*Guy wears shirt*I don't personally see the feminist as being the unreasonable one?
Feminist: That shirt's not really appropriate for a TV interview
Twitter: Go and jump off a cliff and kill yourself, feminist
CG: I will be concerned about your offendedness when you can back up that flower-lovers have been historically and currently are oppressed in society with verifiable statistics and data sets :PDoesn't matter. I am offended by flowers therefore they are wrong. Wrong. Wrong. WRONG! >:(
Feminist: I should probably get one of those with ripped guys on.... Yum.
Feminazi: Woman hater! Purge the unclean through cleansing flame!
Realistically minded people: Tha portugal? I thought he landed something on a comet, apparently it was his shirt or something.
Trolls: Lol a feminazi, get rekt bitch look me 420noscope skillz.
Don't be so offended
With all the bullarmadillo that happened over the gamersgate, clearly SJWs do in fact have their own forums and armadillo.
It's not exactly too much to ask that they keep their bullarmadillo to their forums/sent to local MPs or whatever.
@joek Constantly? Hardly. And it was irony rather than actual use.
Also I'm never talking to anyone here directly with these sort of comments matey, so when I say things like 'Don't be offended' it's not to you it's to whoever I'm talking about...
Don't make it personal, hate the argument not the person behind it... Point is, it feels like you're trying to make it personal. I'm asking nicely, lay off.
No, feminism is good, great even.
I am all for true equality, I don't give two portugals if you're male/female/trans/other, be a decent person and leave me the portugal alone to do whatever I want to do and that's great.
Objectification is an odd thing to get annoyed about imo. When people 'objectify' other people, it's not them, it's their assets. Leave men to objectify womens assets if they want because hell, they're pretty portugaling amazing and they look great. They may never get laid by some girls for doing that, but hey I know girls that love it when guys are looking at them like that, because it makes them feel (and here's the kicker) like a woman. I'm totally cool with women objectifying male assets and don't feel the need to take it personally in the slightest I may be a little jaded that it's never about me but hey :P. I can accept being portugal ugly without needing everyone else to never talk about how good looking another person is.
The demotion or degrading of a person or class of people (esp. women) to the status of a mere object.
Sin, young man, is when you treat people like things.
Urgh, your logic hurts. We read different things, that's cool. Don't just dismiss what I'm saying because my language is 'colourful' and it happens to disagree with what you've seen so far. Take it with skepticism, sure I'm always an advocate of that in most everything. I can't find where I read it, its been buried in a mountain of other armadilloe but yes there were definitely shots fired from both sides. If you're denying that then....Erm...yikes :P
The feminist I portrayed displays a reasonable reaction, maybe I wasn't clear enough: I was showing equality there see because she thinks about doing the same. The femenazi, not so much which is who my rant was aimed at, you may be oblivious to them but yeah go to enough places, hell take 20 minutes browsing youtube and you'll find all kinds of bullarmadillo (more or less) exactly as I'm saying it.
A quote from Anita Sarkeesian: "There's no such thing as sexism against men" So yes, she is the typified person I'm hating on.
What do they do? Cause negativity and arguments all over the place, reducing my enjoyment of browsing the internet for pictures of cats and music by Maria Brink.
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
I would much prefer they stayed to their own forums and promoted their agenda endlessly and futilely there instead. Real equality progression I've always said has to be made by white men. (Which I know is kind of ironic :P)
By that I mean that because we've had it so easy and got accustomed to being paid more/whatever and because we do have most higher paying jobs and a load of industries are against women working in them, one of them I'm actively trying to combat* it's up to our generation and I think this time we're actually going to do it, if not then real progress is going to be made when the likes of Jubal are in their 30's/40's and equality won't even be a thing, it'll just be natural to offer jobs to whoever has the right creds for it.
EDIT: This is pretty much what I'm saying but a lot better, words never have been my weapon of choice. http://goo.gl/L2cPLx
I would, however, question the causes behind this. I think that overall physics and science appeals more to men than women, whether due to some fundamental statistical difference in gender thinking, societal pressure (by this I mean a pressure for males to go into one of these subjects rather than more artistic ones, and for women to go into more artistic ones), or perhaps due to an unwelcoming feel in the subjects.
I think that we should stick with the null hypothesis that societal pressures, the perception of STEM fields as a boys' club, and the general unwelcoming feel of those subjects -- all things which we know are factors in the situation -- are the problem.
You're all for equality, but you think that criticising men for doing something which actively harms the fight for equality is a bad thing? Which is true?
