you can shave at home. Why is getting your nails done professionally any different? Sure I can get a manicure at home, in fact I do because I be po' but I dont have the same equipment or talent as the manicurist at a shop.

Chaz his argument has nothing to do with being insecure. Stop being a spaz.

Why don't you go get a professional shave with a straight razor then, smart ass?

Sep 16, 2010#186

makare

what the hell would they shave? my legs? I don't even think that is possible.

Sep 16, 2010#187

Chazwozel

makare said:
what the hell would they shave? my legs? I don't even think that is possible.

So...

Why the hell does a man need a manicure?

Sep 16, 2010#188

makare

because men and women both have nails? I don't grow facial hair so that comparison doesn't make sense.

Sep 16, 2010#189

ThatGrinningIdiot!

Chazwozel;437506][QUOTE=makare said:
what the hell would they shave? my legs? I don't even think that is possible.

So...

Why the hell does a man need a manicure?[/QUOTE]

They don't. Different strokes for different blokes and all that, I couldn't help but think less of any guy who went out to get a manicure.

Sep 16, 2010#190

makare

My point was refuting the argument against going out and having a grooming task performed professionally when it could easily be done at home.

If going out and getting a shave is ok then getting nails groomed should also be the same. It is still pretentious. That argument is just faulty against it.

Sep 16, 2010#191

Chazwozel

ThatGrinningIdiot!;437509][QUOTE=Chazwozel;437506][QUOTE=makare said:
what the hell would they shave? my legs? I don't even think that is possible.

So...

Why the hell does a man need a manicure?[/QUOTE]

They don't. Different strokes for different blokes and all that, but I couldn't help but think less of any guy who went out to get a manicure.[/QUOTE]

Oh you're just being insecure. Come now, we should get our legs waxed to ease our minds.

Sep 16, 2010#192

makare

chaz loves the salon.

but seriously, if they offer to curl your eyelashes just say no. i mean wtf.

Sep 16, 2010#193

ThatGrinningIdiot!

makare said:
My point was refuting the argument against going out and having a grooming task performed professionally when it could easily be done at home.

If going out and getting a shave is ok then getting nails groomed should also be the same. It is still pretentious. That argument is just faulty against it.

Men and women have different ways to reward themselves. Women go out and get a manicure, and men get a shave. I merely pointed out that I would be weirded out to see a man getting his nails done, the reaction would be the same if I saw a woman getting her beard shaved.

Sep 16, 2010#194

Chazwozel

makare said:
chaz loves the salon.

but seriously, if they offer to curl your eyelashes just say no. i mean wtf.

I do now. I had no idea they waxed out your asshairs!

Sep 16, 2010#195

makare

Apparently some men get a manicure >.>

Sep 16, 2010#196

Adammon

makare said:
Apparently some men get a manicure >.>

If I'm going to a salon, I'm getting

not

Sep 16, 2010#197

makare

I think men in general might enjoy pedicures more than manicures. I mean who doesn't like a foot massage. Ticklish people I suppose... the pussies.

Sep 16, 2010#198

Adammon

makare said:
I think men in general might enjoy pedicures more than manicures. I mean who doesn't like a foot massage. Ticklish people I suppose... the pussies.

I will say I love hot chicks cutting my hair, especially when they wash it first and get all lathered up and give me a deep scalp massage. Mmmm. The idea of someone cutting my nails, pushing back cuticles, applying polish, not so much. Maybe it's the fact that they're in my face trying to chat with me as they do a service typically associated with women that irritates/bothers me. If I could cut my hands off, send them in for maintenance while I sit in the waiting room with a dirty mag or something, and then they could get reattached afterwards - that appeals.

Sep 16, 2010#199

makare

ok just to be clear you do not need to get polish during a manicure. some women don't and most men don't.

Sep 16, 2010#200

Adammon

makare said:
ok just to be clear you do not need to get polish during a manicure. some women don't and most men don't.

I don't get the purpose of cuticle-pressing either. So, the only benefit of a manicure at this point is cutting my nails, and holding hands with a complete stranger while they stare at me intensely. FUN...

Sep 16, 2010#201

makare

Sometimes there is a hand massage, I dont have cuticle issues so no pressing. My nails just look better after they have been taken care of professionally because they have products that make them healthier.

The cuticle pressing is mostly for people whose cuticle have overgrown the nail bed, which looks weird and mutant like. In serious cases they cut them. Bleh.

Also, they are generally looking at your nails. If your manicurist is staring at you you may have something in your teeth or perhaps a booger.

Sep 16, 2010#202

Adammon

makare said:
Also, they are generally looking at your nails. If your manicurist is staring at you you may have something in your teeth or perhaps a booger.

You have to understand - my sexiness is awe-inspiring.

Sep 16, 2010#203

makare

Im going to stick with assuming you have a booger.

Sep 16, 2010#204

Element 117

slightly off topic. There are quite a few men's salons here that give massages, manicures and pedicures, the whole nine yards. They are a big hit with hetero masculine men. Why? Because all the salon staff are all college students who wear lingerie and bikinis.

Sep 16, 2010#205

Adammon

PCT said:
slightly off topic. There are quite a few men's salons here that give massages, manicures and pedicures, the whole nine yards. They are a big hit with hetero masculine men. Why? Because all the salon staff are all college students who wear lingerie and bikinis.

That appeals to me, but I still wouldn't get a manicure or pedicure.

Sep 16, 2010#206

Sara_2814

makare said:
the guy who gets manicures. so any guy who does so.

I agree on the pretentious Sara. I feel the same way about women who get their hair done every week. It's just annoying. But hey they can afford it whatevs I guess.

We all have our indulgences. I get labeled pretentious because I love my Apple iDevices. :lol:

I don't get manicures, but I can understand the appeal. However, when you get fake nails that make it impossible to use your hands, you've gone too far. D:

Sep 16, 2010#207

makare

Oh yeah sometimes I see women's nails and I am like.. what the shit!?

I loved my fake nails. They were pretty short though. I couldn't afford to keep them and I don't think I could take the pain to get them again. Holy shit I have a high tolerance for pain but that stuff they put on your nail to adhere the nail goo burns like fucking acid.

Sep 16, 2010#208

HCGLNS

makare said:
what the hell would they shave? my legs? I don't even think that is possible.

It's not only possible, but when done correctly borders on erotic stimulation for the woman.

Sep 16, 2010#209

makare

someone comes near my legs (or anywhere on my body for that matter) with a straight razor, the last thing ill be feeling is erotic.

Sep 16, 2010#210

HCGLNS

The idea that a straight razor is dangerous is merely propaganda developed by the Gillette Shaving company. Everything about using them contravenes how to use them in a dangerous manner.

Sep 16, 2010#211

The Lovely Boehner

There's a topless haircut place around here named "Sexy Scissors". I have no clue what services they provide.

Sep 16, 2010#212

makare

Ive cut myself with a safety razor. I have mad injuring myself skeelz.

Sep 16, 2010#213

Disconnected

jesus fucking christ what the hell happened is this thread

Sep 16, 2010#214

makare

it got smooooth and sexy.

Sep 16, 2010#215

Chazwozel

I brought up the manicure discussion at lunch here at work. It was unanimously agreed upon that men who get manicures might as well start wearing high heels and tucking things back.

Sep 16, 2010#216

Adammon

makare said:
it got smooooth and sexy.

See, I knew you'd come around to my awe-inspiring sexiness

Sep 16, 2010#217

The Lovely Boehner

Chazwozel said:
I brought up the manicure discussion at lunch here at work. It was unanimously agreed upon that men who get manicures might as well start wearing high heels and tucking things back.

Congrats, you work with a bunch of morons.

Sep 16, 2010#218

Adammon

Fine said:
I brought up the manicure discussion at lunch here at work. It was unanimously agreed upon that men who get manicures might as well start wearing high heels and tucking things back.

Congrats, you work with a bunch of morons.[/QUOTE]

When was your last manicure?

Sep 16, 2010#219

makare

If I worked with him and I thought manicures were ok I wouldn't tell chaz because he would get all hargly gargly and bitchy about it. Sometimes it is just easier to go along with the stupidity.

Sep 16, 2010#220

Chazwozel

makare said:
If I worked with him and I thought manicures were ok I wouldn't tell chaz because he would get all hargly gargly and bitchy about it. Sometimes it is just easier to go along with the stupidity.

You don't even know me.

---------- Post added at 01:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:03 PM ----------

Fine said:
I brought up the manicure discussion at lunch here at work. It was unanimously agreed upon that men who get manicures might as well start wearing high heels and tucking things back.

Congrats, you work with a bunch of morons.[/QUOTE]

Says the guy that works for the IRS. ZING!

Sep 16, 2010#221

The Lovely Boehner

I've never had a manicure, but I still think it's moronic to say stuff like "if you do X, turn in your MAN CARD". Not that I have any pride in being a guy in the first place.

Sep 16, 2010#222

Adammon

Fine said:
I've never had a manicure, but I still think it's moronic to say stuff like "if you do X, turn in your MAN CARD". Not that I have any pride in being a guy in the first place.

That much has been obvious for a long time.

Sep 16, 2010#223

Chazwozel

Fine said:
I've never had a manicure, but I still think it's moronic to say stuff like "if you do X, turn in your MAN CARD". Not that I have any pride in being a guy in the first place.

And this is why you're single...

Sep 16, 2010#224

makare

I have talked to you on here for like three years so unless you are personaing the hell out of this thing, I think I know you at least some.

Sep 16, 2010#225

Chazwozel

makare said:
I have talked to you on here for like three years so unless you are personaing the hell out of this thing, I think I know you at least some.

Yeah, what are my parents like? How was my life growing up? What's my favorite TV show? Who do I hang out with on the weekends? What's my wife's name? You don't know shit about me. I don't sit here and pretend I know anything about you other than you're dipshit, backwoods moron with no worldly experience other than Bumfuck, South Dakota. Please extend me the same courtesy.

Sep 16, 2010#226

makare

I don't know facts about your life but I sure as hell know your personality. That was what I was commenting.

I don't have to know your parents to know that you hargle gargle about this issue because you DID IT IN THIS THREAD. I don't have to know your wife to know that you are not afraid to mock or insult people when you disagree because you also did it in this thread.

Sep 16, 2010#227

Chazwozel

makare said:
I don't know facts about your life but I sure as hell know your personality. That was what I was commenting.

I don't have to know your parents to know that you hargle gargle about this issue because you DID IT IN THIS THREAD. I don't have to know your wife to know that you are not afraid to mock or insult people when you disagree because you also did it in this thread.

Yeah, internet and reality are two different things you dumb fuck. Do you assume that Shego goes around murdering people as well? Are you really this naive?

Sep 16, 2010#228

makare

No, chaz, they aren't. That is something you should really learn. People are people. So as I said, unless you are operating as a persona, it is reasonable to conclude that the person you are online is the person you are in "reality."

Sep 16, 2010#229

Adammon

Gotta disagree. Online personalities and reality diverge drastically - 10 years of experience meeting people online has taught me at least that much.

Sep 16, 2010#230

Chazwozel

makare said:
No, chaz, they aren't. That is something you should really learn. People are people. So as I said, unless you are operating as a persona, it is reasonable to conclude that the person you are online is the person you are in "reality."

Then, I'm sorry, but you truly are stupid.

Sep 16, 2010#231

makare

Then it is an online persona. Who is the real person then?

I am the same in "reality" as I am online. Except of course in real life I do much better at avoiding people I don't like.

If "Chaz" turns out to be a persona I will be quite happy some of my faith in humanity might be restored.

Sep 16, 2010#232

SpecialKO

Adammon said:
GOnline personalities and in-person personalities diverge drastically

FTFY. If you call someone an asshole online, "in reality" you just called someone an asshole. Whether you would do it face-to-face doesn't make it any less real.

Sep 16, 2010#233

Adammon

SpecialKO;437573][QUOTE=Adammon said:
GOnline personalities and in-person personalities diverge drastically

Sep 16, 2010#234

makare

Unless someone thinks, hmm I can call someone an asshole which I otherwise wouldnt do simply because it is LESS hurtful online.

The fact that they are the kind of person who would call someone an asshole is the same in person or online.

Sep 16, 2010#235

Chazwozel

makare said:
Then it is an online persona. Who is the real person then?

I am the same in "reality" as I am online. Except of course in real life I do much better at avoiding people I don't like.

If "Chaz" turns out to be a persona I will be quite happy some of my faith in humanity might be restored.

You've done it, Dr. Freud. You've unlocked the mystery that is Chazwozel.

My name is Leon Kompowsky and I’m a brick layer from Patterson, New Jersey. All my life I was very angry until one day I just talked like this. All of a sudden everybody was smiling at me and I was only doing good on this Earth. So I kept doing it. To make a tired point, which one of us is truly crazy?

Sep 16, 2010#236

Adammon

makare said:
Unless someone thinks, hmm I can call someone an asshole which I otherwise wouldnt do simply because it is LESS hurtful online.

The fact that they are the kind of person who would call someone an asshole is the same in person or online.

DOES THE FACT THAT I TYPE IN ALL CAPS MEAN I AM THE TYPE OF PERSON WHO YELLS ON A REGULAR BASIS or do I just have a typing problem?

Sep 16, 2010#237

makare

Ok you can call me stupid all you want but I fucking hate Freud so pick a different psychologist. Call me Dr Jung or something.

Adammon;437578][QUOTE=makare said:
Unless someone thinks, hmm I can call someone an asshole which I otherwise wouldnt do simply because it is LESS hurtful online.

The fact that they are the kind of person who would call someone an asshole is the same in person or online.

DOES THE FACT THAT I TYPE IN ALL CAPS MEAN I AM THE TYPE OF PERSON WHO YELLS ON A REGULAR BASIS or do I just have a typing problem?[/QUOTE]

It would probably mean you are the kind of person who needs a lot of attention or is not detail oriented.

Sep 16, 2010#238

MindDetective

This thread is going places. Weird, edge of the cliff kinds of places. Places that other places mock in the lunch room.

Sep 16, 2010#239

Chazwozel

Adammon;437578][QUOTE=makare said:
Unless someone thinks, hmm I can call someone an asshole which I otherwise wouldnt do simply because it is LESS hurtful online.

The fact that they are the kind of person who would call someone an asshole is the same in person or online.

DOES THE FACT THAT I TYPE IN ALL CAPS MEAN I AM THE TYPE OF PERSON WHO YELLS ON A REGULAR BASIS or do I just have a typing problem?[/QUOTE]

Haha, that's one of the first things Dave mentioned when he heard me talking on Halforum Vent. "You're a lot less angry than you type."

Sep 16, 2010#240

Adammon

makare said:
Ok you can call me stupid all you want but I fucking hate Freud so pick a different psychologist. Call me Dr Jung or something.

Adammon;437578][QUOTE=makare said:

Unless someone thinks, hmm I can call someone an asshole which I otherwise wouldnt do simply because it is LESS hurtful online.

The fact that they are the kind of person who would call someone an asshole is the same in person or online.

Click to expand...

