It's only sexist when men do it.
- Thread starter Phlakes
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You might wanna fix the link. It isn't properly embed.
I've seen this before. He makes some good points about sexism from shows.
Even though women have been underprivileged in society for quite some time in the past, actions from them like the ones he mentions are not acceptable.
Edit: Nevermind about the link...
Carry on.
I've seen this before. He makes some good points about sexism from shows.
Even though women have been underprivileged in society for quite some time in the past, actions from them like the ones he mentions are not acceptable.
Edit: Nevermind about the link...
Carry on.
I have only one thing to say....
Where is that shop? I'm going to try and rob it.
Also, Sharon Osbourne has been talking out of her arse for years. I didn't realise people still took her seriously enough to grant her TV time.
Make that 2 things to say then.
Where is that shop? I'm going to try and rob it.
Also, Sharon Osbourne has been talking out of her arse for years. I didn't realise people still took her seriously enough to grant her TV time.
Make that 2 things to say then.
Am I frustrated about how society turns a blind eye to, sometimes even actively endorsing, real and horrific cases of violence against men by women? Yes, absolutely! This shit had to stop right now, and people cannot pretend it isn't happening or can be justified. The longer we put off achieving true equality between genders, because society cannot bring itself to admit that women are capable of being just as violent as men in relationships, the more resentment will be created, and the situation may become too bitter to ever fully resolve.
However, are these examples an excuse to 'not take feminism seriously'? No. These people are not 'Feminists', they are 'Retards and Bigots'. There is a big difference, and if we use them as strawmen (or strawwomen in this case)to try and make a point against the entire feminist movement, we would be just as bad as the women who say "ALL men are violent rapists".
However, are these examples an excuse to 'not take feminism seriously'? No. These people are not 'Feminists', they are 'Retards and Bigots'. There is a big difference, and if we use them as strawmen (or strawwomen in this case)to try and make a point against the entire feminist movement, we would be just as bad as the women who say "ALL men are violent rapists".
while i find his video awesome and he does raise some points in good ways, i don't think in the majority of 1st world countries, is feminism honestly "that way", hell i would be inclined to say that MOST people are feminist naturally, equal rights for everyone disregarding gender/race/etc...but unfortunately it's the loud extremist bra burning cunts that leave such an awful taste in peoples mouths that every time i think of a feminist i immediately imagine 4-5 girls i've met IRL that are by far worse at being "cackling cunts" than sharon osbourne ever is/was.
i actually kinda like it, it shows his passion for logically breaking down demented fuckwads.Dungeons said:
While I have some shred of sympathy with the argument in this case, I have issues with the cry of sexism.
In it's purest form, sexism is the belief that a person's sexual characteristics are determinate of their ability in an unrelated area. For example, that women are less able in business or that men are less able to care for children. In this sense, the vast and overwhelming majority of human beings are functionally sexist. Even if they would not make openly sexist comments, most people still unconsciously accept and perpetuate the existence of 'natural' sex roles. Virtually everyone is sexist, men, women, children. Everyone.
This is why, in general, people restrict the definition of sexism to cases where there is a clear and measurable social disadvantage to being seen as less capable in a given behaviour, for example a woman being passed over for promotion in favour of less able male colleagues or a man being excluded from a daycare centre.
What's being described in this video is not 'sexism against men'. It doesn't fit either definition of sexism (well, actually it does, but not in the expected way at all). It's about reactions to sexual violence, which doesn't necessarily have anything to do with sexism in the normatively understood sense. We react largely the same when men are violent to each other (as is the case in the overwhelming majority of violent crimes) as opposed to when men are violent to women. The issue is not 'women as aggressors', the issue is 'men as victims' - because those words are largely incompatible by design.
Now, on to the main point which I seem to end up pointing out on every 'Wah! Women can get away with violence!' thread. Yes, it is socially harmful in many ways that violence against men is taken less seriously, but it does not represent a general ordering of society against men. In fact, the same force which makes violence against men more acceptable also underpins large sections of male privilege, and that is the belief that men 'can take care of themselves', that they are tough, emotionally measured and derive credibility from sexual conquest rather then from sexual passivity.
So hang on.. if you want people to feel horror when someone assaults you or chops your dick off, then you need to give up the idea that you as a man should derive legitimacy from being seen as able to take care of yourself, as not needing the support or sympathy of others, or as always by definition being the 'active' participant in a sex act and of never being a victim (except in regards to other men, and then you're just a pussy). Violence against you will only seem horrible when you are willing to accept the same perception of weakness and vulnerability to harm which women live under every day.