1. As far as I am aware, Anita Sarkeesian has not commented at all on Matt Taylor's shirt. So claiming you're hating on her when you are in a thread talking about the Philae landing, and the controversy over Matt Taylor's shirt, is just bullarmadillo.
Today I learned:
* Rosa Parks did not real.
* Martin Luther King did not real.
* The Stonewall Riots did not real.
* Malcolm X did not real.
* Emmeline Pankhurst did not real. Nor did Emily Davison. Nor any of the other Pankhursts.
Real equality has never been made by straight white men. I see no evidence that it's going to suddenly become so now. (And besides, many straight white men did comment on this, so your point is invalid).
@ joek.
You don't know me, so you don't get to say what I believe if you actually think I was saying 'Don't be offended' meaning that I'm telling people they shouldn't be offended by something as opposed to, ffs people stop being so damn sensitive then you're wrong. Plain and simple. I know what I was writing and the intonation, you do not.
Don't be so offended
when I say things like 'Don't be offended' it's not to you it's to whoever I'm talking about...
I was using the ridiculous moniker 'femenazi' to differentiate quickly the difference between femenists and men haters, sorry if this was a little too much to understand. I'll try and be clearer next time on that as well.
QuoteYou're all for equality, but you think that criticising men for doing something which actively harms the fight for equality is a bad thing? Which is true?
See, you're making the assumption again that you are unequivocally right in what is and isn't equality or harmful. If you take a look from my perspective: Objectification of assets is not the same as objectification of people. Then what I'm saying is not contradictory at all. Which leads into:
Yes I realise that is the technical definition of objectification, which is hugely harmful and should have proper sanctions against it. However, colloquially and more often (and as I am in all cases here) it is used to mean thinking of people as sex objects.
That is just a neutral thing. I'm not saying anyone is acting on anything, if objectifying male was then to insist on buying 'privileges' from whoever he's objectifying then it turns into the former. Of course there are other ways that it turns into the former, I'm giving one example. I hope that's clear.
Your continued skepticism does indeed please me. Don't believe me, I don't care. I am more than happy for you to continue going about things the way you do, I'm not trying to change you. I'm not in the habit of trawling back through the internet to find posts I read days ago, frankly I've got better things to do.
Again, maybe I wasn't clear enough, maybe you're misreading, I don't know. Not *everything* I say is literal, take some time to think about what I'm saying when I say 'I'm looking for pictures of cats'. Take a second and you may discover that really what I meant was 'when searching the interwebs for various things' and feminism seems to come up frequently,
I'm saying is it too much to ask for people not to have this same argument in places like here/dedicated forums instead of on twitter where things get nasty so quickly or youtube where I'm trying to read what people think about the video and not if the singer is a slut, whore etc and how the people who say that can go kill themselves.
QuoteToday I learned:
* Rosa Parks did not real.
* Martin Luther King did not real.
* The Stonewall Riots did not real.
* Malcolm X did not real.
* Emmeline Pankhurst did not real. Nor did Emily Davison. Nor any of the other Pankhursts.
Real equality has never been made by straight white men. I see no evidence that it's going to suddenly become so now. (And besides, many straight white men did comment on this, so your point is invalid).
They did all the hard work, I'm not denying that. Ok maybe I have to be clearer once again: Right now, this present day, the only thing stopping equality from being a real thing is white men not wanting to give up position of power. They have to accept it for it to become real *because* they currently hold power. I'm also saying that when Jub, yourself, penty, othko are in your 30's/40's it'll happen naturally as our generation has been brought up with more equality than any previous generation and I do believe that you have the potential to be the most accepting and equality based generation in history because you'll probably keep a lot of the ideals that we're espousing here.
Finally: Did Taylor put on the shirt in the morning with intent to piss people off? Hell no. His shirt did not read: Women are objects. It had pictures on it of scantily clad women on it, not even real ones. So even if you think he's objectifying the women on his shirt....They're not real people anyway. You can't then tell me that because he has a shirt with that on, he objectifies all women. That is simply ridiculous. You can't tell me that 'it's a symbol of society' because he's a scientist damn it, not a social role model. (Post needed a Trek misquote)
Similarly, youtube commenters can all say what they want. Personally I think that 9/10s of youtube comments are at best inane drivel, and frequently hideously offensive. I survive by not reading the comments on youtube videos. You can too.
