This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
@ Feminism
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Patty
Anyway as far as the discussion goes, it's very true that the patriarchy is widely established as a problem in society, but it is open to debate how much it still influences us. You're more radical feminists would have us believe that women are still trapped in the kitchen, where as the people on the opposite side of the debate would claim that it has gone too far to the other side, that women have all the same rights as men, and are still given more social privileges (for example, they are usually awarded extra consideration in child custody cases). I think the truth of the matter lies way in the middle of the two extremes, which is why discussing the issue, no matter what the issue is, is always important.Again though, that's linked to patriarchy backfiring on men. Traditionally, women are considered the nurturers of the family. It was literally their primary role, and still is considered as such, by some, even to be their
only
role or choice they should make. Does that make sense?
Above all else I think we need to not hide from the issue. I think there are gender differences, and pretending they don't exist is only harmful, for example in that other thread some people wanted to pretend that rape would be a non issue for women in an anarchic society, when it obviously would be given that... you know... it's a problem for women today. I also think that people with opinions we might not necessarily agree with should still be able to voice them rather than being cowed into silence, because that's the only way that they will learn anything, through discussion. And it might turn out in fact that those with the majority opinion could have something to learn as well.The problem is more that those who make arguments about feminism being a moot point, or making strawmans about how this is becoming a movement of misandry aimed at instilling female privilege, usually deny the existence of male privilege or patriarchy at all - which as we've said is demonstrably true. 5 minutes on google and you're educated. I think people have the freedom of expression, but when their expressions (eg. votes) actively repress others, that is not acceptable. The majority opinion isn't on the side of feminism yet, though, I think it's getting there, but it's really going to take a while longer.
I don't think that people should ever hide from discussing things. I know that I'm usually the one saying people should keep offensive opinions to themselves in the religion threads, but this is still how I feel. If MyTie thinks that women should dress more modestly for moral reasons, that is something I disagree with, and it's not something i would mention in correlation with a rape case like the one we've been discussing. However, I would never say that he does not have the right to voice his opinion.Again, when your expression is slamming or actively repressing the expression of others, what right do you have to do that?
The term PC isn't bull*!@#, there are more and more people out there who are becoming afraid to bring up certain issues if they have an unpopular opinion out of a fear of being bullied into silence by the crowd because their opinion is deemed to be ignorant.
Well even if it is, ignorance isn't a crime, and the only way to prevent the spread of it is by engaging people with dissenting opinions in discussion. It's the only way they will learn anything, and we may in fact learn something ourselves.
The difference is that again, this ignorance is actively maintaining the oppressive structure of society that still exists. It doesn't take very long on the internet to educate yourself on social issues, and it shouldn't be the responsibility of the oppressed to point out what those benefiting from privilege are doing wrong, when it's been done to death already. Then there's deniers, which I find absolutely absurd.
ed: and MyTie, to both, yes.
Post by
Jubilee
Yes
Post by
asakawa
it's probably always been a (very ugly, obviously) part of society.
I agree with this. I'm not saying rape is new, I'm just saying that parenting boys to be
more respectful of women
will end in less rape. Is that so radical a concept? Or is it radical that I think boys aren't raised to be as respectful as they once were? I'm not suggesting that this is the CAUSE of rape. I'm suggesting this is a significant contributing factor.
I think it is a bold and unsupported claim to suggest that boys aren't raised to be as respectful
of women
as they once were, yes. I think that the attitudes we (as a society) teach young boys about women is vastly more respectful now since we teach them that women are just as smart as men, can vote, can sit on juries can be Prime-ministers (maybe presidents one day). They're taught that women are men's equals.
I had this cousin, who was never told no. He is the same age as I am. We grew up together. Anything he wanted, he got. His parents allowed him to do whatever he wanted, and if he was told "no", he just had to force the matter to get what he wanted. He is now serving prison time for sexual assault of a minor, his step daughter of all people. I might want to add that that was his third marriage, that he entered in after he got kicked out of the military. What a gem.
Anecdotes don't add much to the discussion. Paedophilia is the result of a deviant psychology and is not a direct result of permissive parenting. That kind of claim is pretty ridiculous.
Post by
MyTie
It's refreshing to see that you all treat the religions equally. I don't know any Christians who would physically hurt you for calling the Bible misogynistic, though the same can't be said for Islamists.
Concerning the Bible, is it misogynistic against men (for lack of a better word), if the Bible tells men to treat women better than they treat themselves?
Post by
392412
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Patty
It's refreshing to see that you all treat the religions equally. I don't know any Christians who would physically hurt you for calling the Bible misogynistic, though the same can't be said for Islamists.
