SEXISM! What's with the standards?

[OtherSideofSky]

Yeah, well call it reparations for women being treated like animals for....thousands of years. I'm sorry worse than animals. I'm pretty sure the family dog was treated better than the wife, in some cases.

This. Did. Not. Happen.
Your statement betrays an utter ignorance of historical reality. The actual, incredibly varied, circumstances of people throughout history do not line up with the myth, created in the 1960s by sociologists masquerading as historians and anthropologists in order to make themselves look especially glorious, that you are repeating as fact in order to attempt the justification of systematic discrimination. Ancient cultures afforded women rights far in excess of the slavery you imagine (owning property, running businesses, in some cases occupying positions of political and religious authority) and rape and domestic violence have been serious crimes in Western societies for hundreds of years (we're just now fighting to get men the same legal protection). Roman women even had the option of a quite effective morning after pill. The condition you refer to as oppression was actually the result of a very, very important social structure designed to keep women out of harms way. This was important because women are the limiting factor on the growth of any human population and any society that did not do this was therefore destined not to be around much longer. These systems were generally as limiting and repressive for men as they were for women and represented interlocking sets of privileges and disadvantages (remember, most of that socially visible work men had to do was work that was likely to get you killed), not a system of oppression like that which existed, and in many ways still exists, based on socioeconomic class.

We, as a society, like to imagine ourselves better than our forebears and one of the ways we judge the value of a society is the way it treats women (just look at the things we say about anyone we go to war with. Its been a tried and true tactic for playing up the immorality of an enemy for centuries. This kind of propaganda is where the idea of the entirely chimerical medieval laws which supposedly allowed feudal lords to freely rape peasant women came from). As a result, many among us have a distinct tendency to greatly exaggerate the historical mistreatment of women, sometimes by repeating inaccurate data, sometimes by inventing out of whole cloth as you have done (the "family dog" as more than a beast of utility is a relatively recent invention. There were few pets, as we would understand the term, in the ancient world) or by stating the conditions endured by women while omitting those suffered by the men of their class (you know they're selling something when they want you to compare a peasant woman to a king and call it a fair measure of gender discrimination).

Do you have some online sources for this information or some terms I should use in a google search to be able to get to it?

No. Unfortunately you, like the rest of us, will have to study history the hard way. I assure you that if there were a quick Google link I would not have taken out nearly as many loans in order to formally study history. A Google search should certainly provide you with confirmation on the specific details I mentioned (I think two of them have even been featured on Cracked, although Cracked provides no citations and is therefore a poor source. Certainly, you'll be able to find court records of laws against rape and "wife beating" so strong they were routinely exploited by professional con-artists for the past 200 years in the English speaking world. Said crimes were also often punished by lynch mobs). Beyond that? Study anthropology, read primary sources (nothing will tell you more about the rights of people in the past than reading their legal codes).

One point you may find interesting are the differences between hunter-gatherers and agricultural society (gender roles in hunter-gatherer societies are now thought to be much less divergent and far less rigid. Many of the divisions that affect us to this day came with the advent of settled agriculture). You may also want to note the fact that men do not display anything remotely close to the level of in-group bias that women do (i.e., women identify with, side with and seek to protect and benefit other women to a degree far greater than that to which men relate to and identify with other men). This means that men occupying positions of power does not benefit other men in the way patriarchy theory commonly supposes it to (no one ever thought to make any scientific attempt at testing that particular theory before hailing it as fact) because men in power do not act in the interests of or sympathize with men in general. As such, the only women definitely disadvantaged by most positions of power being held by men were the women at the top of the social pyramid who might otherwise have occupied those positions.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Equality is something everybody should strive for, and if more people did, perhaps the Radical Feminist movement wouldn't have gotten so large so fast.

Technically, Radical Feminists are the ones who believe that sexism is so entrenched in society that a major restructuring is needed to get rid of it, not scary straw feminists.

How is it worse for women?

