Double Standards, anyone?

[RelexCryo]

Actually, I was referring to western comic books, certain manga, anime, and certain speciific videogames. And what does the fact that women also make videogames have to do with this?

To repeat what I said to Dr. Snakeman:

The majority of feminists are intelligent, reasonable human beings, and the tendency of a vocal minority to discriminate against heterosexual men hurts feminism by association, in a manner similar to Gloria Steinem or Andrea Dworkin. Claiming that it is sexist for men to have fantasies of their own is in itself discrimination.

My point is, it's not everyone's fantasy. As someone who works in a creative entertainment field dominated by guys and geared towards male consumers, it's hard not to question the default assumption that character designs are just fine to constantly cater to that fantasy. When art direction lacks taste, maturity, originality or interest over overt sexuality, there's nothing wrong with expecting more.

There is nothing wrong with asking for more. There is however something wrong with claiming that it is sexist for men to have fantasies about attractive women, especially when the women in question are intelligent, powerful badasses.

The problem is not that people want there to be more to the industry than male fantasy, the problem I was referring to is that a vocal minority accuse those fantasies of inherently being sexist, which is itself a sexist double standard, as all people write the fantasies they want to have into entertainment, which generally includes attractive members of the gender(s) they are attracted to. Accusing heterosexual men of horrible crimes when we are only doing the same thing all genders and sexualities do hurts feminism by associating it with unreasonable, sexist bigots like Gloria Steinem and Andrea Dworkin.

There is a big difference between saying that we should have more than just male fantasy, and, just as an example, saying that big breasts on female characters are inherently offensive.

 

[Chemical Alia]

There is nothing wrong with asking for more. There is however something wrong with claiming that it is sexist for men to have fantasies about attractive women, especially when the women in question are intelligent, powerful badasses.

The problem is not that people want there to be more to the industry than male fantasy, the problem I was referring to is that a vocal minority accuse those fantasies of inherently being sexist, which is itself a sexist double standard, as all people write the fantasies they want to have into entertainment, which generally includes attractive members of the gender(s) they are attracted to. Accusing heterosexual men of horrible crimes when we are only doing the same thing all genders and sexualities do hurts feminism by associating it with unreasonable, sexist bigots like Gloria Steinem and Andrea Dworkin.

There is a big difference between saying that we should have more than just male fantasy, and, just as an example, saying that big breasts on female characters are inherently offensive.

I see what you're saying. I've always been of the opinion that there's plenty of room for all kinds of character designs, and that when a character is sexy/unattractive for the right reasons you can appreciate them even more.

I don't even know who those people you mentioned are, but for every angry feminist that jumps to conclusions, there's another maladjusted nerdy dude who foams at the mouth at another's slightest mention of wanting more diverse or more female characters, with a hundred reasons why it's a terrible idea and that the industry is fine the way it is.

I'm not sure why the subject causes such an uproar in some people, to be honest v:

 

[Project_Omega]

Umm... OP, your example isn't a gender-based double standard, it's a cheap arguing tactic used by men, women and children alike. Mostly by children. Lose an argument to a woman, did you? Life goes on.

I didnt just loose a single argument, I somehow lost ALL the arguements EVER, always with it resulting to be my fault.

 

[Toriver]

Umm... OP, your example isn't a gender-based double standard, it's a cheap arguing tactic used by men, women and children alike. Mostly by children. Lose an argument to a woman, did you? Life goes on.

I didnt just loose a single argument, I somehow lost ALL the arguements EVER, always with it resulting to be my fault.

Then I hate to say it, but you just sound like you're bad at argument, at least face-to-face. If it makes you feel any better, I'm the same way. Give me time to write out a proper argument, and I can defend my position pretty damn well when I want to, but if you put me on the spot, I just suck. Or perhaps the girl you're dealing with is just really good at using that tactic. I'm just saying that it's hardly a "woman" thing, I've personally seen both men and women use it. Heck, what do you think lawyers and politicians do all day?

 

[Blow_Pop]

I don't pull double standards on my guy friends and I slap them every time they even TRY pulling them on me.