Concerning the Bible, is it misogynistic against men (for lack of a better word), if the Bible tells men to treat women better than they treat themselves?
I wouldn't say it's misandric (the word you're looking for, so often misused), no. I'd say it's linked in with general double standards,
often stemming from misogyny
which Jubilee explained better. Misandry would be the bible telling a husband to always be submissive to their wives.
Post by
MyTie
Would it be misogynistic if the Bible told wives to always treat their husbands better than themselves?The term would be misandrist, MyTie.
Thanks. I don't discuss these topics often, so it's kind of new territory for me. Exciting eh?
Post by
Jubilee
Misandristic. And that would be sexism, not misandry.
And the same to the reverse.
Post by
asakawa
It's refreshing to see that you all treat the religions equally. I don't know any Christians who would physically hurt you for calling the Bible misogynistic, though the same can't be said for Islamists.
Are you saying that you personally know enough Muslims who would be violent about such a claim as to feel warranted to make a generalisation about all Muslims?
That's pretty offensive and once again is not related to this topic. Your issue with Islam belongs in another thread and insulting followers of that faith belongs nowhere on the site.
If by chance you're intending "Islamist" to mean members of a specific Islamic revivalist movement then you're comparing apples and oranges which is still unfair and still off topic.
Post by
Gone
Again though, that's linked to patriarchy backfiring on men. Traditionally, women are considered the nurturers of the family. It was literally their primary role, and still is considered as such, by some, even to be their only role or choice they should make. Does that make sense?
I know that, I was just bringing up one of the popular arguments that people on the far extreme of one of the sides of this issue tend to use.
The problem is more that those who make arguments about feminism being a moot point, or making strawmans about how this is becoming a movement of misandry aimed at instilling female privilege, usually deny the existence of male privilege or patriarchy at all - which as we've said is demonstrably true. 5 minutes on google and you're educated. I think people have the freedom of expression, but when their expressions (eg. votes) actively repress others, that is not acceptable.
But don't you think that since the facts are on your side, it's more helpful to let your opponent bring up their side of the debate, and the refute it to prove them wrong, rather than just forcing them into silence?
Again, when your expression is slamming or actively repressing the expression of others, what right do you have to do that?
The problem becomes though, where do you draw the line? In theory, banning any speech that hurts or oppresses somebody sounds good, but in practice it's not that easy.
To give an example, I have a friend who works for Health New England, for the human resources department. It's his job to deal with cases of sexual harassment. The policy of the company is, if the complainant feels sexually harassed, then that mans it's sexual harassment. I don't think I have to tell you the kind of potential for abuse a system like this comes with.
By restricting free speech it leads to a slippery slope where any kind of speech can be censored with the established precedent. Remember that womens rights would never have come about in the first place if it weren't for free speech. And believe me back then there were plenty of both men and women who were offended by the emerging feminism.
The difference is that again, this ignorance is actively maintaining the oppressive structure of society that still exists. It doesn't take very long on the internet to educate yourself on social issues, and it shouldn't be the responsibility of the oppressed to point out what those benefiting from privilege are doing wrong, when it's been done to death already. Then there's deniers, which I find absolutely absurd.
You said yourself earlier that the best way to solve these problems are through education. Only by allowing people to voice their opinions and then refuting them with logic do we accomplish this.
It's refreshing to see that you all treat the religions equally. I don't know any Christians who would physically hurt you for calling the Bible misogynistic, though the same can't be said for Islamists.
Are you saying that you personally know enough Muslims who would be violent about such a claim as to feel warranted to make a generalisation about all Muslims?
Not to make generalizations, but I don't think I'm making a leap when I say that offensive material about the Islamic faith inspires a greater response of violence than offensive material about Christianity.
Post by
MyTie
Not to make generalizations, but I don't think I'm making a leap when I say that offensive material about the Islamic faith inspires a greater response of violence than offensive material about Christianity.
It's pretty clear that's what my post was saying. It doesn't need explanation. Just let it go. Ignore it.
Post by
asakawa
Not to make generalizations, but I don't think I'm making a leap when I say that offensive material about the Islamic faith inspires a greater response of violence than offensive material about Christianity.
It's pretty clear that's what my post was saying. It doesn't need explanation.
It's not at all clear why you would say that in this thread since it is wildly off topic but once it is said I feel that it needs to be challenged and thus we get derailed.
"I don't know any atheists who would picket funerals with insulting signs but the same can't be said for Christians"
. You see how this is a nasty and ignorant thing to say? It's not cool to casually insult a group for the actions of a tiny minority within them. Within this thread I don't think it's cool to casually insult other religions when it doesn't relate to the topic.