When a woman becomes strong and independent, she's risen above her stigma of weakness, and she can take pride in that face, even though many sexist pricks will still think little of her.

If a man DOESN'T become strong, independent, manly, macho, or whatever, he's viewed as a weakling, a pansy, gay, or any number of retarded little groups and epithets pinned on a man not acting the way a man should.

You are saying (quite truthfully) that a "failed" man is equated to being a woman. Ok, maybe a woman who becomes too strong and independant to ignore might get honourary male status and
not be labelled an ***** for challenging the genders roles, but if so, that grudging respect is only given by a select few people. To the man on the street, she's just a woman, just a failed man.

Men and women are, believe it or not, almost equal in terms of sexual assault/rape by either gender, and favoring one over the other isn't helping.

That's simply not true. Men are overwhelmingly (but not exclusively) the perpetrators, women are overwhelming (but not exclusively) the victims.

but you completely ignored the fact that men are just as easily destroyed by false accusations as women.

Assuming that a false accusation is going to ruin someone's life (which is quite possible, but hardly inevitable), the false accusation rate is about the same for rape as it is for anything else, which makes it far, far less common than actual rapes that don't make it to court.

Also: Those 'rules' are complete crap. Rapists NEVER rape women because they were out late, wearing skirts, or anything of the like, there is ALWAYS a mental motivation for it.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. Hell, 90%+ of rapes are committed by teh victim's close friends or family. But society tends to overlook that, if the victim could have prevented it, but didn't, if it's their fault, it means it can't happen to Good People. It's a disgusting example of the Just World Fallacy.

Spoiler: snip

Did you actually just call someone "missy"? For reals?

It's really frightening to live in a world where you can have your reputation dragged through the mud by the simple accusation of sexual misconduct, long before your guilt or innocence is ever established.

By the same token, I imagine it's even more frightening to live in world where you're constantly at risk of being the victim of sexual misconduct, and you'll get YOUR reputation dragged through the mud if you try to report it after it happens.

Both men and women would be well served to stop talking past one another on the issue of sexism and recognize that there are justifiable causes for concern on both sides of the ledger. And really, this forum is male dominated, and on more than one occasion has proven to be a festering pit of barely constrained misogyny, so I don't blame the resident female posters for being a little sensitive.

Exactly.

 

[Darius Brogan]

snip

I don't do individual quotes, 'cuz I hate giant walls-o-text, but here goes.

1) Most (not all) Radical Feminists are out and out 'man-haters' who will do anything they can to insult, degrade, or otherwise belittle men, out of some deep-seated need to 'pay us back' for centuries of subjugation, despite much of that not actually happening.

2) Basically, yeah, it's dually sexist with insulting implications for both genders.
A man's not strong enough? Equate him with a woman.
Stupid outlook, because I know a number of women that could turn me inside out. One of whom is a three time national Tae Kwon Do champion in the States, and happens to be my aunt.

3) That's not true either. Women report their abuse almost three times more often than men do, because a man reporting abuse of pretty much any variety is un-manly, and it's embarrassing. There is man vs women, man vs man, woman vs man, and woman vs woman. Statistically speaking, women perpetrate assault almost as often as men do.

4) I understand your point here, but I was trying to point out that women who are destroyed by an accusation being taken as false, are really just as common as men who are destroyed by a false accusation taken as true.
I've seen both happen and, quite frankly, both problems need to be solved somehow.

5) Society is completely fucked up. Lets just get that out there.
There was a man in Australia acquitted of rape because a judge thought the woman's skinny jeans would be 'too difficult to remove without her permission'... Fucked up.
Rape is the absolute worst thing you can do to a human, male or female, because you destroy them emotionally, but they're alive to re-live the event over and over.

You can recover from rape somewhat, but I guarantee you, you will never, ever be the same again.

 

[Thaluikhain]

1) Most (not all) Radical Feminists are out and out 'man-haters' who will do anything they can to insult, degrade, or otherwise belittle men, out of some deep-seated need to 'pay us back' for centuries of subjugation, despite much of that not actually happening.