DOES THE FACT THAT I TYPE IN ALL CAPS MEAN I AM THE TYPE OF PERSON WHO YELLS ON A REGULAR BASIS or do I just have a typing problem?

It would probably mean you are the kind of person who needs a lot of attention or is not detail oriented.[/QUOTE]

Does it change the meaning of my message?

Sep 16, 2010#241

SpecialKO

Adammon;437575][QUOTE=SpecialKO;437573][QUOTE=Adammon said:
GOnline personalities and in-person personalities diverge drastically

FTFY. If you call someone an asshole online, "in reality" you just called someone an asshole. Whether you would do it face-to-face doesn't make it any less real.[/QUOTE]

The medium is the message. Our societal niceties notwithstanding, the signal-to-noise ratio is so low online that the way we communicate has changed to accomodate. Calling someone an 'asshole' online is nowhere near as powerful, degrading, or even unexpected, as in person. It's similar to what you would say to a persons face as opposed to behind their back. You're right in that it doesn't make it any less 'real', however the damage different is mitigated by the presentation.[/QUOTE]

I quite agree. I was commenting on you and Chaz using the word "reality". "Reality" is not limited to what you say to people's faces. What you say about someone behind their back can have a strong strong behavioral effect on who you say it to which can contribute to how they interact with the person you're speaking with. Your online behavior, even if it's an affected persona, is still a facet of who you are, shaped by the social circumstances under which you're expressing yourself. That people may mistake the persona for you is a side-effect, and no different than if someone draws a mistaken conclusion about your character during a conversation at work.

Sep 16, 2010#242

makare

Depends on the message and the context. I am not concerned with how people type I am concerned with what they type. If someone in person has a speech impediment that is not a personality trait. If someone on here types in caps or hates apostrophes (like me) that is not really revealing to personality.

I made conclusions about chaz by looking at what he says not how he says it. His use of syntax is pretty irrelevant.

Sep 16, 2010#243

Disconnected

Chazwozel;437577][QUOTE=makare said:
Then it is an online persona. Who is the real person then?

I am the same in "reality" as I am online. Except of course in real life I do much better at avoiding people I don't like.

If "Chaz" turns out to be a persona I will be quite happy some of my faith in humanity might be restored.

You've done it, Dr. Freud. You've unlocked the mystery that is Chazwozel.

-snip- To make a tired point, which one of us is truly crazy?[/QUOTE]

well... you do keep responding to her.

Sep 16, 2010#244

Iaculus

Fine said:
Women haven't driven out barbershops. You're just lazy. I'm in Austin, which is the liberal, metrosexual, goddamn hippy-est place in the whole South (probably), and I can find several classic, old school barbershops on Yelp in just a couple minutes.

I still have no clue what it so offensive to you about a guy with healthy hands. What makes him a tool for wanting to look a certain way? What is so wrong and bad about everything feminine?

This is Chaz. Who says he's not just trying to get a rise outta you?

Sep 16, 2010#245

Adammon

makare said:
Depends on the message and the context. I am not concerned with how people type I am concerned with what they type. If someone in person has a speech impediment that is not a personality trait. If someone on here types in caps or hates apostrophes (like me) that is not really revealing to personality.

I made conclusions about chaz by looking at what he says not how he says it. His use of syntax is pretty irrelevant.

How we communicate a message is just as or often more important than what we are communicating. In person, I can call you an asshole with a smile on my face and it could be taken as jovial banter. Or, I can call you an asshole under my breath with my arms crossed against my chest and the interpretation of the message is entirely different. Equating dissimilar forms of communication to the same message is actually one of the symptoms of higher-functioning autism (Aspergers). Online, we're all autistic. The only interpretation we have is based on 1) historic interaction 2) our own mood/bias/ 3) the way we WANT to interpret it.

There's so many readily identifiable personality phenotypes on the board, it's actually kind of fun to play "What's this person really like?"

Sep 16, 2010#246

SpecialKO

Adammon said:
There's so many readily identifiable personality phenotypes on the board, it's actually kind of fun to play "What's this person really like?"

Board RPG! Board RPG!

Sep 16, 2010#247

Adammon

And just to throw this out there: solipsistic introjection

"Lacking any kind of visual face-to-face cues, the human mind will assign characteristics and traits to a "person" in interactions on the Internet. Reading another person's message may insert imagined images of what a person looks like or sounds like into the mind, and mentally assigns an identity to these things. The mind will associate traits to a user according to our own desires, needs, and wishes – traits that the real person might not actually have."

Sep 16, 2010#248

makare

How a person speaks is not as important as what is said and it is perfectly reliable to base an assessment on what he/she says.

Considering how often people misread verbal or physical cues in person it is not really an issue online either.

Sep 16, 2010#249

Chazwozel

makare said:
How a person speaks is not as important as what is said and it is perfectly reliable to base an assessment on what he/she says.

Considering how often people misread verbal or physical cues in person it is not really an issue online either.

Holy shit! And you're going to be a lawyer?

How a message is delivered pretty much can make or break an argument in politics, business, law, and in some cases, yes, even science.

Sep 16, 2010#250

makare

Yeah, and you're not.

Let's think about this.

Sep 16, 2010#251

HCGLNS

If I ever meet Chaz in person, I will be sure to tell him how well manicured his fingernails are while I romance him like Rudolph.

Sep 16, 2010#252

Adammon

Chazwozel;437608][QUOTE=makare said:
How a person speaks is not as important as what is said and it is perfectly reliable to base an assessment on what he/she says.

Considering how often people misread verbal or physical cues in person it is not really an issue online either.

Holy shit! And you're going to be a lawyer?[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that doesn't make much sense considering her background.

Makare, in your reciting, on a dare, cross your arms and stare at the ground. I think you'll be shocked just how important it is.

Sep 16, 2010#253

HCGLNS

Chazwozel;437608][QUOTE=makare said:
How a person speaks is not as important as what is said and it is perfectly reliable to base an assessment on what he/she says.

Considering how often people misread verbal or physical cues in person it is not really an issue online either.

Holy shit! And you're going to be a lawyer?

How a message is delivered pretty much can make or break an argument in politics, business, law, and in some cases, yes, even science.[/QUOTE]

Nixon won that debate Dave dammit!

Sep 16, 2010#254

makare

yeah that would be where that context thing I mentioned comes in.

and i sit in a chair when i recite so my body language isn't really important but even if i were standing and presenting I could be as poised as possible but if the stuff coming out of my mouth is wrong that would be the deciding issue.

Sep 16, 2010#255

Adammon

makare said:
yeah that would be where that context thing I mentioned comes in.

and i sit in a chair when i recite so my body language isn't really important but even if i were standing and presenting I could be as poised as possible but if the stuff coming out of my mouth is wrong that would be the deciding issue.

Your body language is always important. The stuff coming out of your mouth can also be 100% correct, but interpreted as wrong by your eye movement, hand motion, posture, tenor of your voice, breathing, etc.

Sep 16, 2010#256

Chazwozel

makare said:
yeah that would be where that context thing I mentioned comes in.

and i sit in a chair when i recite so my body language isn't really important but even if i were standing and presenting I could be as poised as possible but if the stuff coming out of my mouth is wrong that would be the deciding issue.

So you're saying a lawyer would win a case if he showed up to court all "unmanicured", spat on the floor, scowled at the judge and jury, and scratched his balls even though his argument was 100% airtight? I somehow doubt it. Hell, making people believe and convincing them based on your demeanor and delivery is what your job is all about.

Sep 16, 2010#257

makare

And how does any of that relate to being able to assess what kind of person someone is by how they behave online (the topic of this conversation)? Especially considering it is a one shot thing but instead an going, year by year, analysis?

Ok.... being a lawyer, in the courtroom at least, IS all about persona. It isn't who you really are it is merely a performance. It is goal oriented. That has nothing to do with how those things relate to interactions in everyday online or offline life.
That is like trying to make conclusions about teenagers by watching Hannah Montana.

Sep 16, 2010#258

Adammon

makare said:
And how does any of that relate to being able to assess what kind of person someone is by how they behave online (the topic of this conversation)? Especially considering it is a one shot thing but instead an going, year by year, analysis?

Because in the absence of context as you put it, we're left to fill in the gaps ourselves. Your assessment of a person online says more about you than it does about the person being assessed.

Sep 16, 2010#259

Chazwozel

makare said:
And how does any of that relate to being able to assess what kind of person someone is by how they behave online (the topic of this conversation)? Especially considering it is a one shot thing but instead an going, year by year, analysis?

See right now, I'm looking at the front of my brain. That's how hard I'm rolling my eyes at you.

Sep 16, 2010#260

makare

The conversation is the context. The forum is the context. If someone interacts a certain way with people that is how that person interacts. It is a truism, a tautology. We are who we are.

Even if someone is pretending to be something else they are still the type of person who pretends to be that way. That is in itself revealing.

Sep 16, 2010#261

Chazwozel

Adammon;437624][QUOTE=makare said:
And how does any of that relate to being able to assess what kind of person someone is by how they behave online (the topic of this conversation)? Especially considering it is a one shot thing but instead an going, year by year, analysis?

Because in the absence of context as you put it, we're left to fill in the gaps ourselves. Your assessment of a person online says more about you than it does about the person being assessed.[/QUOTE]

Oh fuck! If this was wrestling, I think you'd have knocked her into a full reversal.

Take a seat Makare:

---------- Post added at 02:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:26 PM ----------

makare said:
The conversation is the context. The forum is the context. If someone interacts a certain way with people that is how that person interacts. It is a truism, a tautology. We are who we are.

Even if someone is pretending to be something else they are still the type of person who pretends to be that way. That is in itself revealing.

So Shego goes around murdering people. For reals. Case closed.

Sep 16, 2010#262

makare

No but we can tell that she is the kind of person who finds that stuff interesting. That is into gore and stuff like that.

Sep 16, 2010#263

crono1224

Disconnected;437593][QUOTE=Chazwozel said:
*snip*

well... you do keep responding to her.[/QUOTE]

I think you missed the whole simpsons quote.

Also tone and inflection are huge in real life, sarcasm can be nearly impossible to tell online unless it is hugely done, in real life a roll of the eyes can be all it takes, or just a little change in tone.

Sep 16, 2010#264

Adammon

makare said:
No but we can tell that she is the kind of person who finds that stuff interesting. That is into gore and stuff like that.

Sep 16, 2010#265

Chazwozel

makare said:
No but we can tell that she is the kind of person who finds that stuff interesting. That is into gore and stuff like that.

So I go around to salons and scream at other men getting manicures that they're being pussies... My God, it's like we've been married for years, you know me so well...

Sep 16, 2010#266

makare

Ok for example, someone who tells a really racist joke and then says haha im just kidding. Ok so that guy ISN'T a racist. But he IS the kind of guy who thinks racist jokes or the making of racist jokes is amusing. What someone says gives insight into who they are as a person. Not necessarily a literal insight.

Shego saying id like to kill people. does that mean she would literally kill people, who knows. but it does give insight into her personality.

Adammon;437631][QUOTE=makare said:
No but we can tell that she is the kind of person who finds that stuff interesting. That is into gore and stuff like that.

She could also be into Hello Kitty and read children's stories to sick cancer patients at the local hospital. Those gaps make up the real person, but we don't see those so we create a persona in our mind representing what we know about the person.[/QUOTE]

I clearly said at least twice that if someone is operating under a persona you can only tell the persona not the person. that doesnt mean all people online are personas.

fuck you firefox personas is a word. :mad:

Chazwozel said:
My God, it's like we've been married for years

Don't even joke about that.

Sep 16, 2010#267

Chazwozel

makare said:
Ok for example, someone who tells a really racist joke and then says haha im just kidding. Ok so that guy ISN'T a racist. But he IS the kind of guy who thinks racist jokes or the making of racist jokes is amusing. What someone says gives insight into who they are as a person. Not necessarily a literal insight.

Shego saying id like to kill people. does that mean she would literally kill people, who knows. but it does give insight into her personality.

This whole fucking thread is based off calling someone sexist for making fun of men that get manicures. That's pretty much Charlie's whole purpose for this thread: to call out who he thinks is a sexist pig, which is why I responded to it in the way I did. If you weren't such a fucking twit with her head so far up her ass she could turn herself inside out, you'd spot that in the first place. Or maybe it's because you couldn't see the tone and context that I delivered my message?

Sep 16, 2010#268

makare

ok... i don't understand your point. but alright.

Sep 16, 2010#269

Frankie Williamson

This whole thread deserves the Feminist Spirit Award.

Sep 16, 2010#270

makare

I like to think it would be shaped like a vagina

Sep 16, 2010#271

Chazwozel

makare said:
ok... i don't understand your point. but alright.

My point is you're a half-wit who can't read between the lines or spot sarcasm from a mile away. I'm willing to be you're incredibly gullible too.

Sep 16, 2010#272

makare

I thought you and adammon were saying I read too much between the lines?

Sep 16, 2010#273

Adammon

makare said:
I thought you and adammon were saying I read too much between the lines?

Nope, quite the opposite. Your focus is on the message at the expense of the medium. It's an admirable trait, but one that doesn't lend itself well to communication outside of controlled environments. I suspect you'd probably avoid Yahoo comments on stories because you couldn't stand the stupidity of people posting there. At least here there is some semblance of not necessarily control, but at least constraint.

It also relates to your commentary on feminism. Your interpretation of feminism can be quite at odds with the more radical elements, despite both goals being the same.

Sep 16, 2010#274

makare

I do think human interaction is human interaction regardless of the medium. Indeed.

Sep 16, 2010#275

MindDetective

Ugh. I want to jump in with the psychology of nonverbal communication but the whole conversation is teetering on the rails...

Sep 16, 2010#276

makare

don't be afraid. we all float down here.

Sep 16, 2010#277

Adammon

makare said:
don't be afraid. we all float down here.

?? *shudder*

Sep 16, 2010#278

makare

that is so it I am going to punch you in the balls :mad:

I don't know why your image posts get past the image off filter but it is chapping my ass!

Sep 16, 2010#279

Adammon

makare said:
that is so it I am going to punch you in the balls

I don't know why your image posts get past the image off filter but it is chapping my ass!

I think it's because you secretly like me.

Sep 16, 2010#280

makare

no arent you a ginger?

Sep 16, 2010#281

Adammon

makare said:
no arent you a ginger?

That shouldn't matter!

Sep 16, 2010#282

makare

It matters to me.

Sep 16, 2010#283

Covar

three pages and no one bothered to mention John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theorem?

Sep 16, 2010#284

Espy

MindDetective said:
Ugh. I want to jump in with the psychology of nonverbal communication but the whole conversation is teetering on the rails...

Oh go for it. What have we got to lose?

Sep 16, 2010#285

Adammon

makare said:
It matters to me.

In a good way or a bad way?

Sep 16, 2010#286

makare

good for me. bad for you.

Sep 16, 2010#287

Adammon

makare said:
good for me. bad for you.

I guess I'm getting mixed messages. Now it sounds like you totally want me.

Sep 16, 2010#288

makare

I want you to be sterile and not produce any little redhead children.

Sep 16, 2010#289

Adammon

makare said:
I want you to be sterile and not produce any little redhead children.

