|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 9:27 am
Man-hate is strong these days. Femi-nazis, while admittedly a minority, have done a good job at influencing the general populace. Especially the young populace. I remember misandry becoming a factor in my life as early as middle school. However, the flow goes both ways here, chauvanism and misogyny I've witnessed too. And depending how you go about it, they're both socially acceptable. I think misandry is currently the more insidious of the two, because the largest cases of misogyny I've seen were from guys who wanted "a good lay". Sex addicts. I don't see any concentrated effort to keep women down for more power and money. It was from boys who wanted playthings and couldn't always get what they wanted. So youre only hurting your cause when you apply these labels to all men. I would defend no woman who would paint with broad brushes.
On race: Maybe professionally whites appear to have an advantage, but let's not forget that they were already at the top. It will take years for all the old white men to die and for the money to cycle out of their families. There will be no instant fix. From a more social standpoint, I have witnessed far more hate towards whites than from them (geographically, I'm in the western USofA; I have no doubt results vary by region). Anyone who claims otherwise in my area is full of s**t, frankly. Whites generally don't care, they just want to enjoy what they have. Any sort of claim of racism around my life towards whites is just s**t-stirring. The only true case of a hate-crime I've seen in my life that I've seen with my eyes was where I was actually the victim. Discrimination is alive and well, and it's not white people doling out the abuse these days.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 12:39 pm
Pirate Captain Sushi CleoSombra Pirate Captain Sushi CleoSombra Valheita Pirate Captain Sushi
...'tis also where I got my beliefs that men were the sexually abused party in our modern era.
A guy in my highschool english class did a speech on how "White Males" are the single most reviled group in modern times. Since everything you say is either racist or sexist. Yeah, because black people and women make more then white men on average. After all white men statistically get higher jail sentences then black men do for the same crime and circumstances. "Cracker" has far worse connotations than "******" does. Single white fathers make far less than single white mothers and far, far less than single black mothers. Women don't think twice about black men walking behind them on a deserted street, but if it's a white man, they look behind themselves every ten steps with a hand on their purse (specifically, the pepper spray can). Yeah. Caucasians and men are totally the most abused group of people. rolleyes [/sarcasm]
Mmmmm, haven't heard of the equal pay act, have we?
Statistics are high due to population number. White males are low because statistically they're a tad high on the population scale.
Rapists can be gay too you know.
Mmm, why is it if I hit a Caucasian male whom's harassing me it's cool but if I hit a female whom is harassing me I go to jail? Why is it if I hit someone of a different race it's considered a hate crime? Why is it when a Caucasian male gets made fun of by his wife in commercials it's socially acceptable but when the wife gets made fun of, special interest groups rally?
Holy crap this thread moves fast. >> If you hit someone because they are of a different race, then it is a hate crime because you are attacking them based on the group they belong to. A black person who attacks a white person because he is a WHITE is also going to have committed a hate crime. A white guy that mugs a black guy just for his money isn't going to be called out for a hate crime. Same goes for the black guy mugging the white guy. The only difference is the black guy's probably gonna get a harsher sentence. If someone kills a white person (regardless of their own race), they are far, far, FAR more likely to receive the death penatly than if they kill someone of a minority race ( source). The Equal Pay Act means a lot less than you think it does. To this day, women still make 77 cents to the dollar a man makes. Source. Why? Education, years of experience, etc. Men are going to get pay raises a lot quicker than women are, too. They're also given more hours. The special interest groups rally because sexism against women is still a very touchy subject. Men did NOT face hundreds of years of discrimination, nor are they continued to be objectified as sex objects in the media today. (There is far, far less pressure on men to be sexually appealing than there is on women). Fifty years of reform and getting more equality for women's rights does not even come close to the struggles they've had for hundreds of years.
Egast, my counter has been countered!
So education and years of experience is the wrench in the cogs? Well then, isn't that the fault of the female all together for not furthering themselves in academic study? Scholarships are plentiful to help for college education, SAT's and ACT's can be assigned fee waivers, and the high-school drop-out rates for females are actually lower than that of mens.