This isn't at all true. You'll find an overwhelming hatred of male culture, perhaps, but not so much at men in general.

2) Basically, yeah, it's dually sexist with insulting implications for both genders.
A man's not strong enough? Equate him with a woman.
Stupid outlook, because I know a number of women that could turn me inside out. One of whom is a three time national Tae Kwon Do champion in the States, and happens to be my aunt.

Oh, I agree with that, it's something everyone should be trying to get rid of, it's in nobody's interest. But bad for all does not equate to as bad for all.

3) That's not true either. Women report their abuse almost three times more often than men do, because a man reporting abuse of pretty much any variety is un-manly, and it's embarrassing. There is man vs women, man vs man, woman vs man, and woman vs woman. Statistically speaking, women perpetrate assault almost as often as men do.

I'm not saying that all sexual assault is male against women, just that the mjaority is. If is was simply a question of men not wanting to admit to being sexually assaulted by women, why are there much more male on male than female on female cases reported?

4) I understand your point here, but I was trying to point out that women who are destroyed by an accusation being taken as false, are really just as common as men who are destroyed by a false accusation taken as true.
I've seen both happen and, quite frankly, both problems need to be solved somehow.

Again, they are both problems that need to be eliminated, but the rates of false rape convictions are nowhere near the number of actual rapes.

You are drawing false equivalencies again. Just because it's a smaller issue doesn't mean that the issue doesn't matter, but it's commonly blown out of proportion to somehow invalidate the shocking actual statistics regarding rape.

5) Society is completely fucked up. Lets just get that out there.
There was a man in Australia acquitted of rape because a judge thought the woman's skinny jeans would be 'too difficult to remove without her permission'... Fucked up.
Rape is the absolute worst thing you can do to a human, male or female, because you destroy them emotionally, but they're alive to re-live the event over and over.

No argument there.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Double post, stupid new/old captchas.

 

[Arakasi]

OP, that is fucking terrible.

I think I would quit society if that happened to me.
I'd litterally leave the country.

Edit, I spent some time reading this thread and this person:

Oh hah, okay so you're just BSing this, now trying to pretend you can cite people you haven't met. Well the only group you can speak for, namely the people you've met, are insufficient.

Is missing the point entirely.
So a man can't use a couple of anecdotes about people he has met to make a point, but a woman can use an anecdote to practically destroy a man's life?

This whole doctrine of men needing more evidence because they could be lying while women are perfect moral angels who never lie needs to be destroyed.
It's fucking stupid, and I'm fucking sick of it.

 

[Colour Scientist]

I'm sorry about what happened to your friend. No modifiers on that.

But for every man who loses his job due to a false claim, ten men sexually harass at the workplace and face no repercussions. For ever man who gets thrown in jail for a false rape claim, one hundred men rape and then go free. For every man who loses his kids in a divorce, ten beat their wives to death before she even has the chance to speak to a lawyer.

It's always wrong when someone suffers for something they didn't do, but cases like this are exceptional because the opposite is so common. If you take a wide view of our society, there's no way a man can say he has it harder unless he is choking on his own male privilege. And this is coming from a man who has no shame whatsoever in being male. I don't hate my gender. I don't wish I was a woman. I simply have an honest view of the way the world works, and sadly a fundamental facet of that is the subjugation and marginalization of women throughout every strata of our society.

If we had a thread made every time the opposite of this incident happened, i.e. where a woman was sexually harassed, made a claim, and had it dismissed or straight-up ignored, then the forums would be flooded. Men don't have to deal with sexism every day of their lives, so when they do encounter it, they seem so shocked and indignant. Truth is, every once-in-a-lifetime complaint I see here from men happens daily to most women.

I'm not going to add anything more because I'm really trying to stay away from this thread but I needed to point out how awesome this post is.

 

[Arakasi]

But for every man who loses his job due to a false claim, ten men sexually harass at the workplace and face no repercussions. For ever man who gets thrown in jail for a false rape claim, one hundred men rape and then go free. For every man who loses his kids in a divorce, ten beat their wives to death before she even has the chance to speak to a lawyer.