With you?

Sep 16, 2010#290

makare

with me yeah but not with anyone really. no childrens for you.

Sep 16, 2010#291

Adammon

makare said:
with me yeah but not with anyone really. no childrens for you.

So what you're saying is you want to do the nasty with me, as long as no kids are produced. Yeah, that sounds ok to me.

Sep 16, 2010#292

makare

damn my sexiness

all the boys want me. I just want to be left alone

Sep 16, 2010#293

Espy

Also, since we are getting reports:

Chaz, knock off the personal attacks. Argue away but do it without the personal attacks.

Sep 16, 2010#294

The Lovely Boehner

Let me wrangle this back on track from these interesting semantics debates and Adammon's impotent flirting.

Hey kids, want to hear about Male Privilege? I knew you would! Here's a checklist. I know certain people are going to go through and pull out various numbers and talk about their anecdotes that are completely valid evidence with no context and disprove the entire theory of male privilege! But try to read this with an open mind and maybe think about it.

The Male Privilege Checklist
1. My odds of being hired for a job, when competing against female applicants, are probably skewed in my favor. The more prestigious the job, the larger the odds are skewed.
2. I can be confident that my co-workers won’t think I got my job because of my sex - even though that might be true.
3. If I am never promoted, it’s not because of my sex.
4. If I fail in my job or career, I can feel sure this won’t be seen as a black mark against my entire sex’s capabilities.
5. I am far less likely to face sexual harassment at work than my female co-workers are.
6. If I do the same task as a woman, and if the measurement is at all subjective, chances are people will think I did a better job.
7. If I’m a teen or adult, and if I can stay out of prison, my odds of being raped are so low as to be negligible.
8. I am not taught to fear walking alone after dark in average public spaces.
9. If I choose not to have children, my masculinity will not be called into question.
10. If I have children but do not provide primary care for them, my masculinity will not be called into question.
11. If I have children and provide primary care for them, I’ll be praised for extraordinary parenting if I’m even marginally competent.
12. If I have children and pursue a career, no one will think I’m selfish for not staying at home.
13. If I seek political office, my relationship with my children, or who I hire to take care of them, will probably not be scrutinized by the press.
14. Chances are my elected representatives are mostly people of my own sex. The more prestigious and powerful the elected position, the more likely this is to be true.
15. I can be somewhat sure that if I ask to see “the person in charge,” I will face a person of my own sex. The higher-up in the organization the person is, the surer I can be.
16. As a child, chances are I was encouraged to be more active and outgoing than my sisters.
17. As a child, I could choose from an almost infinite variety of children’s media featuring positive, active, non-stereotyped heroes of my own sex. I never had to look for it; male protagonists were (and are) the default.
18. As a child, chances are I got more teacher attention than girls who raised their hands just as often.
19. If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether or
not it has sexist overtones.
20. I can turn on the television or glance at the front page of the newspaper and see people of my own sex widely represented, every day, without exception.
21. If I’m careless with my financial affairs it won’t be attributed to my sex.
22. If I’m careless with my driving it won’t be attributed to my sex.
23. I can speak in public to a large group without putting my sex on trial.
24. If I have sex with a lot of people, it won’t make me an object of contempt or derision.
25. There are value-neutral clothing choices available to me; it is possible for me to choose clothing that
doesn’t send any particular message to the world.
26. My wardrobe and grooming are relatively cheap and consume little time.
27. If I buy a new car, chances are I’ll be offered a better price than a woman buying the same car
28. If I’m not conventionally attractive, the disadvantages are relatively small and easy to ignore.
29. I can be loud with no fear of being called a shrew. I can be aggressive with no fear of being called a bitch.
30. I can ask for legal protection from violence that happens mostly to men without being seen as a selfish special interest, since that kind of violence is called “crime” and is a general social concern. (Violence that
happens mostly to women is usually called “domestic violence” or “acquaintance rape,” and is seen as a special interest issue.)
31. I can be confident that the ordinary language of day-to-day existence will always include my sex. “All men are created equal,” mailman, chairman, freshman, he.
32. My ability to make important decisions and my capability in general will never be questioned depending
on what time of the month it is.
33. I will never be expected to change my name upon marriage or questioned if I don’t change my name.
34. The decision to hire me will never be based on assumptions about whether or not I might choose to have a family sometime soon.
35. Every major religion in the world is led primarily by people of my own sex. Even God, in most major religions, is usually pictured as being male.
36. Most major religions argue that I should be the head of my household, while my wife and children should be subservient to me.
37. If I have a wife or live-in girlfriend, chances are we’ll divide up household chores so that she does most of the labor, and in particular the most repetitive and unrewarding tasks.
38. If I have children with a wife or girlfriend, chances are she’ll do most of the childrearing, and in particular the most dirty, repetitive and unrewarding parts of childrearing.
39. If I have children with a wife or girlfriend, and it turns out that one of us needs to make career sacrifices to raise the kids, chances are we’ll both assume the career sacrificed should be hers.
40. Magazines, billboards, television, movies, pornography, and virtually all of media is filled with images of scantily-clad women intended to appeal to me sexually. Such images of men exist, but are much rarer.
41. On average, I am under less pressure to be thin than my female counterparts are. If I am fat, I probably suffer fewer social and economic consequences for being fat than fat women do.
42. If I am heterosexual, it’s incredibly unlikely that I’ll ever be beaten up by a spouse or lover.
43. Complete strangers generally do not walk up to me on the street and tell me to “smile.”
44. On average, I am not interrupted by women as often as women are interrupted by men.
45. I have the privilege of being unaware of my male privilege.

Sep 16, 2010#295

Adammon

makare said:
damn my sexiness all the boys want me. I just want to be left alone

Dayum, just got neg-repped by Charlie for Sexually Harassing you. My apologies.

---------- Post added at 08:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:40 PM ----------

Fine said:
Let me wrangle this back on track from these interesting semantics debates and Adammon's impotent flirting.

Hey kids, want to hear about Male Privilege? I knew you would! Here's a checklist. I know certain people are going to go through and pull out various numbers and talk about their anecdotes that are completely valid evidence with no context and disprove the entire theory of male privilege! But try to read this with an open mind and maybe think about it.

The Male Privilege Checklist
-yawn-snip-

Click to expand...

Just to clarify, we aren't allowed to counter your anecdotes with our anecdotes?

Sep 16, 2010#296

Covar

No because you're a sexist. Anyone who is not a sexist and a feminist knows that list is 100% true and factual.

Sep 16, 2010#297

makare

The problem here is that yes I think a lot of those things on that list are true but what is the point of tabulating them and saying NYAH NYAH you suck because you have male privilege!

the very nature of that list invites a defensive response so even if a guy is going to say ok yeah that's true. He won't want to because that list makes him out to be a pampered douche nozzle.

Sep 16, 2010#298

sixpackshaker

Of course Charlie's avatar of a completely, sexually objectified woman should discredit his feminist stance.

Sep 16, 2010#299

Piotyr

- I am a white male. I should feel bad for being a white male, because society favors me.

Sep 16, 2010#300

The Lovely Boehner

http://www.cpt.org/files/US - Male Privilege Checklist.pdf

I forgot that link and this quote that comes before it that probably would have helped matters!

In 1990, W ellesley College professor Peggy McIntosh wrote an essay called “White Privilege: Unpacking
the Invisible Knapsack”. McIntosh observes that whites in the U.S. are “taught to see racism only in individual
acts of meanness, not in invisible systems conferring dominance on my group.” To illustrate these invisible
systems, McIntosh wrote a list of 26 invisible privileges whites benefit from.
As McIntosh points out, men also tend to be unaware of their own privileges as men. In the spirit of
McIntosh’s essay, I thought I’d compile a list similar to McIntosh’s, focusing on the invisible privileges
benefitting men.
Due to my own limitations, this list is unavoidably U.S. centric. I hope that writers from other cultures will
create new lists, or modify this one, to reflect their own experiences.
Since I first compiled it, the list has been posted many times on internet discussion groups. Very helpfully,
many people have suggested additions to the checklist. More commonly, of course, critics (usually, but not
exclusively, male) have pointed out men have disadvantages too - being drafted into the army, being expected
to suppress emotions, and so on. These are indeed bad things - but I never claimed that life for men is all ice
cream sundaes.
Obviously, there are individual exceptions to most problems discussed on the list. The existence of
individual exceptions does not mean that general problems are not a concern.
Pointing out that men are privileged in no way denies that bad things happen to men. Being privileged
does not mean men are given everything in life for free; being privileged does not mean that men do not work
hard, do not suffer. In many cases - from a boy being bullied in school, to a soldier dying in war - the sexist
society that maintains male privilege also does great harm to individual boys and men.
In the end, however, it is men and not women who make the most money; men and not women who
dominate the government and the corporate boards; men and not women who dominate virtually all of the
most powerful positions of society. And it is women and not men who suffer the most from intimate violence
and rape; who are the most likely to be poor; who are, on the whole, given the short end of patriarchy’s stick.
Several critics have also argued that the list somehow victimizes women. I disagree; pointing out problems
is not the same as perpetuating them. It is not a “victimizing” position to acknowledge that injustice exists; on
the contrary, without that acknowledgment it isn’t possible to fight injustice.
An internet acquaintance of mine once wrote, “The first big privilege which whites, males, people in upper
economic classes, the able bodied, the straight (I think one or two of those will cover most of us) can work
to alleviate is the privilege to be oblivious to privilege.” This checklist is, I hope, a step towards helping men
to give up the “first big privilege.”

makare said:
The problem here is that yes I think a lot of those things on that list are true but what is the point of tabulating them and saying NYAH NYAH you suck because you have male privilege!

the very nature of that list invites a defensive response so even if a guy is going to say ok yeah that's true. He won't want to because that list makes him out to be a pampered douche nozzle.

Admitting you have privilege isn't some sort of bad thing. The paragraphs up there detail how male privilege can hurt men as much as women. I know that it gives me a lot of grief and makes me feel worthless for not having a job/career right now. I still struggle to throw that off.

sixpackshaker said:
Of course Charlie's avatar of a completely, sexually objectified woman should discredit his feminist stance.

My avatar is my favorite part about this entire thread.

---------- Post added at 03:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:54 PM ----------

Piotyr said:
- I am a white male. I should feel bad for being a white male, because society favors me.

No, you shouldn't. You should feel bad that society disfavors so many other people for no reason other than how they were born.

Sep 16, 2010#301

makare

I think the list is stupid. There I said it. It accomplishes nothing, solves no problems, raises no awareness. It's more just a ragman's roll of bitching.

Piotyr said:
- I am a white male. I should feel bad for being a white male, because society favors me.

you should flay yourself.

Sep 16, 2010#302

Covar

makare said:
I think the list is stupid. There I said it. It accomplishes nothing, solves no problems, raises no awareness. It's more just a ragman's roll of bitching.

Piotyr said:

- I am a white male. I should feel bad for being a white male, because society favors me.

Click to expand...

you should flay yourself.

Can I do it? As a fellow white male I'm great at flaying people due to their sex and skin color.

Sep 16, 2010#303

makare

That might be a little gay.

Not that there is anything wrong with that.

Sep 16, 2010#304

Piotyr

Fine said:
- I am a white male. I should feel bad for being a white male, because society favors me.

No, you shouldn't. You should feel bad that society disfavors so many other people for no reason other than how they were born.[/QUOTE]

Here's the thing, though: I can control nothing about it except my own attitude towards other people. Done well before the anecdotal list was posted. I refuse to be ashamed of who I am, or what advantages that affords me. I resent any implication that I follow any item on that list simply because of what I am. What I am is not who I am, and what anyone else is does not in any way indicate who they are.

Sep 16, 2010#305

The Lovely Boehner

Maybe it gets you upset, and you try to bring it to more people's attentions so they maybe do one thing to cast off male privilege?

Sep 16, 2010#306

Piotyr

Here's another somewhat personal anecdote situation:

A couple years ago, there was a series of incidents in the area involving female sexual assaults. On the college campus where I work, our IT thought it might be prudent to not allow a female lab monitors to be work by themselves after dark in the remote computer lab. Too often the lab is deserted, and at the time there wasn't what IT thought to be sufficient security measures in place to protect against a sexual predator. The IT's justification for this was the specific incidents happening in the area, coupled with the significantly higher odds of a female being assaulted vs. a male, at least until sufficient security was in place to protect a worker in that lab. The measure was criticized for being sexist, and the department was forced to relent and let any person work by themselves in the lab. Was it sexist and unnecessary? Maybe so. Was it unreasonable to want to protect a high risk area from a local sexual predator? I didn't really think so at the time.

Sep 16, 2010#307

Adammon

Fine said:
Maybe it gets you upset, and you try to bring it to more people's attentions so they maybe do one thing to cast off male privilege?

No, all it does is confirm opinions about your self-hating.

Edit: how exactly does one "cast off male privilege"?

Sep 16, 2010#308

makare

I think you "cast it off" by going through each issue and dealing with it on an individual basis.

And then we can throw out shit like the mailman, congressman thing. who the hell cares about that? Im a woman. wo-man. man is in my gender too. honestly.

Sep 16, 2010#309

HCGLNS

Adammon said:
Edit: how exactly does one "cast off male privilege"?

Vote NDP.

Sep 16, 2010#310

Adammon

makare said:
I think you "cast it off" by going through each issue and dealing with it on an individual basis.

And then we can throw out shit like the mailman, congressman thing. who the hell cares about that? Im a woman. wo-man. man is in my gender too. honestly.

I guess the issue is my sphere of influence is limited to me. No matter what I personally do, Charlie's always going to be around whining about how he runs the world. So the incentive for me to improve is to hear more bitching about how I'm not doing enough? I don't see that succeeding.

Sep 16, 2010#311

The Lovely Boehner

I dunno if "cast off" is the right word or term. But just recognize it exists and minimize it as much as possible.

Sep 16, 2010#312

Adammon

HCGLNS;437742][QUOTE=Adammon said:
Edit: how exactly does one "cast off male privilege"?

Vote NDP.[/QUOTE]

You son of a bitch!

---------- Post added at 09:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:25 PM ----------

Fine said:
I dunno if "cast off" is the right word or term. But just recognize it exists and minimize it as much as possible.

Not one item in that list can be directly attributed to actions I take.

Sep 16, 2010#313

makare

Just because a general issue doesn't apply to you, doesn't mean it isn't an issue.

Sep 16, 2010#314

Espy

Adammon;437736][QUOTE=Fine said:
Maybe it gets you upset, and you try to bring it to more people's attentions so they maybe do one thing to cast off male privilege?

No, all it does is confirm opinions about your self-hating.

Edit: how exactly does one "cast off male privilege"?[/QUOTE]

It's done alone and in private unless you get together with a buddy and do it to each other.

Sep 16, 2010#315

MindDetective

Fine said:
Maybe it gets you upset, and you try to bring it to more people's attentions so they maybe do one thing to cast off male privilege?