I disagree with that sex object statement, men are also going through pressure to be sexually appealing. If we don't have muscles, short hair (blegh), non-pale skin, acne-less faces or pearly whites that could blind bruce, we're deemed unlikable. Your gender may have had more years worth of suffering from discrimination, but to outcast men because they haven't had it as long seems a tad daft in my opinion. True equality can't be obtained if once side of the scale is heavier than the other, sadly though the scale changes weight with different subjects.
There are women in the military. But how come they are such a small minority? Because it's seen as a man's job. Being a doctor is seen as a man's job. A nurse is seen as a woman's job. Astronauts? Men. Kindergarten teachers? Women. Yes, there are people of both genders in all these fields - more and more every day. But the occupations still have these underlying gender associations. When you talk to someone about your doctor and you haven't said the doctor's gender, people are for more likely to say "he" as opposed to "she" when refering to them. For example, I was telling someone about my family physician. I said something to the effect of "Dr. Smith has seen me once a month over the summer." "So he's just been spotting for you?" This isn't all the time. Not everyone says it. But we're just sort of programmed to lean in certain ways. When a girl says she wants to go work in a hospital, her teacher will be like "Oh, you want to be a nurse?" Right there, that's automatically suggesting a more submissive/lower rank role than she could actually get. In science and math classes, teachers statistically call on boys more often than girls. They're encouraged more to do well in these activities. It's still more socially acceptable to be a housewife than it is to be a housedad. Why are more men CEOs then women? Studies have shown and proved that men and womens' actions are perceived differently. When a male boss fires someone on the spot, he's perceived as ruling with an iron fist. When a female boss does it, it's because she's coldhearted or overly emotional. When a male boss yells at his employees, he's giving them a kick in the a** to work harder. When a female boss does it, she's bitchy/PMSy. An 'assertive' man is a nagging/bossy woman. Check out this nifty article for more. Men do have pressure to look attractive in society, but no where near as much pressure as women do. Look at advertisements selling beer/alcoholic drinks. Sexy women galore. Lotion commercials? That feminine caress/touch. In fact, here's an entire website dedicated to gender studies in advertising. click here. Just to give you an idea, these are some of the links to subjections on this site. And I'll bold the ones that have anything to do with their appearance FEMALES IN ADS Roles StrippersNormalized Women Exotics, General
Exotics, WOC
Exotics, SurrealFeminine As Difficult As DollsAs Naggers Body As ToolNymphomaniaAs Stupid Consumers As NatureBodies OnlyPolitics As Violent Faux Power Female Masculinity 3. MALES IN ADS Males, General Male SexViolence Ag. Males Males As CulturePhallicMale FantasiesNormalized Males As Stupid Male Heroes Men, In Control Male ObjectsGo into the city and look at advertisements on billboards and signs. How many are men and how many are women (more women)? How beautiful/attractive/sexual are the women in these billboards? How about the men? Media objectifies women far, far, far, far more than men. Men don't spend an hour to two hours a day doing their hair and makeup, focused on looking absolutely perfect. Sure, men are pressured to look appealing, but they are nowhere near as pressured as women.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 1:23 pm
CleoSombra Men don't spend an hour to two hours a day doing their hair and makeup, focused on looking absolutely perfect.
