Sexism; Or The Turning of Tables

Recommended Videos

Jake Lewis Clayton

New member
Apr 22, 2010
136
0
0
Colour-Scientist said:
These threads are so super.
Prepare for most people here to agree with you.

I understand your pain, I hate it when previously oppressed people get a few double standards in their favour too. What'll they want next, equal rights? Pfft...

Look, I'll tell you the same thing I told my boyfriend, if you want the male-only gyms, chubby male models and to be able to poke fun at women in ads then grand, not a bother. I'll gladly take all the other benefits you have in society that are actually important and trade.

Seriously, the fact that these are the only things you can think of it's clear that you've never actually been discriminated against in a serious manner.


EDIT: I'm not saying other men haven't been, because I know people will jump on that, I'm just saying what you pointed out is really trivial.

If a young boy is raped say 14, by an older woman, and that woman then becomes pregnant, the boy has no legal right to force termination.

But has to be responsible for child support, for a kid he did not want, from an act he did not commit willingly.

Now tell me how that isn't sexism, stop getting off saying real feminists only want equality, because women surpassed equality 15 years ago.


Yet there are laws in place around the world protecting especially female rape victims right to a termination.
 

LuckyClover95

New member
Jun 7, 2010
715
0
0
Joshimodo said:
A while ago, a sports commentator was at the centre of a huge controversy after he made a comment about a female referee while his microphone was still on. As far as I recall, it wasn't anything particularly lewd, but that is irrelevant. He made the comment, and after a massive media frenzy over it, he lost his job. Overreaction, sure, but he should have either had the mic off, or not made the comment. His fault entirely.

What struck me is that a few weeks after that incident, there was a story about a female newscaster commenting on air about her colleague's penis size. She wasn't fired, and from what I remember, she didn't even get into much trouble about it.
Actually, it was different - we all make jokes about penis size, her joke about penis size isn't necessarily sexist, a man could have made that joke and it'd be the same. I wouldn't know as I haven't heard the joke, but doesn't sound like sexism more like someone insulting someone else.
The sports commentator is different - I have heard his rant, and before I heard it it sounded like a dramatization of some sexist jokes and didn't think it was a big deal, but when I heard it I was disgusted - the sports commentator says, in all seriousness, that the woman shouldn't be doing this and "What is this game coming to"


But as for the main point - I sort of agree. I'd say it was about equal nowadays, wouldn't say men or women have it worse.
 

DJROC

New member
Dec 15, 2010
31
0
0
Talshere said:
Even if we accept your definition as the absolute truth, "social perception needs to change to allow women to expect the same pay", assuming they already don't, the only people who cant actually achieve this.......Are them. Thus making my statement true. Since they start on equal pay. They must ask for the pay rise that makes them equal. Noone can ask for them...............................If they did then your contradicting your own "Women shouldn't be subservient" statement.

I AM CONFUSED!!! YOUR ARGUMENT MAKES NO SENSE >.<
Hypothetically, let's say that employees are required to negotiate their pay with their employers. We would expect those that can negotiate better than others will get higher wages than those that cannot. Hypothetically, let's also say that men are more often encouraged to negotiate than women. We would then expect that women would be paid less than men, not for their lack of skill at their actual job, but for their lack of skill at negotiating. Even if every woman asked for a higher wage, the virtue of asking doesn't magically bestow the ability to negotiate better. If we wanted to change that, it would be the responsibility of the community- men and women; fathers and mothers; teachers and peers; everyone- to socially change by encourage women to negotiate more often so that they can be better at it. Then we would see a wage gap lessen since more women would be as skilled negotiators as men.

On the other side, employers may expect that they can pressure women to accept lower wages.

We have people in our lives that buck the system, whom we can point to and say "See, she did it, why can't everyone else?" But societies simply don't work that way. If I may ask a personal question, does every female coworker of your mother's receive pay equal to their male coworkers? If so, that would seem to indicate that we could say her company, which is a particular community, has eliminated the expectation of women to receive a lower wage. But we cannot extrapolate that to a national scale. And if those other women don't have equal wages, then what are they to do? Quit, and then let their employer hire another women who is willing to work for less? But I'll stop here, since if I continue along this route it'll turn into a "this is why capitalism sucks" issue and may be a little far off topic.