Sorry, but that is not the best way to evoke change. Your list says absolutely nothing about why things are that way, just that they are. There may be (I would contend there ARE!) biological reasons for some of those, as well as social, (which is not changed by listing things), psychological, entrenched economic, linguistic, and plenty more possible causes, some of them related or inter-related and some of them not. You absolutely cannot imply there is a single cause for these disparities (which is implied by such a list, even if not consciously) and simply listing off disparities like this does no justice to the issues. You might as well go and gawk at a traffic accident. It is the same problem as with wage disparity earlier in this thread. There are reasons (plural) why things are like this. If you genuinely want social change, you go about figuring out those reasons and determining the courses of actions that work in changing people's minds and behaviors, or at least respect that people are doing so and follow the science with interest. Otherwise your list is uselessly inflammatory at worst and simply useless at best.

If I recall, you are studying to be a teacher (I apologize if I remember incorrectly but it will serve my point to assume I do not). That is a laudable field, filled with joys and stresses and opportunities to influence lives. But it is a position of action, not of discovery. If you want effective and genuine social change discovery comes first, implementation second. Otherwise you are just trying things because they feel right. Freud did the same thing with cocaine in his practice, to very poor results. This is no way to examine the world and especially no way to figure out the best solution to these complicated problems.

In summary, see my signature.

Sep 16, 2010#316

Adammon

Espy;437748][QUOTE=Adammon;437736][QUOTE=Fine said:
Maybe it gets you upset, and you try to bring it to more people's attentions so they maybe do one thing to cast off male privilege?

Sep 16, 2010#317

makare

man adammon is one horny guy today.

someone hide the plants and the sheep.

Sep 16, 2010#318

Adammon

makare said:
man adammon is one horny guy today.

someone hide the plants and the sheep.

That time of the month, a week early. *sigh* Got the inevitable text message from the wife "You're going to hate me!"

Sep 16, 2010#319

Krisken

sixpackshaker said:
Of course Charlie's avatar of a completely, sexually objectified woman should discredit his feminist stance.

I've been chuckling about that since page 1.

Sep 16, 2010#320

Adammon

Krisken;437753][QUOTE=sixpackshaker said:
Of course Charlie's avatar of a completely, sexually objectified woman should discredit his feminist stance.

I've been chuckling about that since page 1.[/QUOTE]

It doesn't count if Charlie does it. Just like if I sexually harass Espy, it's okay.

Sep 16, 2010#321

The Lovely Boehner

This is getting to the complex issue of whether women that make a lot of money/fame because of their sexuality and body are slaves to the patriarchy or owning it and playing stupid men like fiddles. I don't think you're ready for that discussion though, halforums.

Sep 16, 2010#322

Espy

Adammon;437754][QUOTE=Krisken;437753][QUOTE=sixpackshaker said:
Of course Charlie's avatar of a completely, sexually objectified woman should discredit his feminist stance.

I've been chuckling about that since page 1.[/QUOTE]

It doesn't count if Charlie does it. Just like if I sexually harass Espy, it's okay.[/QUOTE]

Todays message is: sexually objectifying women is funny if it's ironic! Sexually objectifying me is... well... thats life I suppose...

Sep 16, 2010#323

Adammon

Fine said:
This is getting to the complex issue of whether women that make a lot of money/fame because of their sexuality and body are slaves to the patriarchy or owning it and playing stupid men like fiddles. I don't think you're ready for that discussion though, halforums.

Yes, because it's the rest of the forum that has issues with women in society....

Sep 16, 2010#324

Hailey Knight

This has gone on four additional pages today.

Do none of you have better things to do? Sheesh, even Chaz went to work.

Sep 16, 2010#325

The Lovely Boehner

I am as unemployed as fuck

Sep 16, 2010#326

sixpackshaker

Fine said:
I am as unemployed as fuck

I don't know...

Fuck, does a lot of business.

Sep 16, 2010#327

Chazwozel

Fine said:
I am as unemployed as fuck

And it shows...

Perhaps if you spent more time job hunting and less time pissing and moaning about the plight of others...

Sep 16, 2010#328

Sara_2814

The most sexist, anti-Feminist person in this entire discussion is Charlie. Chaz and the others may be throwing out the "pie in the kitchen" type jokes, but that means they don't consider us fragile little flowers who need to be protected by a White Knight. We'll either throw a joke back or get angry, but at least they have the respect for women to assume we can make our own decisions on how to react or feel about it. How many of the "Privileged White Males" in this discussion have lectured women on how we should feel about Feminism? Only one.

Hey Charlie? Feminism doesn't exist to give you an ego boost or teh lulz or whatever the hell your reason is for all this. Women aren't victims for you to White Knight and we're capable of fighting our own battles without your lists and lectures. Since you're a movie guy, I'll put it into those terms: you're acting like a White Savior and you're treating women like ignorant natives who can't take care of themselves.

Sep 16, 2010#329

ThatGrinningIdiot!

Sara_2814 said:
The most sexist, anti-Feminist person in this entire discussion is Charlie. Chaz and the others may be throwing out the "pie in the kitchen" type jokes, but that means they don't consider us fragile little flowers who need to be protected by a White Knight. We'll either throw a joke back or get angry, but at least they have the respect for women to assume we can make our own decisions on how to react or feel about it. How many of the "Privileged White Males" in this discussion have lectured women on how we should feel about Feminism? Only one.

Hey Charlie? Feminism doesn't exist to give you an ego boost or teh lulz or whatever the hell your reason is for all this. Women aren't victims for you to White Knight and we're capable of fighting our own battles without your lists and lectures. Since you're a movie guy, I'll put it into those terms: you're acting like a White Savior and you're treating women like ignorant natives who can't take care of themselves.

I'm impressed! I find your opinions to be concise, intelligent, and wise. You're truly a woman who's due great respect from her peers.

Now kindly bake me pie, please. My favorite is cherry.

Kidding!

Sep 16, 2010#330

Espy

ThatGrinningIdiot!;437769][QUOTE=Sara_2814 said:
The most sexist, anti-Feminist person in this entire discussion is Charlie. Chaz and the others may be throwing out the "pie in the kitchen" type jokes, but that means they don't consider us fragile little flowers who need to be protected by a White Knight. We'll either throw a joke back or get angry, but at least they have the respect for women to assume we can make our own decisions on how to react or feel about it. How many of the "Privileged White Males" in this discussion have lectured women on how we should feel about Feminism? Only one.

Hey Charlie? Feminism doesn't exist to give you an ego boost or teh lulz or whatever the hell your reason is for all this. Women aren't victims for you to White Knight and we're capable of fighting our own battles without your lists and lectures. Since you're a movie guy, I'll put it into those terms: you're acting like a White Savior and you're treating women like ignorant natives who can't take care of themselves.

I'm impressed! I find your opinions to be concise, intelligent, and wise. You're truly a woman who's due great respect from her peers.

Now kindly bake me pie, please. My favorite is cherry.

Kidding![/QUOTE]

He's not kidding. His favorite really is cherry.

Sep 16, 2010#331

Sara_2814

ThatGrinningIdiot!;437769][QUOTE=Sara_2814 said:
The most sexist, anti-Feminist person in this entire discussion is Charlie. Chaz and the others may be throwing out the "pie in the kitchen" type jokes, but that means they don't consider us fragile little flowers who need to be protected by a White Knight. We'll either throw a joke back or get angry, but at least they have the respect for women to assume we can make our own decisions on how to react or feel about it. How many of the "Privileged White Males" in this discussion have lectured women on how we should feel about Feminism? Only one.

Hey Charlie? Feminism doesn't exist to give you an ego boost or teh lulz or whatever the hell your reason is for all this. Women aren't victims for you to White Knight and we're capable of fighting our own battles without your lists and lectures. Since you're a movie guy, I'll put it into those terms: you're acting like a White Savior and you're treating women like ignorant natives who can't take care of themselves.

I'm impressed! I find your opinions to be concise, intelligent, and wise. You're truly a woman who's due great respect from her peers.

Now kindly bake me pie, please. My favorite is cherry.

Kidding![/QUOTE]

Oh, man, cherry pie does sound good. Dammit, now I want pie!

Sep 16, 2010#332

Adammon

Sep 16, 2010#333

crono1224

I do find it amazing a lot of the time the people defending 'minorities' or 'lower class people' tend to treat them like they couldn't do anything themselves. Please think of the women if we don't change our way of life they will be forced to stay in the kitchens because they don't know any better.

Also double points if the act like they understand where the other side is coming from if they have never lived it. Hence the calling Charlie Meatheadd from All in the Family, specifically where the black robbers break into their house, and he defends them saying Archie doesn't understand growing up in the ghetto, and the robbers respond "and you do?".

Sep 16, 2010#334

Krisken

Shame on you Adammon! Warrant should never be remembered.

Sep 16, 2010#335

Hailey Knight

Sara_2814 said:
The most sexist, anti-Feminist person in this entire discussion is Charlie. Chaz and the others may be throwing out the "pie in the kitchen" type jokes, but that means they don't consider us fragile little flowers who need to be protected by a White Knight. We'll either throw a joke back or get angry, but at least they have the respect for women to assume we can make our own decisions on how to react or feel about it. How many of the "Privileged White Males" in this discussion have lectured women on how we should feel about Feminism? Only one.

Hey Charlie? Feminism doesn't exist to give you an ego boost or teh lulz or whatever the hell your reason is for all this. Women aren't victims for you to White Knight and we're capable of fighting our own battles without your lists and lectures. Since you're a movie guy, I'll put it into those terms: you're acting like a White Savior and you're treating women like ignorant natives who can't take care of themselves.

I like you.

And thank you.

Sep 16, 2010#336

makare

I don't know. Charlie's indignance about an issue usually seems to be his own. I've no thought he was trying to say women can't be upset on their own he just is upset also.

Sep 16, 2010#337

The Lovely Boehner

Chaz. For someone who is all like "You don't know a fucking thing about me", you sure as shit are giving me a lot of unwarranted personal advice about jobs/girls. With all due respect, fuck off and leave me alone.

Sep 16, 2010#338

Element 117

Oh my god this thread.

It's my favorite thread EVER. It's just.... So awesome. I cannot give enough rep. So instead I will go recite this thread while naked at open mic night. No pictures, assume it doesn't happen.

Sep 17, 2010#339

Chazwozel

Fine said:
Chaz. For someone who is all like "You don't know a fucking thing about me", you sure as shit are giving me a lot of unwarranted personal advice about jobs/girls. With all due respect, fuck off and leave me alone.

Obviously my goal of jabbing at your open sores worked. Makare really believes she knows me as a person, inside and out (which is an insanely arrogant and prickish thing to assume for any person) when she has no fucking clue. I know better, and all I was trying to do was get a rise out of you to shut you the hell up. There's the difference.

In regards to the thread. The only fathomable reason you're interested in seeing who's a feminist is so you can isolate and verbally bash those who will inevitably respond with comments that are unfavorable to your point of view. That list you posted only pushes your agenda further. You're attempting to spread your white guilt to the rest of us in some sad attempt to make yourself feel better. I'm just extrapolating on what I read on that list. If you're so privileged, why not use that to your advantage instead of feeling guilty about it? Women can fight their own fight. You can support it, but they don't need you there in your white armor, blazing gloriously in the sunlight.

This is akin to why a lot of black people get pissed off when a white person helps with their plight. You're not a woman and your not black. You can sympathize with their situation, but for the most part you don't understand it and you usually end up pissing people off.

Oh and here I can post stupid checklists too:

As a woman …
1. I have a much lower chance of being murdered than a man.
2. I have a much lower chance of being driven to successfully commit suicide than a man.
3. I have a lower chance of being a victim of a violent assault than a man.
4. I have probably been taught that it is acceptable to cry.
5. I will probably live longer than the average man.
6. Most people in society probably will not see my overall worthiness as a person being exclusively tied to how high up in the hierarchy I rise.
7. I have a much better chance of being considered to be a worthy mate for someone, even if I’m unemployed with little money, than a man.
8. I am given much greater latitude to form close, intimate friendships than a man is.
9. My chance of suffering a work-related injury or illness is significantly lower than a man’s.
10. My chance of being killed on the job is a tiny fraction of a man’s.
11. If I shy away from fights, it is unlikely that this will damage my standing in my peer group or call into question my worthiness as a sex partner.
12. I am not generally expected to be capable of violence. If I lack this capacity, this will generally not be seen as a damning personal deficiency.
13. If I was born in North America since WWII, I can be almost certain that my genitals were not mutilated soon after birth, without anesthesia.
14. If I attempt to hug a friend in joy, it’s much less likely that my friend will wonder about my sexuality or pull away in unease.
15. If I seek a hug in solace from a close friend, I’ll have much less concern about how my friend will interpret the gesture or whether my worthiness as a member of my gender will be called into question.
16. I generally am not compelled by the rules of my sex to wear emotional armor in interactions with most people.
17. I am frequently the emotional center of my family.
18. I am allowed to wear clothes that signify ‘vulnerability’, ‘playful openness’, and ’softness’.
19. I am allowed to BE vulnerable, playful, and soft without calling my worthiness as a human being into question.
20. If I interact with other people’s children — particularly people I don’t know very well — I do not have to worry much about the interaction being misinterpreted.
21. If I have trouble accommodating to some aspects of gender demands, I have a much greater chance than a man does of having a sympathetic audience to discuss the unreasonableness of the demand, and a much lower chance that this failure to accommodate will be seen as signifying my fundamental inadequacy as a member of my gender.
22. I am less likely to be shamed for being sexually inactive than a man.
23. From my late teens through menopause, for most levels of sexual attractiveness, it is easier for me to find a sex partner at my attractiveness level than it is for a man.
24. My role in my child’s life is generally seen as more important than the child’s father’s role.

Sep 17, 2010#340

Krisken

Since when does getting someone pissed off make them be quiet?

Sep 17, 2010#341

Sara_2814

As a woman …
1. I have a much lower chance of being murdered than a man.
2. I have a much lower chance of being driven to successfully commit suicide than a man.
3. I have a lower chance of being a victim of a violent assault than a man.
4. I have probably been taught that it is acceptable to cry.
5. I will probably live longer than the average man.
6. Most people in society probably will not see my overall worthiness as a person being exclusively tied to how high up in the hierarchy I rise.
7. I have a much better chance of being considered to be a worthy mate for someone, even if I’m unemployed with little money, than a man.
8. I am given much greater latitude to form close, intimate friendships than a man is.
9. My chance of suffering a work-related injury or illness is significantly lower than a man’s.
10. My chance of being killed on the job is a tiny fraction of a man’s.
11. If I shy away from fights, it is unlikely that this will damage my standing in my peer group or call into question my worthiness as a sex partner.
12. I am not generally expected to be capable of violence. If I lack this capacity, this will generally not be seen as a damning personal deficiency.
13. If I was born in North America since WWII, I can be almost certain that my genitals were not mutilated soon after birth, without anesthesia.
14. If I attempt to hug a friend in joy, it’s much less likely that my friend will wonder about my sexuality or pull away in unease.
15. If I seek a hug in solace from a close friend, I’ll have much less concern about how my friend will interpret the gesture or whether my worthiness as a member of my gender will be called into question.
16. I generally am not compelled by the rules of my sex to wear emotional armor in interactions with most people.
17. I am frequently the emotional center of my family.
18. I am allowed to wear clothes that signify ‘vulnerability’, ‘playful openness’, and ’softness’.
19. I am allowed to BE vulnerable, playful, and soft without calling my worthiness as a human being into question.
20. If I interact with other people’s children — particularly people I don’t know very well — I do not have to worry much about the interaction being misinterpreted.
21. If I have trouble accommodating to some aspects of gender demands, I have a much greater chance than a man does of having a sympathetic audience to discuss the unreasonableness of the demand, and a much lower chance that this failure to accommodate will be seen as signifying my fundamental inadequacy as a member of my gender.
22. I am less likely to be shamed for being sexually inactive than a man.
23. From my late teens through menopause, for most levels of sexual attractiveness, it is easier for me to find a sex partner at my attractiveness level than it is for a man.
24. My role in my child’s life is generally seen as more important than the child’s father’s role.