I'd love to see where you got that data.
Seriously. Show me.

I also noticed you missed the part where males are abused too. How convenient.

It's always wrong when someone suffers for something they didn't do, but cases like this are exceptional because the opposite is so common. If you take a wide view of our society, there's no way a man can say he has it harder unless he is choking on his own male privilege.

That's just plain-utter-fucking bullshit.
I can barely even put it into words, but I'll give it a go.
Everywhere a man walks, he must walk on eggshells, because of situations, situations like the one in the OP, where a perfectly innocent person gets their life practically DESTROYED over accidentally doing something that is misinterpreted as sexism.
I mean fuck me, we should be living in fear of shit like that.
So, how does this make me, a non-sexist, supporter of equal rights, privileged?
Because I can get away with sexist remarks towards women? NEWS FLASH, I CAN'T AND DON'T WANT TO!

This is not equality, not even close. Both sides have it bad and that needs to be fixed.

 

[Doitpow]

UUUUUUUGGHHHHHHHH



Being a woman on this forum is getting fucking tiring.

God I know what you mean, and I'm a guy.

It seems like 90% of these forums is "I like equal rights but LOOK WHAT THIS WOMAN/BLACK GUY/ANIMAL DID!"

I'm not sure what they're trying to accomplish, but it feels like they're waiting for a woman/black guy/animal to agree with them and justify what they're saying. It smacks of a deluded sense of entitlement to me. It really pisses me off. A lot.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

God I know what you mean, and I'm a guy.

It seems like 90% of these forums is "I like equal rights but LOOK WHAT THIS WOMAN/BLACK GUY/ANIMAL DID!"

I'm not sure what they're trying to accomplish, but it feels like they're waiting for a woman/black guy/animal to agree with them and justify what they're saying. It smacks of a deluded sense of entitlement to me. It really pisses me off. A lot.

I don't even get pissed off. I just feel really tired. Like I need a sleep.

Of course there's also the possibility I genuinely do need a sleep. But still. Exhausting!

Maybe it's the fact that I went through the same morally indignant/male outrage phase in my early 20's, and made a lot of these same retarded arguments, that they're as wearisome as they are. Familiarity breeds contempt, and what not.

I'm willing to bet that if this forum wasn't such a teeming nest of late teen/early 20's forever alones who are terrified/resentful of women, you wouldn't see so much seething bitterness and OTT prosthelytizing every time a gender politics thread appears.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Also, your assumption that a woman couldn't beat you in a fight(I think that's what you said, the first paragraph makes no sense grammatically, I can't be sure what it says) just because she's a woman, is dramatically false.

Nope, I actually said the opposite.

Do you think the girls who were physically bigger than me and could probably punch me to the ground if they wanted to ever had to fight?

How is that ambiguous? I suppose I should have used parentheses, but I can't see any way you could have missed the meaning here unless you were just skimming.

I don't think I've made a post yet where you haven't inverted my point completely, and then in all irony accused me of putting words in your mouth. However, I'm willing to accept that maybe I'm not communicating as clearly as I could so I'll try and spell it out more clearly one last time.

Also, I would very much like to see some proof behind your assertion that women are the target of violence less than men.

Okay.. I can't think of any study which specifically excludes gang violence off the top of my head, but let's look at some opportunistic "predatory" crimes which are unlikely to be associated with gang violence.

Spoiler: Saving Space

I apologise for a slightly random cross-section of statistics.

Between 1971 and 1974, Michael Pratt surveyed 1010 incidents of mugging (street robbery) in the UK. Of those incidents, he found that 815 were targeted at men (so about 80%).

1987, and the US bureau of justice statistics reported that 65% of robbery victims overall were male. Note that this includes robberies which occurred during sexual assaults.