Talshere said:
7: Im not saying that 1985 was worse than now...Well, I am, but that 2011 the fact that "women must take a mans name" is simply not true. A woman may do whatever the hell she wants with her own name. Noone looks down on a woman for not taking a mans name. In the same way people dont look down on having sex out of wedlock. Or having children without being married. This stigma ONLY exists for men taking womens names.

I AM CONFUSED!!!!! ARGUMENT IS CONTRARY TO YOUR ARGUMENT >..<
A woman may do whatever the hell she wants with her own name, and so can a man. But I flat out disagree that nobody has an opinion about the taking of names, or that everybody is totally fine with sex outside of wedlock, or that the social opinion of such situations is equal for each sex. Case in point: "Slut" is an insult that applies to women who have lots of sex with lots of men; "Stud" is a compliment that applies to men who have lots of sex with lots of women.
 

Phaerim

New member
Sep 15, 2010
139
0
0
"Large" models and girls are becoming more frequent and accepted. They are still wonderful people, who deserve the same respect as any other woman. Women respect other fat women.

Fat guys are pethetic losers in the eyes of both genders.

This is horrible stereotype and generalization, I know, but taking a look at how my college dorms fat guy and fat girl is being treated, from this perspective I can understand what you mean.

Seems like societys general idea is that when a male reaches maturity, they stop having feelings and then it is ok to mess them up.
 

Phaerim

New member
Sep 15, 2010
139
0
0
Generic Gamer said:
Phaerim said:
Women respect other fat women.


I don't know how much female literature you read or how much time you spend talking to women as a group but...nope. Women as a group, especially IN a group, are incredibly predatory about other women's appearance in a way that almost none of the men I've met in my entire life can rival.

Fat women are certainly not respected, it's just that women are generally more subtle about their insults than to wander up Autismo The Great style and go 'LOL UR FAT'.
You make the assumption that I believe what I am saying is a truth. It is a mere observation from my own personal life, that I used as an example as to why I could understand the POV of the op. Of course some women are douchbags against fat girls aswell. But in my experience, not so much as males (especially atheltic males) are against their own gender.
 

Pontus Hashis

New member
Feb 22, 2010
226
0
0
Sexism towards men exists. I have been affected, multiple times.
Sexim towards women exists. I have fought it, multiple times.

Saying that it's minor towards men, and that they have privilages, is BS. I just realised, as I was just about to say I'd love the girls advantagers, the grass is greener on the other side.
You can't really talk subjectivly about it.
 

CrystalShadow

don't upset the insane catgirl
Apr 11, 2009
3,829
0
0
trooper6 said:
intheweeds said:
trooper6 said:
I'm going to be honest. These boards and becoming more and more overrun with really privileged straight, white guys going on and on about how they are the real victims of society. These boards are becoming full of casual sexism against women. And casual racism, and casual homophobia. It is becoming a really hostile environment and I just don't know how much longer I want to stay here. And I've been here since 2006.
I agree although I haven't been around nearly as long as you. I guess it's a tiny bit acceptable to me only because people seem to be at least trying to have reasonable adult conversations about it. People who disagree are not flamed out, but conversed with. I'm a woman and gay for the record,I often give a dissenting view in threads i think are a little crazy and no one has ever freaked out on me for it.

Yeah it does stink of white male privilege in here, but don't leave! if everyone who thought like you left it really would become that bad.
The conversations aren't really reasonable though. They don't flame people (because they don't want to get reported)--but these conversations are not reasonable. They are full of complete outrageousness, logical fallacies, disingenuous argumentation....and I swear, nowadays we're getting 3-4 of these threads a day.

It is getting really, really tiring. Because these guys who insist they have it so much worse than women are not going to listen to reason or even look the reality on the ground. They just want to further the oppression of women and keep their own privilege. The patriarchy now has such an awesome new strategy. Punch women in the face and then claim that they are the injured ones because a) their knuckles are bruised b) people keep calling men face-punchers and that is stereotyping and oppressive.
Argh. This in particular, and well, really this thread in general reminds me so much of the impossible arguments you can get into on this kind of subject.

For instance, I've seen your argument used by both sides in a yelling match between some radical feminists and transsexuals.

Since both sides insist the other is privileged, and neither is capable or willing to admit to it... You get both sides claiming the other is being oppressive, and both then using your exact argument as a counter-claim.

It'd be vaguely amusing for it's inane stupidity if you were an impartial third party, but since I most certainly am not...