I hate to break it to you but you hitting them and expecting them not to hit you back is a double standard. If you were a guy and did that your liable to get hit back. Unless you'd be ok with them hitting you back you are pulling a double standard. I'd say in general just stop hitting people.

Did I ever even say I didnae expect the same? I slap them when they double standard me and they punch me when I even start to. And my guy friends and I wrestle so yeah I expect to be hit back.

 

[Dr Snakeman]

All the time. When a women has sex with a bunch of men, she's labeled a slut. But if a man does it, he's labeled as gay.

It's bullshit I tell you.

snip-with-an-incredibly-weak-argument

Congratulations: you have successfully overlooked a witty joke for the sake of making a completely nonsensical and boring point. I hope you're satisfied with yourself.

My point was was perfectly reasonable, and on topic. Your post was not. Please do me a favor: even if you hate the underlying nature of a topic, please don't insult people for actually making posts that are on topic. The majority of feminists are intelligent, reasonable human beings, and the tendency of a vocal minority to discriminate against heterosexual men hurts feminism by association, in a manner similar to Gloria Steinem or Andrea Dworkin.

Oh, no, you misunderstand: I agree that there's a certain level of anti-male discrimination in our world.

Thing is, you totally ignored the fact that Irridium was joking (and really, if he wasn't, it would make no goddamned sense at all) in order to make your argument. And even if you weren't acting like a humorless robot who only exists to argue, your argument was still very poorly reasoned, as it ran along the lines of: there's some attractive men in fiction, and some attractive women, and I think that people dislike the attractive women more.

It wasn't that I disagreed with your argument, but that said argument really had no reason to be there in the first place.

 

[g3ko]

girls can reject guys without any consequense yet if a guy rejects a girl hes seen as a asshole

also guys cant stalk girls as its creepy yet girls can stalk guys and its seen as cute

no....no that is still creepy

For years in the UK women had cheaper car insurance.

Last year they had to pay the same as us men and they complained, and I quote, "why should we have to pay more just because we're women"....

I'm sorry ladies, you are paying the same as we've always paid now stick your special treatment up your arse.

In almost every developed country, statistics indicate that men are by far the more reckless drivers and much more likely to get into accidents - particularly under the age of 25. Hence their insurance rates are higher. That's no double standard or unfair treatment, that's insurance companies doing the logical thing because statistically speaking a certain subset of the population is a bunch of fucktards behind the wheel.

Of course this doesn't apply to every young male - myself included, as I'm 23, don't speed, and have yet to be in an accident - but numbers don't lie.

I think the problem always was that women were so happy to base this on Stats here, but when you pull out a stat to a man's advantage it's sexist.

Such as statstically a female doctor will work far less in her lifetime than a male doctor, thus meaning that if we base NHS funding for medical degrees on statistics we should allocate more funding to men. But infact we are having to do the opposite because of 'positive discrimination'. So you see, whilst there is a perfectly good statistical reason for women paying less, it really does irk when it works only that way to the disadvantage of men.

Just because it is at the advantage of women does not mean it is at the disadvantage of men

when you have a closed group of people, and you allocate resources to advantage a certain portion of that grup, regardless of how you pick the advantaged group, the rest either don't get their share of the resources, or end up loosing the share they already had to advantage the group that gets more.
short version: YES IT DOES, and it aplies to any form of discrimination, be it positive or negative

No, a woman having to pay less on her car insurance has absolutely no effect on how much a man pays. If women didn't drive and therefore didn't pay insurance, a mans insurance wouldn't be any less.

yes, it also does, because, the overall amount of funding paid to car insurance is less, meaning less allocated funds for repair and such. Because of this, either, the full insurance paying customers would get less in return for more, or, the total amount gathered would be the same, hence, they actually pay more. Also, the simple fact that women pay less would make most smug about it, and thus, a portion would drive more recklessly.
taking it a couple of steps further, it does affect the matter

 

[DuctTapeJedi]

Spoiler

Spoiler

Here are some of the complaints men have:

- If I break something, a woman will blame me but I can't blame a woman for breaking something.
- I can't make jokes about hitting a woman but women can joke about hitting me.
- I'm not allowed to stare at women's bodies but women are allowed to stare at me.
- I can't use derogatory language directed towards women but women can.