Ew, I never do that. I shower and brush my hair, and I'm done. I don't even blow dry/style my hair or anything, and I've never worn makeup for anything other than Halloween (and a game of Truth or Dare once <.<)
I personally don't give a s**t if society views me as being attractive or feminine or any of that crap. It only pisses me off when it starts to limit me in some way or when the person doing the judging is someone whose opinion I value.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 2:11 pm
CleoSombra In science and math classes, teachers statistically call on boys more often than girls. They're encouraged more to do well in these activities. First point in regards to this specific area is.. males generally outnumber females in those courses. Physics has a ratio of about 1:9 Females to Males. Even less in the earlier levels. Chemistry is only slightly more balanced, and Biology appears the exception being female dominated. Mathematics retains a male dominance, much like Chemistry. Second point is: Maybe you're just more alert to the selection pressures on females because you are one? Just throwing an idea out there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 6:34 pm
CleoSombra There are women in the military. But how come they are such a small minority? There's a surprisingly good reason for this. If too many women die in combat, you're not going to be able to renew the population very well. For example, 1 man and 10 women can produce 10 children every 9 months, 10 men and 1 woman can make... 1 child every 9 months, making men more expendible. It's vital to a country's survival to protect womens' lives. You can't use the military to make your case, as there's a genuinely good reason to bar female entry into combat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 6:44 pm
CleoSombra It's still more socially acceptable to be a housewife than it is to be a housedad. Women tend to look down on men in such a position as well. That has little to do with a man's pride. CleoSombra Why are more men CEOs then women? Because men already owned companies. Women haven't had the time to equalize quantitively. Do you doubt that the women who own these companies do so indisputedly? CleoSombra Studies have shown and proved that men and womens' actions are perceived differently. When a male boss fires someone on the spot, he's perceived as ruling with an iron fist. When a female boss does it, it's because she's coldhearted or overly emotional. What? They're both negative connotations, and I believe that example to be inaccurate. CleoSombra When a male boss yells at his employees, he's giving them a kick in the a** to work harder. When a female boss does it, she's bitchy/PMSy. Actually, the man's a hardass. Two different words for the same thing. CleoSombra An 'assertive' man is a nagging/bossy woman. First we need to establish the difference between assertive and aggressive. the general populace confuses the two. CleoSombra Men do have pressure to look attractive in society, but no where near as much pressure as women do. We're pressured to look professional. CleoSombra Look at advertisements selling beer/alcoholic drinks. Sexy women galore. Lotion commercials? That feminine caress/touch. In fact, here's an entire website dedicated to gender studies in advertising. click here. Just to give you an idea, these are some of the links to subjections on this site. And I'll bold the ones that have anything to do with their appearance. Sex sells. It works on both ends, and you know it. CleoSombra Go into the city and look at advertisements on billboards and signs. How many are men and how many are women (more women)? How beautiful/attractive/sexual are the women in these billboards? How about the men? That's all about money, not discrimination. Marketing companies and departments have educations and researches on how to sell their products. They simply choose what works best to bring in the green. CleoSombra Media objectifies women far, far, far, far more than men. Because it makes them money. Do you doubt that men would be the objectified group of women were more likely to enjoy the exact same type of debauchery? There are all sorts of smut novels specifically designed to cater to what women look for, and there's certainly porn for women, though it's less overt (possibly a smaller demographic?). CleoSombra Men don't spend an hour to two hours a day doing their hair and makeup, focused on looking absolutely perfect. I spend 1 hour if I plan to go out. And no, I don't use make-up, but I don't like make-up on women either. CleoSombra Sure, men are pressured to look appealing, but they are nowhere near as pressured as women. Proof?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:13 pm
Etherealsage CleoSombra There are women in the military. But how come they are such a small minority? There's a surprisingly good reason for this. If too many women die in combat, you're not going to be able to renew the population very well. For example, 1 man and 10 women can produce 10 children every 9 months, 10 men and 1 woman can make... 1 child every 9 months, making men more expendible. It's vital to a country's survival to protect womens' lives. You can't use the military to make your case, as there's a genuinely good reason to bar female entry into combat. That... is not a very good reason at all. Do you really think any war we're involved in is going to be so apocalyptic that humanity will have to resort to having men impregnate harems to keep the species going? Hey, maybe we should send all the sterile women or women who choose not to have children into war. They're expendable as far as propagation goes anyway, so why not? Also, I always enjoyed how so many sitcoms have a schlumpy "regular" dude with a hot wife. I guess if you're funny you don't have to be attractive, but you can still get the good-lookin' women.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 12:19 am
Cherry Brossom Etherealsage CleoSombra There are women in the military. But how come they are such a small minority? There's a surprisingly good reason for this. If too many women die in combat, you're not going to be able to renew the population very well. For example, 1 man and 10 women can produce 10 children every 9 months, 10 men and 1 woman can make... 1 child every 9 months, making men more expendible. It's vital to a country's survival to protect womens' lives. You can't use the military to make your case, as there's a genuinely good reason to bar female entry into combat. That... is not a very good reason at all. Do you really think any war we're involved in is going to be so apocalyptic that humanity will have to resort to having men impregnate harems to keep the species going? In peacetime, no. Do I ever think it's going to happen? Probably not. Do I think the casualty rate could get high enough if something like a world war happened again? Yes. I just doubt such a thing would happen anytime in the near future. On a sidenote, my memory's fairly lousy, so take this next part with a grain of salt, but I think such a thing did happen after one of the world wars. It was just a 2:1 ratio though. I don't remember where I learnt it, but for some reason, I did, somewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 12:16 pm
That's still an entirely spurious argument. "Sorry, ladies, we're not going to put your skills and talents to use in the military because we have to keep your baby-makin' parts safe." neutral
I know I wouldn't want to be part of a society where women are considered little more than breeding stock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 12:52 pm
It's my opinion that you should be courteous to everyone regardless of gender. I believe that chivalry is a form of innocent sexism left over from a time where it was acceptable to treat women as if they were inferior. The reason it's so looked down upon is because some people believe that all sexism is entirely wrong, even when it's something as harmless as holding a door open.