Look, one of the major problems that feminism has historically faced is the systematic silencing of women's voices. In Classical Athens, women weren't allowed to speak in the Assembly, or in law courts, or even to give evidence in court cases. It wasn't until 1893 that women gained the right to a voice by voting in New Zealand, the first country where this was permitted. British women didn't have the right to sit in parliament until 1918 and didn't get the right to vote on the same basis as men until 1928. Your saying that feminists should shut up and not speak where you, a white man, might hear them, is part of a historic pattern of oppression. Do you understand the problem, here?
I agree that the most important thing stopping true gender equality is that white men don't want to give up on their position of power. Guess what: that was even more true in all the historical examples I gave. You know how equality wasn't achieved? Women, people of colour, queer people, trans* and gender-non-binary people, non-Christian people sitting back and waiting for straight white cis-hetero Christian (and increasingly atheist) middle-class men giving up their own power out of the goodness of their hearts.
You say it will happen naturally eventually, but I'm not content to wait for it to happen naturally, eventually. I want to do what I can right now to improve the position of people who have been historically disadvantaged, and the largest group of those, by far, is women.
@JoeFist off, cut this out now.
I'm going to go ahead and say you're probably autistic. You continue to display such characteristics. I'm sorry for that but hey, you still got to try at least buddy!
I'm going to go ahead and say you're probably autistic. You continue to display such characteristics. I'm sorry for that but hey, you still got to try at least buddy!
I am actually allowed to use the word 'femenazi' I get offended by atrocities committed to my people as well, but it's an important topic to talk about so words that are distasteful must be used.
No. See this is why you can't have nice things. Saying someone looks good is objectifying their looks (again, more common use of the word). You can also revere them as a deity of humour, an epic beatbox. Saying someone looks good does not mean you can't have any other opinions about them. I think this is where we're finding the most trouble.
You can in fact feel more than one thing towards a person. You can think more than one thing about a person.
You're getting so het up on terminology, you're missing all of the picture.
If I try to explain further, I'll just be treading on ground already crushed. I have considered what you've said, I have tried to be in your shoes and decide that any picture of a woman not covered from the ankles up is objectifying women and that sex is such a foreign concept that there is no difference between wanting to have sex with a woman and thinking of her as only useful for that. I've tried darn it, but I just can't. What can I say, common sense is such a curse. :(
Also, me disagreeing with what conversation should be where is not the same as me policing it. Am I writing a letter to youtube HQ telling them how the mean femenazis were spoiling my fun? No. No, I'm not doing this because everyone has the right to free speech (Myself included! Yay! That means I can say things like this!), what I am doing is saying why I hate all the bullarmadillo that goes hand in hand with hard-line feminism. Stuff that ironically, you should hate too as it's slowing down the process of equality!
QuoteSimilarly, youtube commenters can all say what they want. Personally I think that 9/10s of youtube comments are at best inane drivel, and frequently hideously offensive. I survive by not reading the comments on youtube videos. You can too.
'HALP HALP! I'm being oppressed!' Would be a bad reaction to what you've just said. Me saying 'The comments are for people to share what they like and dislike about a video and to discuss the topic, not for the promotion of entirely separate agendas.' would be a better reaction.
QuoteLook, one of the major problems that feminism has historically faced is the systematic silencing of women's voices. In Classical Athens, women weren't allowed to speak in the Assembly, or in law courts, or even to give evidence in court cases. It wasn't until 1893 that women gained the right to a voice by voting in New Zealand, the first country where this was permitted. British women didn't have the right to sit in parliament until 1918 and didn't get the right to vote on the same basis as men until 1928. Your saying that feminists should shut up and not speak where you, a white man, might hear them, is part of a historic pattern of oppression. Do you understand the problem, here?
So once again you've missed the point again, too stuck in your own head. It's kinda like... Ah wait no I already said that at the start.
The problem is not difficult to understand. However that's also not what I'm saying, once again using typical lefty tactic[...]
[...]of putting words in other peoples mouth. Don't you guys have like, another trick? What I am saying is this: Please keep the discussion where it's relevant. It's an open request to nobody in particular. Hell, nobody who this is even aimed at is going to read it.
QuoteI agree that the most important thing stopping true gender equality is that white men don't want to give up on their position of power. Guess what: that was even more true in all the historical examples I gave. You know how equality wasn't achieved? Women, people of colour, queer people, trans* and gender-non-binary people, non-Christian people sitting back and waiting for straight white cis-hetero Christian (and increasingly atheist) middle-class men giving up their own power out of the goodness of their hearts.
You say it will happen naturally eventually, but I'm not content to wait for it to happen naturally, eventually. I want to do what I can right now to improve the position of people who have been historically disadvantaged, and the largest group of those, by far, is women.