Here are some complaints women have:

- One out of every five women will be raped, but only one out of 165 men will be.
- I work the same job as a man, but get paid on average twenty-five cents less an hour.
- I have a 300% higher chance of being murdered by my spouse than a man does.
- I am more likely to die of gender-neutral diseases, and a lower percentage of medical funding goes towards my sex-specific diseases despite their prevalence being higher.
- The vast majority of religious organizations will not allow me any semblance of authority or power despite me showing equal skill with a man.


In short, stop fucking whining, you over-privileged brats. Boo fucking hoo. No one cares if you can't stare at tits or that you have to be extra nice to those pesky ladies, lest they period themselves everywhere over you. Until you're afraid of walking home in the dark, I don't care.

Spoiler: I get a chance to use this :3

I'm already apprehensive of walking home in the dark.
[small]That's not really a gender specific thing.[/small]
[sub]Just saying.[/sub]

Wait- Did you just respond to a post about rape with the "Deal with it Dog?"
I need a second to process this...

Fuck yeah I did.
S/he? ended their post by being a dick, telling people to ignore double standards because it suited women. I felt I had to respond accordingly.

[sub]:3[/sub]

The fact that someone may have been a little rude, not even to you, specifically, doesn't make it any less callous.

 

[Red Albatross]

YOUR likelihood of getting into an accident is based on YOUR driving history and abilities, not your gender. You shot holes in your own argument in the same paragraph that you made it. Everyone paying the same rates is fair. Everyone getting penalized equally for accidents is fair. Likewise, everyone getting equally rewarded for a clean driving record is fair. Having different rates for different genders, no matter what the statistics say (the situation is FAR more complex than you spun it to be), is sexist. End of story.

You are right it is based on your likelihood of getting into an accident. If you are female and it just so happens that females in your country are less likely to get into an accident then you are actually less likely to and will pay less for insurance. They then take your driving record into account but if you are a new driver its based more on what type of car you drive and what sex you are. I am not talking about your final rate I am talking about the base rate which is then modified by other things.

You cant honestly say that they will not charge a male more if males are more likely to get into accidents. Its not sexist to charge people who are more likely to put in a claim more. That is how insurance companies work and how they make money. I know the calculation is far more complex, I was just trying to give a simplified version.

I want you to think about what you just said, very carefully. "...based on...what sex you are."

That is the definition of sexism.

Think about it this way. If we were talking about race, this thread would have been done from the start, because it's illegal to charge different rates based on race, no matter what the statistics say. It doesn't matter if purple people get into 300% more accidents than green people, you can't charge purple people more than green people or you're gonna be looking at some nasty lawsuits.

Why do you think it's okay to charge people more or less based on gender, then? Because you're starting to sound like one of those people who doesn't give a flying fuck about discrimination as long as it's against other people or if it directly benefits you.

Edit: forgot a word.

 

[CthulhuMessiah]

It's okay for a woman to cut off a man's penis and throw it into a garbage disposal, yet if a man cuts off a woman's breasts and throws them into a garbage disposal, he is the worst human ever.

 

[Nathan Crumpler]

It's okay for a woman to cut off a man's penis and throw it into a garbage disposal, yet if a man cuts off a woman's breasts and throws them into a garbage disposal, he is the worst human ever.

What? Who would say that's okay? This thread has taken a dark turn.

 

[CthulhuMessiah]

It's okay for a woman to cut off a man's penis and throw it into a garbage disposal, yet if a man cuts off a woman's breasts and throws them into a garbage disposal, he is the worst human ever.

What? Who would say that's okay? This thread has taken a dark turn.

I guess you missed the topic. To summarize:

-The View brought up that story about a crazy girlfriend cutting off her boyfriend's penis and throwing it into a garbage disposal.
-They all laughed.
-Sharon Osbourne said "If a man cut off a woman's breasts and threw them into a garbage disposal, it would be wrong".
-Everyone on The View agreed.
-During their "apology", Sharon could not stop laughing during it.