However, I don't believe it's necessarily bad. Just a bit naive. Chivalry is a sign of respect for women. Maybe people bemoan the modern day lack of chivalry, but it's my opinion that not pulling out a chair for a women may be just as respectful as actually pulling the chair out. Respecting a women's ability to do things for herself is pretty important. Some women will get very irrational and irritated if their man dares to do nice things for them because they feel like they need to prove themselves.
Men have a hard time with this and sadly the best way many have found to cope with the confusing attitudes regarding politeness, chivalry, and respecting women is to just not do nice things for women. It's my opinion, like I said before, is to be courteous to everyone, not just women. If a women declines your help, then don't feel bad. But if she snaps at you for being polite, you have every right to be offended. There is no excuse for being rude. I mean, seriously, if a person is rude to you for holding a frickin' door open, they're probably not a very healthy person to begin with. (Eight year olds probably don't have enough experience to really understand and if they bite your head off, they just need to be informed. And probably lectured. Like I said, no excuse for rudeness.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 1:04 pm
Gallows and Guillotines It's my opinion that you should be courteous to everyone regardless of gender. I believe that chivalry is a form of innocent sexism left over from a time where it was acceptable to treat women as if they were inferior. The reason it's so looked down upon is because some people believe that all sexism is entirely wrong, even when it's something as harmless as holding a door open.
Benevolent sexism can be just as harmful and hostile sexism in a lot of cases. An example I learned about in my Psychology of Gender class involves a male teacher and a female student, where the teacher doesn't tell the student what she's been doing wrong because he doesn't want to make her cry. He means well, because he just doesn't want to make her feel bad, but now she'll never learn. =/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:09 pm
Cherry Brossom That's still an entirely spurious argument. "Sorry, ladies, we're not going to put your skills and talents to use in the military because we have to keep your baby-makin' parts safe." neutral I know I wouldn't want to be part of a society where women are considered little more than breeding stock. You seem to be seeking offense in pragmatism. Women aren't exactly denied senatorhood or even presidency. You're not denied positions in any of the governmental branches or powerful positions in society at large. I'm sorry you feel slighted by the idea that women are not as expendible as men. Little Miss Fortune Gallows and Guillotines It's my opinion that you should be courteous to everyone regardless of gender. I believe that chivalry is a form of innocent sexism left over from a time where it was acceptable to treat women as if they were inferior. The reason it's so looked down upon is because some people believe that all sexism is entirely wrong, even when it's something as harmless as holding a door open.