That's where this becomes so incredibly convoluted though. When you've got an obviously priviliged group abusing another, it's usually easy to spot.

When you have an abused minority arguing with people who claim to represent another abused group (who in this particular case aren't a minority, but in more general cases probably would be), and especially when various aspects of the argument suggest they are indeed abusing eachother in some sense...

Well I really can't call it anything other than a complete and utter headache. Unfortunately, it's not one that seems resolvable without some outside influence that is sufficiently neutral and respected by both sides to arbitrate it somewhat.
And good luck on finding anyone like that... >_<

It's enough to drive a person completely mad. Which I guess, to be fair, it did.
 

Daveman

has tits and is on fire
Jan 8, 2009
4,202
0
0
Joshimodo said:
Daveman said:
at least that's how it is with your shit US comedy shows, it's pretty different with the Comedy we have in the UK.
I'd respond to your whole post, but I don't have time right now. However, I will point out that I'm not from the US. I'm from the UK. Might have undermined your validity there.
Meh. A stupid mistake? Yes. Undermine my validity? Definitely not.
 

cobra_ky

New member
Nov 20, 2008
1,643
0
0
CrystalShadow said:
Argh. This in particular, and well, really this thread in general reminds me so much of the impossible arguments you can get into on this kind of subject.

For instance, I've seen your argument used by both sides in a yelling match between some radical feminists and transsexuals.

Since both sides insist the other is privileged, and neither is capable or willing to admit to it... You get both sides claiming the other is being oppressive, and both then using your exact argument as a counter-claim.

It'd be vaguely amusing for it's inane stupidity if you were an impartial third party, but since I most certainly am not...

That's where this becomes so incredibly convoluted though. When you've got an obviously priviliged group abusing another, it's usually easy to spot.

When you have an abused minority arguing with people who claim to represent another abused group (who in this particular case aren't a minority, but in more general cases probably would be), and especially when various aspects of the argument suggest they are indeed abusing eachother in some sense...

Well I really can't call it anything other than a complete and utter headache. Unfortunately, it's not one that seems resolvable without some outside influence that is sufficiently neutral and respected by both sides to arbitrate it somewhat.
And good luck on finding anyone like that... >_<

It's enough to drive a person completely mad. Which I guess, to be fair, it did.
Reading <a href=http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2011/03/feminism-101-situational-and-relative.html>this might help. in particular this part:

And when "progress for women" comes at the expense of, say, the gay community, that's not actually progress for women at all. That's just progress for straight women. When it comes at the expense of women of color, that's just progress for white women. When it comes at the expense of trans women, that's just progress for cis women. And so on.

That's why an inclusive feminism is the only feminism that ultimately makes any sense?and an inclusive feminism is only possible when privileged women (white women, straight women, cis women, thin women, able-bodied women, Western women, wealthy women, employed women, etc.) acknowledge their relative privilege to other women.
Pretty much everyone is privileged in one aspect or another. And as long as people aren't willing to recognize their privilege, aren't even willing to entertain the possibility that it might exist, well, there's only so far the dialogue can go.
 

Vrud

New member
Mar 11, 2009
218
0
0
Joshimodo said:
When portraying family scenes in "funny" adverts (usually to do with insurance, or something along those lines), men appear to be nothing more than bumbling idiots, with the woman in the ad sitting to the side shaking her head and rolling her eyes, effectively acting like the male is some kind of pet doing something silly and amusing.
However, those same scenes tend to treat the woman as an unlikable *****, whereas the man's idiocy is empathetic. :/ It's not really that flattering to either gender.
 

JasonKaotic

New member
Mar 18, 2009
1,444
0
0
There are more irksome examples than the ones you pointed out, but I mostly agree with you. Sexism exists on both parts, but sexism towards men is almost completely ignored. And that's one of the main examples of why sexism towards men is worse than it is towards women in today's society.
Don't get me wrong, sexism towards women annoys the hell out of me, but people do need to be more aware of this.
 

UltraXan

New member
Mar 1, 2011
288
0
0
"It's sexist if men do it."

I couldn't agree more with that statement.

Also, on the note of that list of privileges that men have, I have this to say: Holy shit, that actually makes sense. I totally agree with the "Men have a near 0% chance of getting raped" statement.
 