In 2008, the Australian institute of criminology reports that men are 3 times more likely to be subject to armed robbery (33.5 per 100,000 people, as opposed to 9.9, meaning about 70% of crimes were against men).

The pattern continues pretty much across the developed world throughout the last few decades, for practically all crimes from homicide to common assault. The only violent crime women are more likely to suffer is sexual assault (and arguably intimate partner violence, although that kind of depends how you look at it).

Your earlier point about not having to cite sources for common knowledge might apply here.

To summarize, stop putting words in my mouth, and violence should be examined by how severe the violent act is, not by who the victim is.

Sorry? I've put words in your mouth?

How many sitcoms have you watched where women slap men and people laugh? How many sitcoms have you watched where men slap women and people laugh?

You said that, right?

I explained why that is. Basically, that men are seen as more able to deal with violence and reap the social rewards of being seen like that.

This is why women or feminism haven't magicked it away. You already are equal before the law, if you want I will dig out the legal definition of assault and demonstrate this. What you're talking about is an issue of perception, and it's an issue of perception which men (in general) benefit from.

My point is this, why are you blaming people for laughing when you get slapped? They aren't laughing because they hate you, they're laughing because they believe (however wrongly) that it doesn't really hurt or affect you because you're a man. Do you think it would be better for you if people believed that if they slapped you you'd be really upset and start crying, so they shouldn't laugh at it?

I don't know how to make this any simpler. You can't expect people not to laugh if you get slapped unless you can acknowledge that it hurts you.

Women are perfectly capable of defending themselves if they are trained, and likely unable if not, but that's also true for men. But again, what's your point? What bearing does this have on the existence of this gender bias?

Then, you said that. Again, proving the point.

You want violence against you to be treated just as seriously, yet you try and suggest that noone should be afraid of it because somehow anyone can defend themselves if attacked as long as they're "trained". Well guess what, not everyone is "trained" to that level, and if they were then the people attacking them would be trained too. You don't live in a fucking Kung Fu movie. You live the same real world that I do where sometimes people are bigger or stronger or better or fighting or, god forbid, armed.

Where is your case that I should treat violence against you just as seriously as I do against women if you're not even afraid of it. If you don't think it's "serious" to have someone attack you because you can afford to believe that no serious harm could possibly come to you. That's the fucking gender bias right there, that's the privilege I've been trying to bring home to you.

You don't have to live in terror of being stabbed or raped or beaten to pulp, you're absolutely right to prepare to defend yourself and to encourage women to do the same. But fucking acknowledge these risk before you start talking about how you want violence to be treated equally.

Making the perception of violence equal doesn't start by putting a gag on anyone who laughs at a sitcom, it starts with you making the basic acknowledgement of vulnerability, that maybe sometimes violence can actually hurt you. Because if you're not going to accept that, if you're going to keep believing that you're invincible, then why shouldn't people laugh when you get hit? It's not like there's any harm in it.

 

[spartan231490]

snip

You are seriously mis-interpreting my point, it seems that we actually believe virtually the same thing. I have only been arguing that the bias exists. I also offered that, as a society, we take violence too seriously when no harm is done or intended. I never meant to imply that violence shouldn't be taken seriously at all, or that extreme situations don't warrant very serious attention. I was just trying to say that violence shouldn't be a felony level crime when no harm is done or intended. I also offered an opinion as to the origin of the bias, but only as a side-comment, a musing, nothing more. You made your point clear, lets see if I can do the same.

I never said that people laughing at guys getting slapped was the problem, I just used it as an example to show the existence of the problem. Further, I also never said I don't take violence against myself seriously, at least I didn't intend to. What I was trying to say is that I view violence as serious only in proportion to the seriousness of the violence.

To use our slapping example, I find that to be on a similar level to being rude to someone. It's not nice, and it shouldn't be done, but no harm is really done. If someone starts throwing punches or even kicks, but nobody ends up with any worse than bruises, maybe a broken nose, then I consider it a little more serious, but still not really criminal. I don't think any legal authorities should get involved until bones are broken, and even then I don't think it should be a felony level offense until damage more severe than broken bones is done(note, I count broken joints as worse than broken bones), or if there was obviously an intent to do so or worse.