Benevolent sexism can be just as harmful and hostile sexism in a lot of cases. An example I learned about in my Psychology of Gender class involves a male teacher and a female student, where the teacher doesn't tell the student what she's been doing wrong because he doesn't want to make her cry. He means well, because he just doesn't want to make her feel bad, but now she'll never learn. =/I would argue that that's not polite at all. o.O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 11:35 pm
Etherealsage Cherry Brossom That's still an entirely spurious argument. "Sorry, ladies, we're not going to put your skills and talents to use in the military because we have to keep your baby-makin' parts safe." neutral I know I wouldn't want to be part of a society where women are considered little more than breeding stock. You seem to be seeking offense in pragmatism. Women aren't exactly denied senatorhood or even presidency. You're not denied positions in any of the governmental branches or powerful positions in society at large. I'm sorry you feel slighted by the idea that women are not as expendible as men. I'm not simply looking for excuses to be offended, so don't bother with the patronizing. (Unless you want to tell me that you really do believe that women are nothing more than baby-makers, in which case I'll be more than happy to get good and offended. Unless I decide I'd rather just laugh in your face. biggrin ) I'd say it's more pragmatic to realize that your "good reason" doesn't really stand up to the reality of the society we live in. It's simply a fallacy to think that we need every woman in this country to stay safe in their little comfy nests so they can breed with designated stud males after the rest of the menfolk go off to war and die. It's extremely unlikely that that would ever be necessary (as you yourself admitted), and also very unlikely that it would fly even if you tried to enforce it. (Although horny males would probably think it was a great idea. biggrin ) Meanwhile, the reality is that if a woman has the fortitude and determination and physical strength to be a soldier, she can put her life on the line just like any man. Americans aren't going to go extinct just because there are women out on the front lines, and treating women like little fragile treasures when they could be out helping to kick a** is only unnecessarily handicapping yourself. Also, the fact that women can do things besides be in the military is nice, but it isn't really relevant to this particular argument. What I'm dismantling here is the notion that it's a good idea to keep women out of the military because they're more valuable as breeding stock. 'Cause that's just silly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 12:09 am
Ooh! Ooh! I found something else! Wiki sez:"One study found that the male to female sex ratio in the German state of Bavaria fell as low as 0.60 after the end of World War II for the most severely affected age cohort (those between 21 and 23 years old in 1946). This same study found that out-of-wedlock births spiked from approximately 10-15% during the inter-war years up to 22% at the end of the war. This increase in out-of-wedlock births was attributed to a change in the marriage market caused by the decline in the sex-ratio." So in this real-world scenario, which you cited in your earlier rebuttal, what caused the problem was not the lack of overall population caused by war casualties, but the lopsided gender ratio caused by the relative overabundance of females. So really, if you still want to use that example, it seems that we should send more females off to be "expendable" so that the ratio on the homefront stays even and people don't have problems finding spouses. Hacha.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 9:14 am
Gallows and Guillotines It's my opinion that you should be courteous to everyone regardless of gender. I believe that chivalry is a form of innocent sexism left over from a time where it was acceptable to treat women as if they were inferior. The reason it's so looked down upon is because some people believe that all sexism is entirely wrong, even when it's something as harmless as holding a door open. However, I don't believe it's necessarily bad. Just a bit naive. Chivalry is a sign of respect for women. Maybe people bemoan the modern day lack of chivalry, but it's my opinion that not pulling out a chair for a women may be just as respectful as actually pulling the chair out. Respecting a women's ability to do things for herself is pretty important. Some women will get very irrational and irritated if their man dares to do nice things for them because they feel like they need to prove themselves. Men have a hard time with this and sadly the best way many have found to cope with the confusing attitudes regarding politeness, chivalry, and respecting women is to just not do nice things for women. It's my opinion, like I said before, is to be courteous to everyone, not just women. If a women declines your help, then don't feel bad. But if she snaps at you for being polite, you have every right to be offended. There is no excuse for being rude. I mean, seriously, if a person is rude to you for holding a frickin' door open, they're probably not a very healthy person to begin with. (Eight year olds probably don't have enough experience to really understand and if they bite your head off, they just need to be informed. And probably lectured. Like I said, no excuse for rudeness.)
Here's a damn good reason there aren't as many females actually on the front (there are plenty of women in other branches of the army compared to the fighting forces), by the way—the insane sexual harassment that occurs in the army as a result of sexism, cabin fever, bottled-up sexual frustration, and so forth. Just putting that on the table. At least in my country (Australia), women are certainly allowed to join the army, but here's one major reason why I wouldn't even if I were able-bodied.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