BRex21

New member
Sep 24, 2010
582
0
0
Gonna mash together a few of your posts here.
xXxJessicaxXx said:
I'm sorry but you are completely wrong there, and most of the time men will not even consider an average woman as a girlfriend. They have to look perfect.
I seriously doubt this is the case There is a pretty slim ratio of perfect 10 women to men, if all men only chose perfect 10s then the vast majority go home alone. Quite frankly i hate it when women generalize and say all men have to like the same thing.

xXxJessicaxXx said:
But women do have it worse off than men...Women will earn less again than the short man you mention...

I don't see how pointing that out when someone is arguing the opposite is wrong.

I find it interesting that mostly people have picked up on my post rather than argue with the male OP for example.
The problem here is that youre assuming everyone is ganging up on you because your a woman, not because you are expressing an unpopular opinion with no real science to back it up.
For the most part if a man and a woman work the same job chances are the man will be more open to overtime, relocation, and to taking riskier behaviour. I read a good book a while back, its based an a peer reviewed and fairly in depth study of the wage gap:
here is a synopsis. http://www.warrenfarrell.net/Summary/
a link to the first in a series of videos the author did about it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cb_6v-JQ13Q
It shows that the majority of the wage gap comes from the different choices men and women are making. I'm not saying there isn't sexism, neither does the author, its just that not all of a womans problems are based on everyone else.
 

dystopiaINC

New member
Aug 13, 2010
498
0
0
xXxJessicaxXx said:
Joshimodo said:
Please enlighten me as to what genuine benefits men have in society now?
Well in comparison to 'we get made fun of in adverts'

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 relatively low.

8. On average, I am taught to fear walking alone after dark in average public spaces much less than my female counterparts are.

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 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. My elected representatives are mostly people of my own sex. The more prestigious and powerful the elected position, the more this is true.

15. When I ask to see ?the person in charge,? odds are 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 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.

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. Even if I sleep with a lot of women, there is no chance that I will be seriously labeled a ?slut,? nor is there any male counterpart to ?slut-bashing.?

25. I do not have to worry about the message my wardrobe sends about my sexual availability.

26. My clothing is typically less expensive and better-constructed than women?s clothing for the same social status. While I have fewer options, my clothes will probably fit better than a woman?s without tailoring.

27. The grooming regimen expected of me is relatively cheap and consumes little time.
28. If I buy a new car, chances are I?ll be offered a better price than a woman buying the same car.

29. If I?m not conventionally attractive, the disadvantages are relatively small and easy to ignore.

30. I can be loud with no fear of being called a shrew. I can be aggressive with no fear of being called a *****.

31. 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.)

32. 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.

33. My ability to make important decisions and my capability in general will never be questioned depending on what time of the month it is.

34. I will never be expected to change my name upon marriage or questioned if I don?t change my name.

35. The decision to hire me will not be based on assumptions about whether or not I might choose to have a family sometime soon.

36. Every major religion in the world is led primarily by people of my own sex. Even God, in most major religions, is pictured as male.

37. Most major religions argue that I should be the head of my household, while my wife and children should be subservient to me.

38. 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.

39. If I have children with my girlfriend or wife, I can expect her to do most of the basic childcare such as changing diapers and feeding.

40. If I have children with my 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.

41. Assuming I am heterosexual, 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 rarer.

42. In general, I am under much 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.

43. If I am heterosexual, it?s incredibly unlikely that I?ll ever be beaten up by a spouse or lover.
44. Complete strangers generally do not walk up to me on the street and tell me to ?smile.?

45. Sexual harassment on the street virtually never happens to me. I do not need to plot my movements through public space in order to avoid being sexually harassed, or to mitigate sexual harassment.

45. On average, I am not interrupted by women as often as women are interrupted by men.

46. I have the privilege of being unaware of my male privilege.

taken from: http://www.amptoons.com/blog/the-male-privilege-checklist/

You guys really don't understand how much better you have it.
did you even read the list you just posted? most of this are just, well, stupid. and some are out right false or else so miniscule it might as well be unmentioned. personally i wouldn't even notice if i didn't "benefit" from anything on that list.
 

cobra_ky

New member
Nov 20, 2008
1,643
0
0
dystopiaINC said:
did you even read the list you just posted? most of this are just, well, stupid. and some are out right false or else so miniscule it might as well be unmentioned. personally i wouldn't even notice if i didn't "benefit" from anything on that list.
Thank you for so aptly demonstrating number 46.