I am a terrible, horrible person. Every single item on this list is entirely my fault, and it’s entirely my fault they still exist. I am a selfish asshole for choosing to be born into a gender with these privileges. These privileges would instantly cease to exist if only I would fully accept my guilt and put a bumper sticker on my car proclaiming it. I am ashamed to be a woman.

amidoinitrite?

Sep 17, 2010#342

Covar

you forgot My fault I'm female.

Sep 17, 2010#343

The Lovely Boehner

I have never said anything remotely about being shamed to be a man. And that checklist you posted is really terrible and stuff I've run into many times and felt horrible about. And I don't have any bumper stickers on my card. I didn't post this thread to find people to make fun of. Y'all do a pretty good job of making yourselves obvious everywhere else! I posted it to raise awareness and possibly disspell some of the dumb myths about feminism (that it's about Women being superior to Men for one).

The white knight thing really gets me mad. I'm not fighting the battles for women. I'm joining them and fighting with them. I'm in no way implying or thinking that I can do it better than them. I'm not helping them because I have pity or anything like that, I'm doing it because the way things are pisses me off, and I want to do what I can to change things.

Sep 17, 2010#344

MindDetective

Blindly changing things rarely helped anybody.

Sep 17, 2010#345

Chazwozel

Fine said:
I have never said anything remotely about being shamed to be a man. And that checklist you posted is really terrible and stuff I've run into many times and felt horrible about. And I don't have any bumper stickers on my card. I didn't post this thread to find people to make fun of. Y'all do a pretty good job of making yourselves obvious everywhere else! I posted it to raise awareness and possibly disspell some of the dumb myths about feminism (that it's about Women being superior to Men for one).

The white knight thing really gets me mad. I'm not fighting the battles for women. I'm joining them and fighting with them. I'm in no way implying or thinking that I can do it better than them. I'm not helping them because I have pity or anything like that, I'm doing it because the way things are pisses me off, and I want to do what I can to change things.

Funny that you say that list I posted sucks ass. I got it from the same website that generated the one you posted.

As far as joining them and fighting with them goes. Women don't need your help. The best way you can help is to not be a sexist pig yourself. This is exactly akin to why black people get pissed off at times when white people step too far with helping their civil rights plight. It's not your fucking fight. So just shut the fuck up and enjoy your privileged white male status; stop trying to shame me for doing the same. The reason people get their panties in a bunch over assholes like you isn't because they're racist or sexist, it's because your head's so far up your ass that you can't see past your own agenda and immediately throw out labels towards people who skew even slightly from your perspective. How many times have we heard ol' Charlie call a person out and call them a "horrible human being." The majority of people are not horrible human beings. You associate horrible human beings with anyone who doesn't agree to how you think.

I don't like being called a sexist when I know I'm not. You don't have to wave a retarded list of garbage half-truths to shame me into siding with your argument. That's a great way to get a punch to the face.

Sep 17, 2010#346

ScytheRexx

I backed out of the thread earlier because I had nothing else to really say on this matter once it degenerated. However, I wanted to chime in to say I like you Sara_2814, you are my type of peoples.

Sep 17, 2010#347

Chazwozel

ScytheRexx said:
I backed out of the thread earlier because I had nothing else to really say on this matter once it degenerated. However, I wanted to chime in to say I like you Sara_2814, you are my type of peoples.

I too like Sara. She seems like she'd be awesome to have a beer with and shoot the shit.

Sep 17, 2010#348

makare

So one list canceled out another. Glad that's over. :rolleyes:

Sep 17, 2010#349

Chazwozel

makare said:
So one list canceled out another. Glad that's over.

It's pretty hilarious how he thinks the list I posted is crap. I literally got it from the same website that Charlie found his little turd-nugget.

Sep 17, 2010#350

makare

Chazwozel;437922][QUOTE=makare said:
So one list canceled out another. Glad that's over.

It's pretty hilarious how he thinks the list I posted is crap. I literally got it from the same website that Charlie found his little turd-nugget.[/QUOTE]

I think he feels the same way about the list he posted though.

And I have to know, oh mysterious one, if you were sitting with your friends and one of them said that not only is he ok with manicures but he gets one every month or so, what would you say to him? What would you say behind his back? Let's assume that the things you say while "joking" count.

Sep 17, 2010#351

Covar

makare;437926][QUOTE=Chazwozel;437922][QUOTE=makare said:
So one list canceled out another. Glad that's over.

Sep 17, 2010#352

makare

covar = chaz :wtf:

Sep 17, 2010#353

Chazwozel

makare said:
covar = chaz :wtf:

Cover = doing what any other red blooded American would do. It's not normal for men to get manicures! Of course I'd throw jabs at my friend for getting a manicure. I wouldn't hold a grudge against him or cease to be his friend though. Honestly, you're such a fucking weirdo.

Sep 17, 2010#354

SpecialKO

If it were me, I'd ask him first if it worked with the ladies (or some similar use).

If it did, then I'd proclaim it an expense worth it.

If it didn't, I'd buy him a $2 nail clipper and take the money in his monthly manicure budget just so it doesn't throw his life too far out of whack.

Sep 17, 2010#355

makare

so you would do what I said you would do? wtf has the last three pages of this thread been about then?

Sep 17, 2010#356

Covar

makare said:
covar = chaz :wtf:

I'm sorry I didn't realize this was a private discussion :humph:

Sep 17, 2010#357

Chazwozel

makare said:
so you would do what I said you would do? wtf has the last three pages of this thread been about then?

Uh, you claimed that people would go along with it just to humor me. In other words, you're suggesting that all my friends aren't really my friends. In other other words, you're a fucking weirdo.

Seems to me like you're the insecure one. You never drop anything.

Sep 17, 2010#358

makare

Yeah that's what I was saying. Not that people generally like to avoid being ripped on. :rolleyes:

Sep 17, 2010#359

Chazwozel

makare said:
Yeah that's what I was saying. Not that people generally like to avoid being ripped on.

There you go again, making assumptions that you know who am I and what my relationships with other are like. Keep filling in those gaps. :pud:

Sep 17, 2010#360

makare

You just confirmed that I did know what you would do.

Sep 17, 2010#361

MindDetective

I tease my friends and my family all the time, in some cases about their masculinity or femininity. It is delivered with affection and acceptance of who they are, however, and it is taken that way as well (after all, I still have friends). Jokes often have an element of truth in them but they needn't be divisive. They can be observational without being critical.

Sep 17, 2010#362

Chazwozel

MindDetective said:
I tease my friends and my family all the time, in some cases about their masculinity or femininity. It is delivered with affection and acceptance of who they are, however, and it is taken that way as well (after all, I still have friends). Jokes often have an element of truth in them but they needn't be divisive. They can be observational without being critical.

Please, Mind, let Dr. Freud continue with her psychoanalysis of me...

Sep 17, 2010#363

Covar

See I think this is one of the big differences between men and women. Men mock their friends, mercilessly. This is not the same as ripping someone. One is as sign of friendship the other is malicious.

Sep 17, 2010#364

makare

Yes, I joke with my friends also. So I guess assuming that chaz would do the same is probably not that big of a stretch or assumption? Not sure why he got so inflamed about it.

I conclude that chaz wants to fuck his mom.

Sep 17, 2010#365

Chazwozel

makare said:
You just confirmed that I did know what you would do.

I may be a blunt asshole, but you sure are a pretentious motherfucker.

Sep 17, 2010#366

Adammon

Fine said:
I have never said anything remotely about being shamed to be a man.

Fine said:
I've never had a manicure, but I still think it's moronic to say stuff like "if you do X, turn in your MAN CARD". Not that I have any pride in being a guy in the first place.

*ponders*

Sep 17, 2010#367

makare

I don't have pride in a lot of things that Im not ashamed of.

Sep 17, 2010#368

Adammon

makare said:
I don't have pride in a lot of things that Im not ashamed of.

That is not the worst mangling of a split double negative I've never seen.

We should all be proud of who and what we are.

Sep 17, 2010#369

Chazwozel

Adammon;437963][QUOTE=makare said:
I don't have pride in a lot of things that Im not ashamed of.

That is not the worst mangling of a split double negative I've never seen.[/QUOTE]

Are you not not sure that it's not?

Sep 17, 2010#370

makare

how can it be double when each not refers to different things?
"I do not have pride in a lot of things that I am also not ashamed of."
see no double

ok i just got a good laugh in constitutional law class. They were talking about 2010 apathy vs the founding fathers passion. A guy in class, rick if you follow my posts, is going on about having to earn it and things have gone down hilil etc. the prof said yes well you know what they did? they let in the WOMEN! that's what he is really saying.
Rick's face was fantastic. Because he knows that if we actually believed he thought that he would be found in alley with his balls in his mouth. But it was pretty damn funny.

Sep 17, 2010#371

Chazwozel

Sep 17, 2010#372

The Lovely Boehner

Adammon said:
We should all be proud of who and what we are.

I'm proud of my accomplishments, not things I had no part in (being white, being straight, being male, being in America, etc)

And re: me saying the list is terrible. It's terrible because those things are inequalities, it's terrible that guys have to go through that too. Both lists are terrible because they're, for the most part, true. I didn't mean that it was a terrible example or that it didn't matter compared to my list.

Sep 17, 2010#373

Chazwozel

Fine said:
We should all be proud of who and what we are.

I will probably live longer than the average man.

CURSE YOU WOMEN FOR HAVING DIFFERENT GENETIC COMPOSITION THAN ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Seriously, just stop. Men and women are fundamentally different parts of the same species. There are and will always be differences in male and female social roles, just like every Goddamn animal species on the planet. Yes, I'm talking to you, you damn sexist silverback males! How dare you force the females in your band to raise your bastard offspring!?!

Sep 17, 2010#374

makare

I'm not going to sit here using my computer, in my stone building, with my ac running, and the cars passing outside and then resign myself to "welp we're just animals".

Trying to be better than our own animal nature is kind of how we roll.

Sep 17, 2010#375

Officer_Charon

Sara_2814 said:
The most sexist, anti-Feminist person in this entire discussion is Charlie. Chaz and the others may be throwing out the "pie in the kitchen" type jokes, but that means they don't consider us fragile little flowers who need to be protected by a White Knight. We'll either throw a joke back or get angry, but at least they have the respect for women to assume we can make our own decisions on how to react or feel about it. How many of the "Privileged White Males" in this discussion have lectured women on how we should feel about Feminism? Only one.

Hey Charlie? Feminism doesn't exist to give you an ego boost or teh lulz or whatever the hell your reason is for all this. Women aren't victims for you to White Knight and we're capable of fighting our own battles without your lists and lectures. Since you're a movie guy, I'll put it into those terms: you're acting like a White Savior and you're treating women like ignorant natives who can't take care of themselves.

It's already been commented on, but I love how well you articulate exactly what I've been getting pissed about through this whole thread.

Not going to proclaim my love for you, though. Might make things awkward with my wife. Tasty adult beverage, instead?

Sep 17, 2010#376

makare

so to summarize:

making sexist jokes = not sexist
trying to put an end to sexism = sexist

there will be a test later.

Sep 17, 2010#377

Officer_Charon

Fine said:
We should all be proud of who and what we are.

I'm proud of my accomplishments, not things I had no part in (being white, being straight, being male, being in America, etc)[/QUOTE]

Also, out of curiosity, what HAVE you accomplished? What have you contributed to the benefit of mankind as a whole, that makes you feel entitled to speak for the half of the population that you are not a member of?

Sep 17, 2010#378

makare

wtf?!

Charlie is a guy and a feminist who wants to stop sexism. In what universe is that a bad thing? I think charlie is a tool I always have and I always will. But just because he is a guy doesn't mean he shouldn't care about this issue. What kind of attitude is that It wouldn't even be an issue if more guys cared and took it on as something worth fighting about or at least thinking about.

The whole let women fight their battles alone argument is stupid. It isn't a one sided thing and should be of concern to both genders.

Sep 17, 2010#379

Chazwozel

makare said:
I'm not going to sit here using my computer, in my stone building, with my ac running, and the cars passing outside and then resign myself to "welp we're just animals".

Trying to be better than our own animal nature is kind of how we roll.

Denying it is the ultimate act of ignorance.

Sep 17, 2010#380

Officer_Charon

The issue that I have is not that he's a guy who's claiming that he wants to end sexism. I have no issue with that.

The issue that I have is that he's apparently stating that "If you are not with me, then you are against me." His black and white view is extremely limiting.

Like I stated earlier: just treat others as you would want to be treated. By all means, stand up for what you think is right, but FFS make sure that someone is being deliberately aggressive and attacking before you decide to lash out.

Chaz was not attacking - he was rebutting. Debate and classical argument is a good thing. Blind defensiveness serves no purpose.

Sep 17, 2010#381

makare

Sara's point was that charlie shouldn't be "fighting" the battle for women because it is the women's battle. You agreed. Charlie is obnoxious so what. That doesn't discredit his view point that men should give a shit too, that it isn't just a women's issue.

Chazwozel;438007][QUOTE=makare said:
I'm not going to sit here using my computer, in my stone building, with my ac running, and the cars passing outside and then resign myself to "welp we're just animals".

Trying to be better than our own animal nature is kind of how we roll.

Denying it is the ultimate act of ignorance.[/QUOTE]

I didn't say I denied it I said I won't resign to it. Surrendering to it and forfeiting all our responsibility is not how society works.

Sep 17, 2010#382

Chazwozel

makare said:
Sara's point was that charlie shouldn't be "fighting" the battle for women because it is the women's battle. You agreed. Charlie is obnoxious so what. That doesn't discredit his view point that men should give a shit too, that it isn't just a women's issue.

Chazwozel;438007][QUOTE=makare said:

I'm not going to sit here using my computer, in my stone building, with my ac running, and the cars passing outside and then resign myself to "welp we're just animals".

Trying to be better than our own animal nature is kind of how we roll.

Click to expand...

Denying it is the ultimate act of ignorance.

I didn't say I denied it I said I won't resign to it. Surrendering to it and forfeiting all our responsibility is not how society works.[/QUOTE]

It's not his battle to fight. He can be supportive, but it's just not his fight. Again this is why black people get pissed when white people cross a line. You don't have the same understanding of the group that's being discriminated against if you're part of the oppressing group, so therefore there are limits to how involved you should be. Charlie has a bad case of white male guilt.