If you can all do that, we will probably live in a much better world for it.
In it's purest form, sexism is the belief that a person's sexual characteristics are determinate of their ability in an unrelated area. For example, that women are less able in business or that men are less able to care for children. In this sense, the vast and overwhelming majority of human beings are functionally sexist. Even if they would not make openly sexist comments, most people still unconsciously accept and perpetuate the existence of 'natural' sex roles. Virtually everyone is sexist, men, women, children. Everyone.
This is why, in general, people restrict the definition of sexism to cases where there is a clear and measurable social disadvantage to being seen as less capable in a given behaviour, for example a woman being passed over for promotion in favour of less able male colleagues or a man being excluded from a daycare centre.
What's being described in this video is not 'sexism against men'. It doesn't fit either definition of sexism (well, actually it does, but not in the expected way at all). It's about reactions to sexual violence, which doesn't necessarily have anything to do with sexism in the normatively understood sense. We react largely the same when men are violent to each other (as is the case in the overwhelming majority of violent crimes) as opposed to when men are violent to women. The issue is not 'women as aggressors', the issue is 'men as victims' - because those words are largely incompatible by design.
Now, on to the main point which I seem to end up pointing out on every 'Wah! Women can get away with violence!' thread. Yes, it is socially harmful in many ways that violence against men is taken less seriously, but it does not represent a general ordering of society against men. In fact, the same force which makes violence against men more acceptable also underpins large sections of male privilege, and that is the belief that men 'can take care of themselves', that they are tough, emotionally measured and derive credibility from sexual conquest rather then from sexual passivity.
So hang on.. if you want people to feel horror when someone assaults you or chops your dick off, then you need to give up the idea that you as a man should derive legitimacy from being seen as able to take care of yourself, as not needing the support or sympathy of others, or as always by definition being the 'active' participant in a sex act and of never being a victim (except in regards to other men, and then you're just a pussy). Violence against you will only seem horrible when you are willing to accept the same perception of weakness and vulnerability to harm which women live under every day.
If you can all do that, we will probably live in a much better world for it.
In fairness, a guys penis getting cut off is pretty hilarious.
tbh I laugh at basically all Madeleine McCann jokes and I laughed when he said "clitoris", I'd be a bit of a hypocrite if I didn't think it was funny. I like taking dark situations and making light of them. tbh any given Frankie Boyle joke is worse than what they said.
Basically I don't know why it's funny but it is.
tbh I laugh at basically all Madeleine McCann jokes and I laughed when he said "clitoris", I'd be a bit of a hypocrite if I didn't think it was funny. I like taking dark situations and making light of them. tbh any given Frankie Boyle joke is worse than what they said.
Context for americans: Richard Hammond was in a coma at the time of the joke.
Context for americans: Harvey is her downs syndrome son
And a Jimmy Carr joke to finish off...
Context for americans: Harvey is her downs syndrome son
And a Jimmy Carr joke to finish off...
Basically I don't know why it's funny but it is.
I am tempted to ask what he was doing that made you kick him? Certainly if he deserved it I wouldn't feel sorry for him, although them saying that you should have gone further, when what little you did was already enough to incapacitate him, even put him in hospital, I think is a little too much.ElektroNeko said:
However, we aren't discussing the feminism movement, that is, the old feminism movement that focused on ACTUAL equality. We're focusing on the social movement that is taking hold underneath that is full of these retards/bigots, and has FAR more steam than the notion of real equality.NinjaDeathSlap said:
There's another video, by a girl, that touches on this. We shouldn't use the word feminism anymore to refer to wanting equality. That name has been hijacked by feminazis and the type of women that would laugh at a man's genitals being chopped up (which is, sadly, most of them anyway). The words humanist and humanism should be used.
Video, which I cannot imbed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8lkYsbENeQ&feature=related
Poorly researched and very poorly articulated.
"If this were to happen to a woman would we be laughing about it"
No we wouldn't, but we're also not talking about it - millions of girls the world over have their clitoris and labia removed when they reach puberty. But it's ok, in happens in the third world so we don't talk about it, just like most of the crap that goes on there. It's called "Female genital mutilation", look it up people, it's horrific.
Yelling into a video camera is not a good way of conveying your argument, it detracts from your sentiment and makes you seem less intelligent, that you have to resort to angry frustration because you're incapable of putting your ideas across in a reasoned form.
Defining a bunch of retards as feminists is also quite the strawman tactic not to mention polarizing issues as black and white when reality is somewhere in the grey middle.