Post by
MyTie
To give an example, I have a friend who works for Health New England, for the human resources department. It's his job to deal with cases of sexual harassment. The policy of the company is, if the complainant feels sexually harassed, then that mans it's sexual harassment. I don't think I have to tell you the kind of potential for abuse a system like this comes with.
There is a really big problem here. That potential for abuse. In the end, it is inevitable that people will be falsely accused, and there will be people who will get away with sexual assault. People have spent a huge portion of their lives in prison, without actually having raped anyone, and of course, there are rapists who got away with it. It's so sad.
Post by
Patty
The problem is more that those who make arguments about feminism being a moot point, or making strawmans about how this is becoming a movement of misandry aimed at instilling female privilege, usually deny the existence of male privilege or patriarchy at all - which as we've said is demonstrably true. 5 minutes on google and you're educated. I think people have the freedom of expression, but when their expressions (eg. votes) actively repress others, that is not acceptable.
But don't you think that since the facts are on your side, it's more helpful to let your opponent bring up their side of the debate, and the refute it to prove them wrong, rather than just forcing them into silence?Tbh I wouldn't waste my time with a debate about gravity, so not really. It also technically wouldn't be a debate - one side is demonstrably wrong from the very start. I'd kindly remind them to learn a bit more about something before making any judgement calls that could be harmful to others.
The problem becomes though, where do you draw the line? In theory, banning any speech that hurts or oppresses somebody sounds good, but in practice it's not that easy.
To give an example, I have a friend who works for Health New England, for the human resources department. It's his job to deal with cases of sexual harassment. The policy of the company is, if the complainant feels sexually harassed, then that mans it's sexual harassment. I don't think I have to tell you the kind of potential for abuse a system like this comes with.
By restricting free speech it leads to a slippery slope where any kind of speech can be censored with the established precedent. Remember that womens rights would never have come about in the first place if it weren't for free speech. And believe me back then there were plenty of both men and women who were offended by the emerging feminism.Slippery slope fallacy. Nice. I'm not saying that people shouldn't be
able
to express their thoughts. I'm saying that that shouldn't then negatively impact people around them. Which being a misogynist
does
, because it just keeps the patriarchy running.
Obviously that system is ripe for potential abuse, and hopefully it gets pointed out to the management, or they have significant enough checks and balances in place, in terms of punishments to falsified reports, to stop it being abused. Although remember that only between 2-8% of sexual assault accusations are falsified, I wouldn't be surprised if the figures for harassment were similar.
You said yourself earlier that the best way to solve these problems are through education. Only by allowing people to voice their opinions and then refuting them with logic do we accomplish this.Actually, I'd include it as a part of personal, social, sex health and education classes, I think it needs to be instilled from a young age. To be honest, for my own anecdotal evidence, most of the times I've mentioned how people have been sexist, racist, homophobic or whatever else, they have either immediately jumped on me for being an overly sensitive PC-obsessed !@# (links in with what I mentioned in the racism thread about self-righteousness), or been like "well it's just a joke so it doesn't matter". When yes, it &*!@ing
does
. It shouldn't be someone else's responsibility to tell an adult how to be a decent human being. And it's so self-evident that it's like explaining to a grown adult that we breathe because air provides something we need to survive.
Post by
Gone
The slippery slope thing isn't a fallacy, it's a very real problem. If somebody wants to hang a swastika outside their house then I think that's wrong, but nobody has the right to take it down. You protect the speech you don't like in order to ultimately protect all free speech.
Also a lot of the issues are debatable. It's an established fact that the patriarchy plays a part in our social hierarchy, but it's still very much up for debate on just how much it effects society and what should be done to fix it.
I've mentioned how people have been sexist, racist, homophobic or whatever else, they have either immediately jumped on me for being an overly sensitive PC-obsessed !@# (links in with what I mentioned in the racism thread about self-righteousness), or been like "well it's just a joke so it doesn't matter". When yes, it &*!@ing does. It shouldn't be someone else's responsibility to tell an adult how to be a decent human being
There's mentioning something, and then there's going off the deep end over something trivial. Not to bring up ancient history, but there was the racism thread. I said something that i thought was innocent and you flipped your !@#$ like the teenager that you are, I got offended and insulted you back, and the next thing you know we are both namecalling each other. You tried to silence my opinion instead of debating or ignoring it, and it didn't work. The Rank came in and responded to my original quote logically and used a sound argument, and he actually changed my mind about parts of what I had previously thought.
Finally i wanna point out that you are working under the assumption that your viewpoint is 100% right and infallible, so discussion is pointless. That's closed minded, and it's not the way to debate something.(##RESPBREAK##)16##DELIM##asakawa##DELIM##"...like the teenager that you are"
Ad hominem attacks are becoming the norm in OT lately and they are inexcusable.