Oh and fundamentally, human society is no different from a troop of chimps. Sorry to break it to you.

Sep 17, 2010#383

makare

I disagree entirely. The entire point of the battle, sexism, racism etc, is to get the other people on your side. What could be better than having the other side fight with you?

Sep 17, 2010#384

Officer_Charon

makare said:
I disagree entirely. The entire point of the battle, sexism, racism etc, is to get the other people on your side. What could be better than having the other side fight with you?

Having them fight FOR you?

Sep 17, 2010#385

Chazwozel

makare said:
I disagree entirely. The entire point of the battle, sexism, racism etc, is to get the other people on your side. What could be better than having the other side fight with you?

Uh, the fact that you're still under a form of oppression? " Look at me, I'm a poor black man, I can't even fight for my civil rights without a white man helping me."

"I'm a strong, independent woman! I can do anything! (As long as a white man is behind my back ready to catch me if I fall"

That's the message that gets sent.

Sep 17, 2010#386

makare

If you are both fighting then how the hell can they be fighting FOR you?

You are both fighting for the same end.

The goal is equality, as much as possible, that is a goal that is shared by both white and black, men and women. The goal isn't to beat the other side and throw a parade it is to achieve a goal. Therefore it is right and proper that both sides fight together.

Sep 17, 2010#387

Chazwozel

makare said:
If you are both fighting then how the hell can they be fighting FOR you?

You are both fighting for the same end.

The goal is equality, as much as possible, that is a goal that is shared by both white and black, men and women. The goal isn't to beat the other side and throw a parade it is to achieve a goal. Therefore it is right and proper that both sides fight together.

You need to take some black studies classes, my friend.

Sep 17, 2010#388

SpecialKO

makare said:
I disagree entirely. The entire point of the battle, sexism, racism etc, is to get the other people on your side. What could be better than having the other side fight with you?

Who is "the other side" here? Just because I don't agree with everything Charlie says doesn't default me to "the other side". Neither does me being male.

Sep 17, 2010#389

makare

And how were civil rights awarded? by all those black men in power? the black men on the supreme court?

if white people hadn't joined the fight the goal would not have been met. It isn't actually a war between people's it is a war between ideologies.

SpecialKO;438018][QUOTE=makare said:
I disagree entirely. The entire point of the battle, sexism, racism etc, is to get the other people on your side. What could be better than having the other side fight with you?

Who is "the other side" here? Just because I don't agree with everything Charlie says doesn't default me to "the other side". Neither does me being male.[/QUOTE]

Thank you! the other side is not men that is the point. the other side is a power structure, an ideology that is wrong and outdated. that is why men and women have to fight it together.

Sep 17, 2010#390

Chazwozel

makare said:
And how were civil rights awarded? by all those black men in power? the black men on the supreme court?

if white people hadn't joined the fight the goal would not have been met. It isn't actually a war between people's it is a war between ideologies.

SpecialKO;438018][QUOTE=makare said:

I disagree entirely. The entire point of the battle, sexism, racism etc, is to get the other people on your side. What could be better than having the other side fight with you?

Click to expand...

Who is "the other side" here? Just because I don't agree with everything Charlie says doesn't default me to "the other side". Neither does me being male.

Thank you! the other side is not men that is the point. the other side is a power structure, an ideology that is wrong and outdated. that is why men and women have to fight it together.[/QUOTE]

Yes! All those black men obtained a different type of power that swung the civil rights pendulum in their direction. What? You, you think a lot of white people were happy about black civil rights??!?! If that was the case then racism would have been abolished at that point in time. Wow, you are an incredibly naive person. Take the example of when India obtained its independence from the British. Do you think that the British were convinced of the err of their ways and decided to pack up and leave? Wow... just wow...

Sep 17, 2010#391

makare

Uh huh and what was this power that the black men got?

It certainly wasn't the dramatic shift on the supreme court away from original construction and towards advocacy that allowed for the Brown v Board of Education to be pulled through. It wasn't the asinine reaction of a certain Arkansas governor who put even the president on the children's side. and it certainly wasn't the media broadcasting cruel treatment of protesters that raised international awareness of the plight. it was this magic power.

Sep 17, 2010#392

Chazwozel

makare said:
Uh huh and what was this power that the black men got?

It certainly wasn't the dramatic shift on the supreme court away from original construction and towards advocacy that allowed for the Brown v Board of Education to be pulled through. It wasn't the asinine reaction of a certain Arkansas governor who put even the president on the children's side. and it certainly wasn't the media broadcasting cruel treatment of protesters that raised international awareness of the plight. it was this magic power.

Yeah, black people rallied across the country. Unless white people wanted a shit ton of riots and another civil war, things had to be done. That's power. For some strange reason, though, it was a black man that was considered a key factor during the civil rights movement. Martin Luther King, Jr. I don't recall many black folks following around a white guy for support.

Sep 17, 2010#393

makare

the riots happened way after Brown. The ball was already rolling and the path set before the riots.

Sep 17, 2010#394

Chazwozel

I am so fucking sick of this thread. Yeah, sure, riots after Brown... whatever...

my advice to you is to travel a bit after you're done with law school. Get some more perspective on life.

Sep 17, 2010#395

makare

I have traveled a lot, all over the country, and all over Europe.

Sep 17, 2010#396

Chazwozel

makare said:
I have traveled a lot, all over the country, and all over Europe.

Then learn to hang out with people that aren't like you i.e. stop avoiding people you don't like. You might learn something.

Sep 17, 2010#397

makare

I hang out with a wide variety of people at my school. One of the nice things about law school is people come from all over. I'm not sure what you are basing that statement on but I don't agree with quite a few of my friends views on things.

Sep 17, 2010#398

Espy

This thread used to be fun then it got all not fun.

Sep 17, 2010#399

makare

Oh espy you always add so much to a thread.

Sep 17, 2010#400

Officer_Charon

Tell you what, makare. When I get called a "cracker-ass motherfucker," today by some jack-boy who I'm "brutally oppressing," I'll make sure and think of you. I'll toss CDS/TLB/FFF in there too, if it happens to be a female. How's that sound?

Sep 17, 2010#401

makare

Officer_Charon said:
Tell you what, makare. When I get called a "cracker-ass motherfucker," today by some jack-boy who I'm "brutally oppressing," I'll make sure and think of you. I'll toss CDS/TLB/FFF in there too, if it happens to be a female. How's that sound?

Sep 17, 2010#402

Adammon

Espy said:
This thread used to be fun then it got all not fun.

Hey, you still up to the mutual casting off of male privilege?

Sep 17, 2010#403

Chazwozel

If you enjoy and watch pornography you can't be a feminist.

Sep 17, 2010#404

makare

But Im a feminist and I watch A LOT of porn.

Sep 17, 2010#405

Officer_Charon

makare;438042][QUOTE=Officer_Charon said:
Tell you what, makare. When I get called a "cracker-ass motherfucker," today by some jack-boy who I'm "brutally oppressing," I'll make sure and think of you. I'll toss CDS/TLB/FFF in there too, if it happens to be a female. How's that sound?

Ok....

Im still trying to figure out what your point is. I do not think I have succeeded but Ill guess.

Because there are asshole people, who are also black, it is wrong to want equality between white and black? Im really not sure here.

But It does seem a fine place to put this anecdote:

My friend Shannon hates /HATES/ the police. She is always saying fuck the police, those fucking pigs should all die! the oppressive bastards!

which is pretty funny coming from a blond, white girl in braids and a hello kitty shirt.[/QUOTE]

Point is just as you stated. The civil rights movement was a wonderful thing, which brought about theoretical equality between the races.

Doesn't change the fact that racism still exists. Will always exist. Much the same as sexism. There will always be ignorance. The only thing that you can "struggle" to change is the majority's outward perception of it's effects. You are not going to change someone's mind, if they are determined to be ignorant.

Your friend is a good example, too. Nice place for that anecdote.

I'ma go to work now and try not to get stabbed or shot. You enjoy your law school.

Sep 17, 2010#406

makare

So what are you saying now? We should fight to change the perception and the system? That's what's been said throughout the thread.

Or we shouldn't because there are assholes?

I refuse to let the assholes win, mang.

Sep 17, 2010#407

Chazwozel

makare said:
But Im a feminist and I watch A LOT of porn.

Well then, you are supporting an industry that counters the very essence of what feminism stands for.

Sep 17, 2010#408

makare

Chazwozel;438052][QUOTE=makare said:
But Im a feminist and I watch A LOT of porn.

Sep 17, 2010#409

Sara_2814

makare said:
Sara's point was that charlie shouldn't be "fighting" the battle for women because it is the women's battle. You agreed. Charlie is obnoxious so what. That doesn't discredit his view point that men should give a shit too, that it isn't just a women's issue.

Because Charlie being obnoxious is not helping women at all. What he’s done is antagonize the men until they’re forced to react against the Feminist argument to defend themselves and now they have one more negative experience with Feminism to add to their tally. How can this possibly help?

I’ve worked all my life to build bridges with men, creating friendships and mutual respect to show my gender doesn’t define my abilities, and then Charlie comes along and tries to burn those bridges down with his “Us vs. Them” bullshit, and I’m supposed to be grateful for this?

I’m not against men supporting equal rights for women, I’m against men destroying everything women have worked for in some heavy-handed attempt to “help”. This is exactly why I won’t use the label “Feminist”. Charlie is poisoning it as much as any radical.

Sep 17, 2010#410

Chazwozel

makare;438053][QUOTE=Chazwozel;438052][QUOTE=makare said:
But Im a feminist and I watch A LOT of porn.

Well then, you are supporting an industry that counters the very essence of what feminism stands for.[/QUOTE]

I don't think you understand feminism.

As long as the woman chooses to do porn she has the right to do it. Women can do whatever men do. Men are in porn so women can be too.

Also women can enjoy sex. Porn is not anti-feminist. Some feminist groups say it is but it isn't that is a bastardization of the ideology.

Kind of like that wacky christian lady saying we can't masturbate. That is not a tenet of Christianity, it is a tenet of a nutbar.[/QUOTE]

A healthy major of feminist groups are anti-porn. And you've got to be shitting me when you're trying to compare men in porn to women. Men are LARGELY portrayed in porn as the dominant partner while women are subservient. There are a few genres where this is not the case, but the majority of porn is this way.

Yes, please tell me what's so proactive about a woman on her knees catching loads from 10 guys?

Sep 17, 2010#411

makare

So what? You can be a feminist and not like porn and you can be a feminist and like porn.

It is a non-issue.

Unless you are saying that the only feminists that matter are the ones in groups which I think is a pretty crappy attitude.

Chazwozel said:
Yes, please tell me what's so proactive about a woman on her knees catching loads from 10 guys?

Maybe she enjoys sex and likes that? Maybe it is just her job? Are the men who do that in gay porn being victimized and therefor it is against men?

It's just sexy times chaz. It's ok.

Sep 17, 2010#412

Chazwozel

makare said:
So what? You can be a feminist and not like porn and you can be a feminist and like porn.

It is a non-issue.

Unless you are saying that the only feminists that matter are the ones in groups which I think is a pretty crappy attitude.

Labeling yourself as a feminist delineates that you share feminist ideology. i.e. that porn is demeaning to women.

Sep 17, 2010#413

makare

It is not an absolute of feminism.

That's why they are called anti-porn feminists. If all feminists were anti-porn they wouldn't need that label.

Sep 17, 2010#414

Covar

Fine said:
We should all be proud of who and what we are.

I'm proud of my accomplishments, not things I had no part in (*snip* being in America, etc)[/quote]

You had a choice in that one. Believe it or not you can actually move, No one is forcing you to stay here.

Sep 17, 2010#415

makare

You don't really stop being an American because you move somewhere else. It's still where you came from and you will probably be treated as such.

Sep 17, 2010#416

The Lovely Boehner

Feminism isn't some hive-mind re: porn. Lots of people have wildly different views on it.

I really don't know what to tell you, Sara, if you think I'm 'burning your bridges'. I haven't antagonized anyone in here that didn't come into the thread saying something factually wrong or also already attacking me just for calling myself a feminist.

Sep 17, 2010#417

Covar

makare said:
You don't really stop being an American because you move somewhere else. It's still where you came from and you will probably be treated as such.

By your logic no immigrant is ever an American and no adopted child is ever a member of the family. Which is in fact, bullshit.

Sep 17, 2010#418

SpecialKO

I could spend more time on this, as I find some of the viewpoints expressed in this thread rather fascinating, but I have to run.

So, in summation of the last half (so it seems) of this thread.

1) Makare knows Chaz intimately, despite never having met him.

2) Chaz just knows black people

Later folks, don't take everything so seriously.

Sep 17, 2010#419

makare

Covar;438065][QUOTE=makare said:
You don't really stop being an American because you move somewhere else. It's still where you came from and you will probably be treated as such.

By your logic no immigrant is ever an American and no adopted child is ever a member of the family. Which is in fact, bullshit.[/QUOTE]

So if I move to France and get citizenship, people won't still think of me as American?

Technically you can change citizenship but the perception of others is pretty much consistent.

Eww don't say I know chaz intimately

and all i said was I know him some after talking to him on here for three years. I do not, and do not want to, know him "intimately" in any shape or form.

Sep 17, 2010#420

Sara_2814

I'd like to interrupt the drama for a moment to thank everyone for all the love and offers of beer in this thread. You guys are so sweet. :wub: So I figure that now that I have you all under my spell, I should drop my persona and reveal the true me for you.

(Is that fun enough for you, Espy?)

(Also, bring me beer.)

Sep 17, 2010#421

Chazwozel

SpecialKO said:
I could spend more time on this, as I find some of the viewpoints expressed in this thread rather fascinating, but I have to run.

So, in summation of the last half (so it seems) of this thread.

1) Makare knows Chaz intimately, despite never having met him.

2) Chaz just knows black people

Later folks, don't take everything so seriously.

Wait, my whole point was that being white: "I just don't get it" ala South Park.

Sep 17, 2010#422

makare

Man I love south park. Im watching the eek a penis ep.

Riotous.

Sep 17, 2010#423

Espy

Yes it is Sara! Thank you very much.

Here is your beer.

Sep 17, 2010#424

Chazwozel

makare;438067][QUOTE=Covar;438065][QUOTE=makare said:
You don't really stop being an American because you move somewhere else. It's still where you came from and you will probably be treated as such.

and all i said was I know him some after talking to him on here for three years. I do not, and do not want to, know him "intimately" in any shape or form.[/QUOTE]

Don't worry toots. Large and in charge ain't the type of chicks I roll wit.

Sep 17, 2010#425

makare

So your wife is a candy ass pansy?

/me makes note.

but what is here naaaaame?

Sep 17, 2010#426

Chazwozel

makare said:
So your wife is a candy ass pansy?

/me makes note.

but what is here naaaaame?

Now, now, now let's leave her out of this mmmkay? Take all the potshots you want at me, but let's keep family out.

Sep 17, 2010#427

Covar

makare said:
So your wife is a candy ass pansy?