It also manages to completely ignore the elephant in the room, that women have been oppressed for millennia, subjugated as second class citizens instead of being treated as equals, you can't ignore that history and whilst it doesn't excuse behaviour it does put it in a better perspective.
Ignoring issues that count against your opinion don't strengthen your argument, if you could address them, you might not be able to fully excuse them but you could remove some of there weight, then your argument appears more rounded and is stronger for it.
He comes across as little more than a screaming manchild who's only thoughts about the topic have spewed forth from his cake-hole as soon as the camera started rolling, no preparation, no analysis, just vitriol bile. Thereby carrying no weight.
As for the topic, I try not to pigeon hole people. We're all folk; creed, colour, religion, sexuality doesn't denote who your are - it can play a part, maybe even a strong part, but I try not judge.
The big played by my band today was organised by a fairly obvious transsexual and as such there were a fair few tasteless jokes going around which I tried to duck out of. These differences exist, as much as we wish they didn't and some of us try not to allow them to dictate the way we think and react we have already lost, as we're already thinking about how we think and react.
I guess what I'm saying is yes it happens, try not to be the one who does or at least try not to be a douche about it.
When it boils down to it, women have been getting the short-end of the stick (no pun intended) for a long time (also not a pun) so how about we cut them some slack if a few of the poorer representations of our society make a bad joke? Afterall your don't see Dawn French taking to her webcam railing against the blatant sexism on Sickipedia which objectifies women on a daily (hourly?) bases in a far worse fashion than some obscure US TV show which a much lower viewing figure..
"If this were to happen to a woman would we be laughing about it"
No we wouldn't, but we're also not talking about it - millions of girls the world over have their clitoris and labia removed when they reach puberty. But it's ok, in happens in the third world so we don't talk about it, just like most of the crap that goes on there. It's called "Female genital mutilation", look it up people, it's horrific.
Yelling into a video camera is not a good way of conveying your argument, it detracts from your sentiment and makes you seem less intelligent, that you have to resort to angry frustration because you're incapable of putting your ideas across in a reasoned form.
Defining a bunch of retards as feminists is also quite the strawman tactic not to mention polarizing issues as black and white when reality is somewhere in the grey middle.
It also manages to completely ignore the elephant in the room, that women have been oppressed for millennia, subjugated as second class citizens instead of being treated as equals, you can't ignore that history and whilst it doesn't excuse behaviour it does put it in a better perspective.
Ignoring issues that count against your opinion don't strengthen your argument, if you could address them, you might not be able to fully excuse them but you could remove some of there weight, then your argument appears more rounded and is stronger for it.
He comes across as little more than a screaming manchild who's only thoughts about the topic have spewed forth from his cake-hole as soon as the camera started rolling, no preparation, no analysis, just vitriol bile. Thereby carrying no weight.
As for the topic, I try not to pigeon hole people. We're all folk; creed, colour, religion, sexuality doesn't denote who your are - it can play a part, maybe even a strong part, but I try not judge.
The big played by my band today was organised by a fairly obvious transsexual and as such there were a fair few tasteless jokes going around which I tried to duck out of. These differences exist, as much as we wish they didn't and some of us try not to allow them to dictate the way we think and react we have already lost, as we're already thinking about how we think and react.
I guess what I'm saying is yes it happens, try not to be the one who does or at least try not to be a douche about it.
When it boils down to it, women have been getting the short-end of the stick (no pun intended) for a long time (also not a pun) so how about we cut them some slack if a few of the poorer representations of our society make a bad joke? Afterall your don't see Dawn French taking to her webcam railing against the blatant sexism on Sickipedia which objectifies women on a daily (hourly?) bases in a far worse fashion than some obscure US TV show which a much lower viewing figure..
No it's not!Daveman said:
OT: While this thread has been done a million times over; I don't encounter women who go to extremes like that. I guess I'm lucky. It sure as hell is horrible though.
He's right, modern feminism is hypocritical. However his concluding by telling me to fuck off makes me not want to take him seriously either.
The thing is modern feminists don't want equality among genders, 'cause if both genders were equal they wouldn't be able to go crying to big daddy (and by 'big daddy' I mean the government etc.) every time a man so much as looked at them funny. Meanwhile they can do and say whatever the hell they want.
The thing is modern feminists don't want equality among genders, 'cause if both genders were equal they wouldn't be able to go crying to big daddy (and by 'big daddy' I mean the government etc.) every time a man so much as looked at them funny. Meanwhile they can do and say whatever the hell they want.