Post by
Jubilee
Come on now, haven't we been warned enough?
Post by
Patty
The slippery slope thing isn't a fallacy, it's a very real problem. If somebody wants to hang a swastika outside their house then I think that's wrong, but nobody has the right to take it down. You protect the speech you don't like in order to ultimately protect all free speech.I know this is getting bogged down in semantics, but it
is
a fallacy. It assumes that one precludes the other. I posted that I don't think that it's acceptable (basically, in that context I meant justified or morally right) when one's rights are exercised to maintain the repression of other people, not that I think those people's rights should be stripped away. The two can be mutually exclusive.
Also a lot of the issues are debatable. It's an established fact that the patriarchy plays a part in our social hierarchy, but it's still very much up for debate on just how much it effects society and what should be done to fix it.Agreed, and there are different approaches. But that's not what I was talking about. I mean, I'm happy to talk about that.
There's mentioning something, and then there's going off the deep end over something trivial. Not to bring up ancient history, but there was the racism thread. I said something that i thought was innocent and you flipped your !@#$ like the teenager that you are, I got offended and insulted you back, and the next thing you know we are both namecalling each other. You tried to silence my opinion instead of debating or ignoring it, and it didn't work. The Rank came in and responded to my original quote logically and used a sound argument, and he actually changed my mind about parts of what I had previously thought.The thing is, it
isn't
something trivial. I'll use rape jokes as an example. You yourself mentioned earlier in this thread how you find them utterly disgusting. So do I. Pointing out that they are wrong and promoting a rape culture by trivialising what is really one of the most awful experiences I can imagine isn't "going off the deep end over something trivial". That trivialisation contributes to a culture where victims don't want to speak out because they will be made into a joke, or won't be taken seriously. Additionally, these things are usually good indicators on their overall opinions on things, and pointing them out and calling people out for voicing problematic %^&* is surely educating them, no?
We also both know other factors were at play in the racism thread - the original post and other posters there were saying ^&*! that
was
racist. I stand by the spirit of what I posted in the racism thread, but not in the way I phrased it. Obviously tensions were very high. And on the addendum about xenophobia, it more generally refers to a fear of an "other", at least that is the way it's been used in all the contexts I've seen (mainly to do with issues of nationalism and fascism), which can also refer to ethnic divisions.
Finally i wanna point out that you are working under the assumption that your viewpoint is 100% right and infallible, so discussion is pointless. That's closed minded, and it's not the way to debate something. Well, I
did
say I wasn't treating this like a debate any more, didn't I? :p But you're right. I'll clarify. The existence of a rape culture or male privilege/patriarchy (really too connected to put separately) won't be something I treat as a debate, as it was debated on previous pages, because it is demonstrably true. That doesn't mean I am not up for discussion as a whole, I just want to avoid the mess of the last few pages from last night tbh.
Post by
gnomerdon
feminism is only good to a certain point. when it's past a point i dislike and feel it isn't fair, i hate it.
what about meminism?
is there a list of what social factors we also go through as males?
Post by
Gone
@Patty
I think at this point we're just arguing over semantics. You and I have butted heads a lot over sensitivity the past few weeks, since I called Rick a pussy in that Walking Dead thread. Maybe I'm insensitive, maybe your oversensitive, either way, let's just meet in the middle and avoid ugliness. It's true I can appear insensitive sometimes because I have a somewhat abrasive way of approaching some situations if I'm in a casual setting.
I'm pretty much on the same side of the fence as you as far as this issue goes, I think it's just the method of debating them that we are differing on at this point. I won't argue with you when I agree with 90% of what you've been saying.
Although actually I'm pretty sure xenophobia is a fear of
these
things. In which case I wouldn't blame a xenophobic person, xenomorphs are terrifying...
EDIT: I didn't mean the teenager comment as an insult btw, I'm sorry if it sounded offensive.
@Facesmasher
Its not the same thing. Men do have many unique problems in society, but many of them are caused by the same hierarchy that causes problems for women. As Patty said earlier, women are usually awarded custody of children in divorce cases because they are thought of as natural caregivers. Men and women both suffer from problems caused by the patriarchy, but it obviously has a more profound effect on women. Feminism isn't anti men (at least not most feminists, the stereotypical feminazi that you hear about in anecdotes doesn't count), its more set against a social view perpetuated with the male as the leading role, while women are lower down the ladder.
Post by
Jubilee
I'm glad the rape discussion is mostly over, but I have to link this.
https://www.change.org/petitions/cnn-apologize-on-air-for-sympathizing-with-the-steubenville-rapists
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.