/me makes note.

but what is here naaaaame?

actually all you really know is that she can be small and meek, small and bossy, or large and meek.

He's left you with quite a few options.

Sep 17, 2010#428

makare

I was just kidding because you are all raaaage you dont know my wife's name! BLARG

Sep 17, 2010#429

Chazwozel

Fill in those gaps.

Sep 17, 2010#430

ThatGrinningIdiot!

makare said:
I was just kidding because you are all raaaage you dont know my wife's name! BLARG

It's considered hitting below the belt, when you involve family.

Sep 17, 2010#431

Sara_2814

Fine said:
Feminism isn't some hive-mind re: porn. Lots of people have wildly different views on it.

I really don't know what to tell you, Sara, if you think I'm 'burning your bridges'. I haven't antagonized anyone in here that didn't come into the thread saying something factually wrong or also already attacking me just for calling myself a feminist.

If you're absolutely serious about this, then please just tone it back. Waving lists of wrongs in people's faces doesn't help. It only puts people on the defensive and creates bad feelings. In that list you posted, how is any man in this thread -- in the world -- supposed to change the fact that the major world religions have historically been patriarchies? They can't, so pushing stuff like that in people's faces is not productive. I'm going to assume that most of the men here have wives, girlfriends, mothers, sisters, and/or daughters that they love, so they're all aware of obstacles women face. So show some respect to the men here, okay? They get it.

"You can catch more flies with honey than vinegar" is absolutely true. I always approach men I meet with the benefit of the doubt: I assume he's going to respect me until he proves otherwise and that's worked great for nearly 40 years. If you want men to be allies of Feminism, then treat them like allies and not enemies.

Sep 17, 2010#432

ThatGrinningIdiot!

Sara, where is that goddamned cherry pie?!

*Checks out your spoiler* OHH SHIIII!

This thread has turned into a hydra.

Sep 17, 2010#433

makare

ThatGrinningIdiot!;438082][QUOTE=makare said:
I was just kidding because you are all raaaage you dont know my wife's name! BLARG

Sep 17, 2010#434

Chazwozel

makare;438085][QUOTE=ThatGrinningIdiot!;438082][QUOTE=makare said:
I was just kidding because you are all raaaage you dont know my wife's name! BLARG

It's considered hitting below the belt, when you involve family.[/QUOTE]

I think it was pretty obvious I was just stating the opposite of what he said and was not in anyway referencing his actual wife.[/QUOTE]

Should I start making reference to your sister's drug addiction in a clever little twist on what you say?

Sep 17, 2010#435

makare

so you are saying your wife IS a candy ass pansy? Im confused.

Sep 17, 2010#436

Covar

Sara_2814;438083][QUOTE=Fine said:
Feminism isn't some hive-mind re: porn. Lots of people have wildly different views on it.

I really don't know what to tell you, Sara, if you think I'm 'burning your bridges'. I haven't antagonized anyone in here that didn't come into the thread saying something factually wrong or also already attacking me just for calling myself a feminist.

but in all seriousness excellent post.

Sep 17, 2010#437

The Lovely Boehner

If I came off kind of antagonistic here, it's because I've had a lot of static/arguments in the past with people here along these same lines. The list of male privilege things are not supposed to make someone change the world, just make you aware of it, maybe think about it for a minute.

Sep 17, 2010#438

Chazwozel

Fine said:
If I came off kind of antagonistic here, it's because I've had a lot of static/arguments in the past with people here along these same lines. The list of male privilege things are not supposed to make someone change the world, just make you aware of it, maybe think about it for a minute.

And what Sara is telling you is that you're just rubbing shit in our face with a squeaky clean smile.

---------- Post added at 03:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:08 PM ----------

makare said:
so you are saying your wife IS a candy ass pansy? Im confused.

Keep on smilin'

*snip* See explanation in my response.

Sep 17, 2010#439

phil

Christ. I've never actually seen monkeys throwing shit at one another until now.

Sep 17, 2010#440

Covar

phil said:
Christ. I've never actually seen monkeys throwing shit at one another until now.

You should come into the politics board more often.

Sep 17, 2010#441

MindDetective

Fine said:
Maybe it gets you upset, and you try to bring it to more people's attentions so they maybe do one thing to cast off male privilege?

Fine said:
The list of male privilege things are not supposed to make someone change the world, just make you aware of it, maybe think about it for a minute.

Either you are inconsistent with your original intent or you are splitting extremely fine hairs when you say it isn't supposed to make someone change the world. I don't think anyone expected world-changing, but I got the impression that you felt it could have an impact.

A blind, arms swinging in the dark impact.

Sep 17, 2010#442

Dave

Okay, I'm writing in red now.

Makare, Chaz asked you nicely to leave his family out of it which is well withing his rights. Knock the shit off or get a 24 hour sit down. This is your warning.

Chaz, I know makare provoked it this time not backing off your wife. This is why you are getting a warning. She has made it clear she doesn't want her picture out there in the wild. Please refrain. This is your warning.

---------- Post added at 02:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:46 PM ----------

By the way, I love when I have to write in red and see it with my avatar. It makes it authoritative yet somehow hilarious.

Sep 17, 2010#443

Chazwozel

Word. Backing off...

Sep 17, 2010#444

Element 117

Aww nah admin red font king in DA HOUSE BITCHES. This shit just got SCARLET! yo!

Sep 17, 2010#445

Hailey Knight

Man, I don't have time to read all this shit. Another 5 pages, good gods.

I can't pick a side in this particular Makare vs Chaz... both being asses. Not gonna say who I think was being moreso.

Sep 17, 2010#446

Sara_2814

Fine said:
If I came off kind of antagonistic here, it's because I've had a lot of static/arguments in the past with people here along these same lines. The list of male privilege things are not supposed to make someone change the world, just make you aware of it, maybe think about it for a minute.

That's the thing. You're assuming they aren't aware of it. How could they not be? You're only the bajillionth person to tell them that their patriarchy is keeping the woman down.

As for the arguments, maybe they’re just arguing to argue with you? Running polls to ask people to label themselves “Us” or “Them” isn’t the best start for a discussion about “Us”.

If you're passionate about helping women and making people aware of the problems women face, why not put that passion towards helping women who truly need help? Post about fundraising drives for schools for Afghan children or microfinancing programs or Heifer International or any other organization that helps women overcome poverty and illiteracy. Then you’re raising awareness with something productive and positive rather than arguing about a label that has a negative connotation for many people.

Sep 17, 2010#447

Dave

Sara_2814;438130][QUOTE=Fine said:
If I came off kind of antagonistic here, it's because I've had a lot of static/arguments in the past with people here along these same lines. The list of male privilege things are not supposed to make someone change the world, just make you aware of it, maybe think about it for a minute.

Sep 17, 2010#448

MindDetective

I sent her some from both of us, Dave.

Sep 17, 2010#449

Element 117

Dave;438134][QUOTE=Sara_2814;438130][QUOTE=Fine said:
If I came off kind of antagonistic here, it's because I've had a lot of static/arguments in the past with people here along these same lines. The list of male privilege things are not supposed to make someone change the world, just make you aware of it, maybe think about it for a minute.

Sep 17, 2010#450

Hailey Knight

I'd rep her again if I hadn't yesterday. Someone said something similar to Charlie a while ago, but without links, so it probably got washed over with Chaz chazzing it up.

I wish I hadn't gone back through some of these pages. My opinions of certain people have dropped severely.

Charlie not being one of them. Charlie's at this stage in his social awareness where he's latched onto an idea and is clinging to it for dear life like a rockclimber with a sword in his teeth and a foot in his mouth beyond it. You see this most often with college freshmen, just breaking the surface of new ideas on culture and society, and in their excitement and zeal, they start mapping out the lines of battle (such as this poll) without realizing that there's no war happening around them. Because the ideas are not new to people--there's a crawl of development that society takes, and one more tool hopping up and down, screaming and flinging shit like a monkey isn't going to change minds. It never does. But this is a normal stage that people go through, where their minds are expanding and ideas are taking shape in lighter forms before they mellow out into reality. I went through it when I was 16. People often go through it 18-20. Some, much later.

I remember one of my first classes in college, Intro to Lit maybe, where one kid started ranting and raving suddenly about societal collapse and government problems and blah blah socialism blah. The professor let him get it out of his system, about a minute and a half. "Okay," she said in a blank tone, and then resumed talking about what our reading schedule would be. The kid's rant had nothing to do with the professor's words or anything we were doing. He looked around, as if he expected everyone to rise from their seats cheering, ready to march wherever that promising leader would bring them, but no one did. They paid attention to what was important (the class at hand) and let him sit quietly like he was supposed to. Because he couldn't grasp the difference between discussion and shouting.

Sep 17, 2010#451

Krisken

^^^^ +1

Sep 17, 2010#452

The Lovely Boehner

lol fuck all of y'all. it's true, Sara is the best feminist

Charlie out.

Sep 17, 2010#453

makare

As Ive said I don't find charlie's methods all that bad. So he is talking about something we all know, so what? If we can't regurgitate things on this forum the forum will die.

Sexism against women is a perfectly acceptable topic and there is nothing wrong with wanting to talk about it. If the guys feel like they are being attacked they should just stay out of the damn thread.

Sep 17, 2010#454

Hailey Knight

Why?

I feel Charlie is sexist because his Us vs Them mentality puts it as Them = Women. To truly be equal, we must obliterate gender from our minds. We are all people. We are all men. We are all women. We are all humans. We are simply We.

Now I will go watch the We channel. It's for me... I mean Us. The great Us that We are.

Sep 17, 2010#455

makare

And I want world peace and a pony.

Be realistic seriously. Feminism is about the struggle. It is not ABOUT equality it is about the struggle FOR it. It is acknowledging we are different but are still of the same worth. I guess there is just no way to explain it when people, as some have said, have such a negative view about.

Sep 17, 2010#456

Chazwozel

round and round you go....

Sep 17, 2010#457

Hailey Knight

Makare... I was being facetious. :/ Sorry.

Sep 17, 2010#458

Chazwozel

People, people, let's all calm down and objectify some women together.

:drool::drool::drool:

Sep 17, 2010#459

Krisken

Wait, it just dawned on me... if Charlie is Meathead, who is Archie?

Sep 17, 2010#460

makare

If you want to talk about objectification, The Expendables. all the sexy sexy men.

Sep 17, 2010#461

Dream Goddess

escushion said:
Why?

I feel Charlie is sexist because his Us vs Them mentality puts it as Them = Women. To truly be equal, we must obliterate gender from our minds. We are all people. We are all men. We are all women. We are all humans. We are simply We.

Now I will go watch the We channel. It's for me... I mean Us. The great Us that We are.

makare said:
And I want world peace and a pony.

Be realistic seriously. Feminism is about the struggle. It is not ABOUT equality it is about the struggle FOR it. It is acknowledging we are different but are still of the same worth. I guess there is just no way to explain it when people, as some have said, have such a negative view about.

Sep 17, 2010#462

Dave

I prefer The Full Monty.

Sep 17, 2010#463

Sara_2814

Fine said:
lol fuck all of y'all. it's true, Sara is the best feminist

Charlie out.

Egalitarian. Sara is the best egalitarian. :humph:

---------- Post added at 08:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:39 PM ----------

makare said:
Feminism is about the struggle. It is not ABOUT equality it is about the struggle FOR it.

Then I'm definitely not a feminist, because I've done my struggling but now I'm Too Old For This Shit. You youngins can struggle all you like, I'm taking Espy's beer and putting my feet up and enjoying my egalitarianism (which is about equality, not the struggle).

---------- Post added at 08:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:47 PM ----------

Covar said:
XKCD

Covar, you are a dirty bastard for crushing my aphorism. You can go to Hell!

:waah: <-- female privilege.

Sep 17, 2010#464

phil

Fine said:
lol fuck all of y'all. it's true, Sara is the best feminist

Charlie out.

Fuck it. I like this guy.

Sep 17, 2010#465

makare

Dream Goddess;438214][QUOTE=escushion said:
Why?

I feel Charlie is sexist because his Us vs Them mentality puts it as Them = Women. To truly be equal, we must obliterate gender from our minds. We are all people. We are all men. We are all women. We are all humans. We are simply We.

Now I will go watch the We channel. It's for me... I mean Us. The great Us that We are.

makare said:
And I want world peace and a pony.

Be realistic seriously. Feminism is about the struggle. It is not ABOUT equality it is about the struggle FOR it. It is acknowledging we are different but are still of the same worth. I guess there is just no way to explain it when people, as some have said, have such a negative view about.

Wow. She just took you seriously. Holy crap. Give me some of whatever she's taking. It sounds triptasticly awesome.

Um, no. Seriously. The "We" channel comment didn't even get one brain cell a-hopping? I had no idea that vacuous, mind-numbing willingness to believe in the most obviously sarcastic, facetious bullshit that sounds a little something like pretentious feminazi/hippie prattle was apart of my creed as a female feminist.[/QUOTE]

I was mostly still responding to sara's idea which was the serious version of that statement. Did it seem like I was upset or something? My last statement wasn't any different than anything else Ive said the whole thread.....

Everything sara has said has come off as very Miss America to me and that was what I was trying to get across. I wasn't necessarily responding to escushion.

Sep 17, 2010#466

Hailey Knight

Didn't you see my awesome post at the end of page 13? Charlie left, makare. Now, it's all about me.

Sep 17, 2010#467

makare

ok... wanna make out?

Sep 17, 2010#468

Adammon

makare said:
ok... wanna make out?

Sep 17, 2010#469

Hailey Knight

Take me, Alan Rickman.

Sep 17, 2010#470

Dream Goddess

makare said:
ok... wanna make out?

Step off, biotch! This hunk of sassy ass is mine! *whip crack* ESC, I TOLD YOU TO GET BACK IN THE KITCHEN AND MAKE MEH A PIE!

Sep 17, 2010#471

Hailey Knight

You can't boss me around. You didn't win hearts and minds with your moving performance in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.

Sep 17, 2010#472

Dream Goddess

*lip quiver* B-b-but, I'm smooshy and cute and you lurrrrrrrrrrrrves me.

Sep 17, 2010#473

makare

Adammon;438238][QUOTE=makare said:
ok... wanna make out?

[/QUOTE]

sorry dude.

escushion said:
Take me, Alan Rickman.

aw yeah let's do this... wait you aren't a ginger too are you?

Sep 17, 2010#474

Hailey Knight

Only underneath.

Sep 17, 2010#475

Dream Goddess

*passive aggressive crying, like a real woman*

Sep 17, 2010#476

makare

go cry somewhere else woman. he wants some snape-loving and he's-a gonna get it

Sep 17, 2010#477

Sara_2814

makare said:
Everything sara has said has come off as very Miss America to me and that was what I was trying to get across. I wasn't necessarily responding to escushion.

Yes, you're right. Listening to the concerns of 'the other side' and setting your goals to be inclusive is so shallow. Hell, even having a goal just proves I'm a naive airhead. So hand me my bouquet and tiara, I'll try not to fart a rainbow on anyone when I walk across the stage.