Again, you go for the extremes. There is this nice, grey, comfy patch of land called 'the middle ground'.
Here is a shocker: Men can.....Work *with* women on this!
I do disagree that you can force it to happen quicker, I believe that forcing the issue will create more resistance but that's just an opinion, there is no way to know the right answer there and I'm sure you can accept that.
Having a shirt with women on also does not alienate women or anyone else.
It alienates people with too much time on their hands.
Am I alienated because I wanted them to be guys with pecs as large as my face? No.
Was my friend alienated because she likes science and also has a vagina? No. Her words: 'He doesn't look much like a scientist, cool shirt'.
@Joek. I'll need proof of lack of autism. This is a heavily exaggerated example of what you've been asking from me. You're asking me to find people for evidence whose voice I'm...voicing, those with no opinion on the matter, those who don't give a portugal.
This is one of the reasons why I have a problem with how you're going about all this. The 'proof' you show is nothing of the sort, there are no counterpoints included, the data is held in isolation. You can't just analyse things and call it proof. It's data. I don't think you're autistic at all, I was just using a gross example to illustrate a point.
No, I'm allowed to use the word, because it's both technically meaningless and useful in this context where I differentiate between a person with realistic feminist goals and agenda, and a person who hates men and thinks women are superior as opposed to equal.
Whether you agree or not, idgaf, this is how I've used it, it's shorthand, get it? The rest of that was because it seems your delicate eyes can't bear to read something distasteful so how would you cope dealing with something even more grim but also as important to talk about? Nothing to do with me being Jewish in particular, saying 'my people' was just me identifying with another group of oppressed people.
Objectifying people as in thinking they are an object is not even a thing. Nobody without a basis in slavery looks at a person like they are a thing and not a person. It just doesn't happen, how the hell could it even happen, you'd have to ignore everything about them other than their existence. It just can't be done by a normal person. If you think it is so commonplace, you've not lived. You've not met enough people.
You seem to always take the stance that someone is either a feminist or anti-women. Only the Sith deal in absolutes (which I think is an absolute in itself...).
Why don't you tell me then what counts as objectifying women in real terms?
The entire porn industry maybe?
What if actually nobody is asking you to 'save' them and you're hopping on a bandwagon because you read something by a journalist online.
I'm not saying you are, I don't think you are at all actually, I think you're naive as to how the world works. Not everything is black and white, people aren't put into boxes, nobody is 'just' this that or the other, peoples beliefs are malleable and *everything* is dependent on criteria being met.
On the shirt: It's clearly a piece of artistic design, designed by a woman I'm sure you're aware,
saying he shouldn't have worn it is trying to censor it.
Start censoring art and you're on shaky ground.
The only people it offends are people that are *looking* to get offended by anything and everything. If there are people that have so little going on in their lives that they feel the need to get angry over a shirt then yeah, they have too much time on their hands. 'They' did not tell you, some of them wrote something online.
Many, many, many more don't give a portugal about the shirt.
You can't just analyse things and call it proof. It's data. I don't think you're autistic at all, I was just using a gross example to illustrate a point.What was this point you were trying to illustrate?
@ Penty, I wasn't insulting him, autism isn't an insult it's a different mental state. Yes I do know what it is, I've met quite a few people with it during group therapy who tell us about it during the sessions. Apparently there aren't enough people with what I've got to make a group from.You clearly don't, autism is not a mental state its a wide ranging disorder characterised by quite a number of different attributes, mostly relating to social interaction.
QuoteI'm not saying you are, I don't think you are at all actually, I think you're naive as to how the world works. Not everything is black and white, people aren't put into boxes, nobody is 'just' this that or the other, peoples beliefs are malleable and *everything* is dependent on criteria being met.
Relevance. This point doesn't have any.
2. Saying "only the sith deal in absolutes" completely fails to demonstrate anything.
@Penty. Right, tell me what I know about a disorder I've seen in action hundreds of times.I will as long as you incorrectly describe it unless you actually post something to show me that you're not incorrect. If you want me to provide evidence then I feel the National Autistic Society's descriptions are probably reliable as a starting point: http://www.autism.org.uk/about-autism/autism-and-asperger-syndrome-an-introduction/what-is-autism.aspx
Reading through that thread made my head hurt. :(
Just found something on iFunny I though I might put up here.
It was a very innocent comment...Quote from: TomReading through that thread made my head hurt. :(
No one's making you read it if it doesn't interest you.