Now, I'm not saying that my opinion should be the law in specifics. This is how I view violence and don't really expect society to view it the same exactly. But I think that we need to consider violence in proportion to what harm is done, and especially that very minor violence shouldn't be viewed very seriously at all. It shouldn't be a joke, or acceptable, but it shouldn't be very serious.

I offered my opinion about how it might have started merely as a side note. I wasn't trying to make an argument out of it, or use it to support what I was saying, it was an unconnected opinion.

Thanks for the proof, I wasn't trying to be belligerent, I just wanted to see some studies because it's directly counter to what I would expect.

My comment about training was to emphasize that without some kind of martial training or experience, men can't really defend themselves either, but with it either gender can do so. Just commenting on how stupid the bias is, that wasn't intended to support my argument, it was just a statement. On a side note, it doesn't take much training to defend yourself, it's also easier than most people expect to defend against an armed opponent(Not easy, but much easier), though I suppose your comment about the attacker being trained is worth consideration, but again I was simply commenting on the stupidity of the bias, I wasn't trying to make any kind of argument beyond that.

Just because it bears repeating, I don't take violence lightly because no harm could possibly come to me, I take violence lightly if no serious harm comes to me. I'm sorry that was unclear.

Again, I never meant to make light of the risk of serious violence, I merely meant to say that we shouldn't send people to prison for a few harmless bruises. If violence results in serious harm then yes, it should be taken very seriously, but only in proportion to the harm done or intended.

My comments about training just arise from the fact that I love martial arts and I can't talk about violence without bringing it up. I also see a lot of misconceptions about the martial arts that I have a hard time not commenting about. I'm sorry about the misunderstanding, I hope this clears it up.

 

[spartan231490]

These threads never fail to depress me, but I never seem able to escape them. The amount of well-intentioned who advocate actions that will inevitably take society further away from what they profess to want is just tiring.

 

[Nexxis]

God I know what you mean, and I'm a guy.

It seems like 90% of these forums is "I like equal rights but LOOK WHAT THIS WOMAN/BLACK GUY/ANIMAL DID!"

I'm not sure what they're trying to accomplish, but it feels like they're waiting for a woman/black guy/animal to agree with them and justify what they're saying. It smacks of a deluded sense of entitlement to me. It really pisses me off. A lot.

I don't even get pissed off. I just feel really tired. Like I need a sleep.

Of course there's also the possibility I genuinely do need a sleep. But still. Exhausting!

Maybe it's the fact that I went through the same morally indignant/male outrage phase in my early 20's, and made a lot of these same retarded arguments, that they're as wearisome as they are. Familiarity breeds contempt, and what not.

I'm willing to bet that if this forum wasn't such a teeming nest of late teen/early 20's forever alones who are terrified/resentful of women, you wouldn't see so much seething bitterness and OTT prosthelytizing every time a gender politics thread appears.

Finally, some bloody SENSE on these boards. I was getting the impression that The Escapist was solely made up of people like that fat Capcom prick who keeps insisting that sexual harrassment is just comme il faut.

Not entirely XD. I would post on this thread, but there would not be enough space for me to vent up here. I've heard some things that I've not only found to be stupid, but also very insulting to my gender (and race in some cases). I usually just wait for some fairly sensible people to post their opinions and it usually cheers me up. Especially when one gender comes to the defense of the other and points out valid reasons for it.

Update: Just saw the video today, but YAY BOB CHIPMAN

 

[spartan231490]

double post. dang captcha

 

[RuralGamer]

My uncle lost his job over a false sexual harassment claim. She twisted saying something he'd said and as a result, he lost his job. Who benefited? She did, because she then got his job. Then she 'lost' the job when all her co-workers (mostly female I will add) retaliated by shunning her; she ended up having to quit about a month later. I think she tried to claim constructive dismissal, but no one would back her claim.