So if the goal doesn't matter and it's all about the Glorious Struggle, are you the Feminist Front of Judea or the Judean Feminist Front?

Sep 17, 2010#478

makare

The goal does matter but the goal doesn't magically happen. You don't get to say, this is how it should be and the BAM it IS.

There is a struggle and an imbalance first. And not acknowledging the imbalance isn't going to rectify it.

Now as my av says it's beer-thirty.

Sep 18, 2010#479

Element 117

Were I not a man hatin lesbian bent on the destruction of all Mankind, I might suggest the modern day challenges of gender differences renders terms like "feminism" obsolete for any useful discussions. Maybe the real challenge is answering specific inequities in any gender, collectively, not just saying "the min or wimmins have it harder"

Now if you'll excuse me:

Sep 18, 2010#480

makare

This thread needs more womynists

Sep 18, 2010#481

Chazwozel

Reporting.

Sep 18, 2010#482

Sara_2814

makare said:
The goal does matter but the goal doesn't magically happen. You don't get to say, this is how it should be and the BAM it IS.

There is a struggle and an imbalance first. And not acknowledging the imbalance isn't going to rectify it.

lolwut? Who has said gender equality happens in an instant, or that there isn’t any imbalance?

Nevermind. Either it’s the Chewbacca Defense or we’re having different conversations at this point.

---------- Post added at 09:34 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:22 AM ----------

PCT said:
Were I not a man hatin lesbian bent on the destruction of all Mankind, I might suggest the modern day challenges of gender differences renders terms like "feminism" obsolete for any useful discussions. Maybe the real challenge is answering specific inequities in any gender, collectively, not just saying "the min or wimmins have it harder"

Sep 18, 2010#483

Dave

Sep 18, 2010#484

Chazwozel

Sara_2814;438301][QUOTE=makare said:
The goal does matter but the goal doesn't magically happen. You don't get to say, this is how it should be and the BAM it IS.

There is a struggle and an imbalance first. And not acknowledging the imbalance isn't going to rectify it.

PCT said:
Were I not a man hatin lesbian bent on the destruction of all Mankind, I might suggest the modern day challenges of gender differences renders terms like "feminism" obsolete for any useful discussions. Maybe the real challenge is answering specific inequities in any gender, collectively, not just saying "the min or wimmins have it harder"

[/QUOTE]

Welcome to the world of trying to have a discussion with makare.

Sep 18, 2010#485

Hailey Knight

Sara_2814;438301][QUOTE=makare said:
The goal does matter but the goal doesn't magically happen. You don't get to say, this is how it should be and the BAM it IS.

There is a struggle and an imbalance first. And not acknowledging the imbalance isn't going to rectify it.

lolwut? Who has said gender equality happens in an instant, or that there isn’t any imbalance?

Nevermind. Either it’s the Chewbacca Defense or we’re having different conversations at this point.[/QUOTE]

Hey, you don't know Chewbacca Defense like makare at all. She's going to law school, dammit.

Sep 18, 2010#486

makare

Alright I'll summarize it

These are the point as I have understood them.
1. Feminism is obsolete because many of the tenets of feminism are shared by other groups and people in general.
What difference does that make? We can't have more than one group that purports an ideology or goal?

2. Since some people/groups have taken feminism to bizarre extremes contrary to the essential elements it should be disregarded.
I feel kind of stupid having to explain why this argument is bad but ok. If we threw out every ideology, belief, goal system, etc because stupid try to ruin it we would have nothing. One bad apple may spoil the whole bunch but let's not throw the baby out with the bath water here.

3. A discussion of sexism often seems to attack men and that makes them uncomfortable.
Well sorry, sometimes we have to deal with uncomfortable things. As a white person in Sodak I am told at least every month or so that "my people" destroyed the native americans. I can come up with about thirty reasons why that is bullshit mostly that my personal family didn't get here until 1905 but I don't say those things. Because unfortunately for me I do have characteristics that coincide with the dominant system that DID crap on the native Americans. So basically, sucks to be me.

Are all guys misogynistic bastards who take advantage of their privileged place in society? No, I would guess most guys aren't Can we come up with a hundred examples of how men are screwed in society, probably. But that does not meant that the system isn’t still stacked on the men’s side. Men are on the “winning side” and yet it really sucks. Sorry, that’s the way it is. Don’t take the discomfort and the unfairness out on feminism. Feminism did not create the system it just tries to change it.
I think that about covers that part.

Revisiting the body language conversation. I feel that I ended up saying things that skewed my actual point. Yes body language IS important in communication, it can show things like mood or if someone is being deceptive. However, my issue was online communication and not mood, but personality. There is no body language online but that does not mean that online interaction is not valuable in learning about someone’s personality. When I was talking to Adammon, who was making really good points but I don’t think we were talking about the same thing, and Harglegargle McStalker I think my point got lost and my actual views were not represented.

And then onto masculine/feminine

What is masculine and feminine is not written in stone or genetic code. There are not three stages of history, cave man, 1950s and now there have been thousands of years of society evolution. Every possibly manifestation of sexuality has occurred in that time. Men have worn makeup and dresses and women rustic simple clothes. Gender may have physical and functional components that are unchangeable, men’s strength or women’s reproductive ability, but those stand secondary to society’s interest in dictating what is sexy and appealing by dictating what is masculine and feminine.

I think that about covers it. If you don’t get my point after that then I am incapable of explaining it further.

Sep 18, 2010#487

North_Ranger

Kudos, Alan Rickman. Kudos.

Let's get drunk.

Sep 18, 2010#488

makare

the end of all things is upon us. let us drink and NOT spit.

(hope youve seen dogma)

aranoid:

Sep 18, 2010#489

North_Ranger

makare said:
the end of all things is upon us. let us drink and NOT spit.

(hope youve seen dogma) aranoid:

Seen it, loved it, will quote it.

Now, have you seen any good Charlton Heston movies lately or should we talk something else than theology?

Sep 18, 2010#490

Element 117

Sara_2814 said:
lolwut? Who has said gender equality happens in an instant, or that there isn’t any imbalance?

Nevermind. Either it’s the Chewbacca Defense or we’re having different conversations at this point.

Sep 18, 2010#491

Sara_2814

makare said:
1. Feminism is obsolete because many of the tenets of feminism are shared by other groups and people in general.
What difference does that make? We can't have more than one group that purports an ideology or goal?

Nobody here has said that you can't identify as a Feminist. They are explaining why they don't identify as Feminists, which was the original point of this thread. If you don't want to hear the answers, don't ask the question.

And apparently we can't have more than one group that has the same goal, because somebody called us "naive" earlier in this discussion for considering ourselves egalitarian:

makare said:
I call myself feminist because I believe women should be treated as being the same worth as men. I think saying you are just for equality period is kind of naive. I mean, who isn't? But a large portion of society doesn't have to fight for the same worth and recognition as other parts. There is nothing wrong with acknowledging that fight.

So you're saying Egalitarianism is naive because many of the tenets of Egalitarianism are shared by Feminists? What difference does that make? We can't have more than one group that purports an ideology or goal?

In conclusion: Lots of people don't identify as Feminists because they disagree with some of the ideology of Feminism and/or prefer a gender-neutral label that identifies their inclusive stance on equality. If you're going to get all butthurt over this, then stop asking people if they are Feminists.

:deadhorse:

Sep 18, 2010#492

makare

"Sara_2814 said:
makare said:

1. Feminism is obsolete because many of the tenets of feminism are shared by other groups and people in general.
What difference does that make? We can't have more than one group that purports an ideology or goal?

Click to expand...

Nobody here has said that you can't identify as a Feminist. They are explaining why they don't identify as Feminists, which was the original point of this thread. If you don't want to hear the answers, don't ask the question.

And apparently we can't have more than one group that has the same goal, because somebody called us "naive" earlier in this discussion for considering ourselves egalitarian:

makare said:

I call myself feminist because I believe women should be treated as being the same worth as men. I think saying you are just for equality period is kind of naive. I mean, who isn't? But a large portion of society doesn't have to fight for the same worth and recognition as other parts. There is nothing wrong with acknowledging that fight.

Click to expand...

So you're saying Egalitarianism is naive because many of the tenets of Egalitarianism are shared by Feminists? What difference does that make? We can't have more than one group that purports an ideology or goal?

No it is naive because saying that we should all be equal because we are equal, or as you call it egalitarianism, completely disregards the fact that you actually have to work for it. It is as I said Miss America like. We all want world peace but what good is saying that kind of crap if you dont have a way of meeting the goal because your statement is too broad. Feminism at least has a way of working for it because it has a focused goal.

And i am explaining why i am an advocate of feminism over any other -ism. Which as you said would be the counter point of this thread. If we were just going to announce yes, no , maybe what was the point of posting a discussion board with the poll?

Sara_2814 said:
In conclusion: Lots of people don't identify as Feminists because they disagree with some of the ideology of Feminism and/or prefer a gender-neutral label that identifies their inclusive stance on equality. If you're going to get all butthurt over this, then stop asking people if they are Feminists.

If you think I am "butthurt" over any of this then you are seriously reading too much into what I am saying. I am just stating my view point of both feminism and opposing -isms, you know, discussing things in the discussion forum?

Unless you were referring to charlie because I never asked anyone if he/she was a feminist.

Sep 18, 2010#493

Chazwozel

MAKARE! WHAT A WOOKIE! GRRRRAAAAAAOOOOOOOLLLLOOOOOWWWOOOOOWOOORRRRRRRR

Sep 18, 2010#494

Hailey Knight

makare said:
3. A discussion of sexism often seems to attack men and that makes them uncomfortable.
Well sorry, sometimes we have to deal with uncomfortable things. As a white person in Sodak I am told at least every month or so that "my people" destroyed the native americans. I can come up with about thirty reasons why that is bullshit mostly that my personal family didn't get here until 1905 but I don't say those things. Because unfortunately for me I do have characteristics that coincide with the dominant system that DID crap on the native Americans. So basically, sucks to be me.

Problem 1: Your main antagonist here isn't Chaz. He's just fucking with you, and you fell for it, like you always fall for it, like you can never resist being led along by him like a cat chasing a laser pointer, and your actions in response are just as futile as far as having any effect or purpose.

Sara is the one making the good counter-points against you, and I'm sure her man nature is incredibly uncomfortable.

Problem 2: The "suck it up" approach could be turned around on feminism to say "suck it up, women". It's not a good way to a situation of idealogical differences.

Problem 3: By that paragraph's logic... I know a judge in Florida who was mugged by a black guy, and so he hates black people. And this is justified to you, because other black people share that characteristic with the mugger. That is some fucking tripe right there.

Sep 18, 2010#495

makare

escushion said:
Problem 1: Your main antagonist here isn't Chaz. He's just fucking with you, and you fell for it, like you always fall for it, like you can never resist being led along by him like a cat chasing a laser pointer, and your actions in response are just as futile as far as having any effect or purpose.

Sara is the one making the good counter-points against you, and I'm sure her man nature is incredibly uncomfortable.

Problem 2: The "suck it up" approach could be turned around on feminism to say "suck it up, women". It's not a good way to a situation of idealogical differences.

Problem 3: By that paragraph's logic... I know a judge in Florida who was mugged by a black guy, and so he hates black people. And this is justified to you, because other black people share that characteristic with the mugger. That is some fucking tripe right there.

Actually I have hardly responded to Chaz. Except for his little freak out about me not knowing him related to the manicure thing I have actively tried to ignore him. (I did try some chaz-style joking with him but no matter how many times he harangues me for not having a sense of humor whenever i try and joke with him he flips a tit. ah well) I disagree completely with Sara's assessment of the discussion in this thread and her points seem unproductive. I don't have an issue with her personally and I am not butthurt about any of it. We are just talking, senor.

As for problem 2, if we had a thread about how men are being screwed in society I would say suck it up women. Because it is about the conversation. I guess that ties in the problem 3 too, I am not ok with native americans thinking that I some how destroyed their culture but when we are talking about the devastation that was caused it just seems callous and stupid to argue the point.

If this thread is about the difficulties women are having saying yeah well men have trouble too doesn't really solve anything. If we were in a thread about gender issues or the troubles both genders face then fine. It is ok to discuss one individual with deference to that struggle alone. The point I am trying to make with that issue statement was that it is OK for men (women, whites, blacks whatever) to shut up and listen at the issues the other side has without getting defensive no matter how valid an argument they might have.

Sep 18, 2010#496

Hailey Knight

I feel like you're stuck on some idea that people are saying this topic shouldn't exist. I don't think anyone's said that about any thread on Halforums. However, that isn't going to stop someone from making fun of said thread, its OP, or people in it. You seem like you're defending the right to have the discussion--people aren't attacking the discussion, they're attacking other discussers' view points. No one's told you, Charlie, Sara, me, to shut up or leave.

...Well, actually, you told people to leave, but that wasn't addressed to anyone by name, just those who weren't having the discussion the way you wanted (was how I interpreted it. Others might have interpreted it as you telling people to leave who didn't agree with you, but I didn't see it that way exactly.)

Sep 18, 2010#497

makare

Where did I tell people to leave?

Sep 18, 2010#498

Hailey Knight

Last page.

makare said:
As Ive said I don't find charlie's methods all that bad. So he is talking about something we all know, so what? If we can't regurgitate things on this forum the forum will die.

Sexism against women is a perfectly acceptable topic and there is nothing wrong with wanting to talk about it. If the guys feel like they are being attacked they should just stay out of the damn thread.

Sep 18, 2010#499

makare

escushion said:
Last page.

makare said:

As Ive said I don't find charlie's methods all that bad. So he is talking about something we all know, so what? If we can't regurgitate things on this forum the forum will die.

Sexism against women is a perfectly acceptable topic and there is nothing wrong with wanting to talk about it. If the guys feel like they are being attacked they should just stay out of the damn thread.

Click to expand...

If the topic upsets someone they don't have to engage in the topic. It isn't really asking people to leave as much as pointing that out. And that all ties in with my general frustrations about not being able to talk about the issue without qualifying it.

It is kind of like a kid telling a mom he's hungry and she responding, you think you're hungry there are starving kids in Africa.

That is true but it doesn't really solve the hungry kid problem.

I wasn't intending to boot people who wanted to discuss the actual issue out but for those whose personal offense at being "attacked" keeps them from talking about it, what is the point of being in the conversation?

*on a complete side not, if nothing else this thread has been worth its w3ight in halbucks. bank bank kaching*

Sep 18, 2010#500

Sara_2814

So people who don’t agree with your idea of gender equality are naive? Nobody has attacked you for identifying as Feminist, but you resort to name-calling (“naive”, “Miss America”) when people identify as something else?

Remember back on the first page when I said I was turned off of Feminism by the name calling and “my way or the highway” attitudes I’ve received from Feminists? You've just demonstrated what I was talking about.

makare said:
No it is naive because saying that we should all be equal because we are equal, or as you call it egalitarianism, completely disregards the fact that you actually have to work for it. It is as I said Miss America like. We all want world peace but what good is saying that kind of crap if you dont have a way of meeting the goal because your statement is too broad. Feminism at least has a way of working for it because it has a focused goal.

Citation Needed.

Forums