Against ALL women - Infanticide, Slavery, Rape, Trafficking... (#3)

Message boards : Politics : Against ALL women - Infanticide, Slavery, Rape, Trafficking... (#3)
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 . . . 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 . . . 53 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Es99
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 10872
Credit: 350,402
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1683768 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 18:23:44 UTC - in response to Message 1683764.  

Even 10 years ago, this would've been impossible, so maybe there is a real social change taking place

Its great to have some good news, isn't it?
Reality Internet Personality
ID: 1683768 · Report as offensive
Мишель
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Nov 13
Posts: 3073
Credit: 87,868
RAC: 0
Netherlands
Message 1683781 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 19:03:17 UTC - in response to Message 1683765.  
Last modified: 24 May 2015, 19:04:14 UTC

Firstly, I didn't state 'me and my friends'. I think it is important to note that I have had this discussion with far more than just friends. Secondly, perhaps it wasn't as effective as I had hoped, but I chose that route nonetheless because I still don't know anyone that it appeals to.

Friends, other guys, the point stands that you have only asked a very limited sample.

But okay, I will agree that there are probably plenty of people who are not interested in breast implants. Then again, points of attraction differ from person to person.

Unfortunately at this point, based upon who is telling me how it reads, I am unlikely to take the lesson to heart and learn from it.

Well that is to bad.

By asking the obvious question would they still do it if society didn't place so much emphasis on size and shapes of breasts.

If it is subconscious it means the person holding views isn't aware of them, or that they play a role. Perhaps in some cases such an obvious question makes the person aware of their unconscious views, but it just as well doesn't.

I never said I assumed only a singular reason. What I have done is point out that most reasons seem to revolve around society's expectations of how women should look, and when women feel that don't match up to that ideal, they want to change their bodies to look better.

Your entire argument is that people only do plastic surgery because they feel they have to in order to come closer to society's insane beauty standard. That sounds like a singular reason to me.

I somehow knew that if I didn't properly address your generalization and lumping of all things body-modification, you would attempt to use an argument such as this. Obviously what you are talking about here is not something I object to, and is outside the scope of what my argument is. At least, it should have been obvious based upon the original comment and my somewhat flippant response.

Sorry, but what is obvious for you is not so obvious for me. I can't look in your head to see what you think and how you think it. I have to rely on what you write, and sadly that means some of the more subtle parts of human communication don't work as well as they would if we were having this conversation face to face. Please keep this in mind.

It would have also been a safe generalization to assume that since my namesake is OzzFan, indicating that I am into heavy metal, and have previously stated an affinity for counter-culture, that I would celebrate all things unorthodox. Yet somehow, here in this discussion, it was automatically assumed about me that I am against these things as well. Then I am quickly blamed for these automatic assumptions simply because I allegedly stated my part poorly - and all this was based upon a singular, off-handed comment.

Sorry, but I don't know you well enough to know that you are into metal and have an affinity with counter culture. And usernames are not a reliable source of information about the person itself (just look at my username). And again, you are relying on me having prior knowledge about you and your cultural affinities when I formed a response to what you have said. I don't know you that well, so don't rely on it and don't hold it against someone when they make assumptions on the only things they do know about you, namely the things you've literally written.
ID: 1683781 · Report as offensive
Profile Es99
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 10872
Credit: 350,402
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1683784 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 19:07:48 UTC - in response to Message 1683766.  


No, I heard it. What I am going on about is misuse of the label, and how doing so is alienating those that might otherwise agree with you.

I don't think I or the others here who have also pointed it out, have misused the label.

It also appears to me that you want me to flatter and manipulate you into seeing my side of the argument, rather than confronting you outright.
Reality Internet Personality
ID: 1683784 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15682
Credit: 83,213,477
RAC: 16,322
United States
Message 1683786 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 19:14:46 UTC - in response to Message 1683781.  

By asking the obvious question would they still do it if society didn't place so much emphasis on size and shapes of breasts.

If it is subconscious it means the person holding views isn't aware of them, or that they play a role. Perhaps in some cases such an obvious question makes the person aware of their unconscious views, but it just as well doesn't.


Not all answers to questions are found simply by asking. Lots of social experiments involve developing tests to hypotheses to avoid having a question or action impact the answer to the question.

I never said I assumed only a singular reason. What I have done is point out that most reasons seem to revolve around society's expectations of how women should look, and when women feel that don't match up to that ideal, they want to change their bodies to look better.

Your entire argument is that people only do plastic surgery because they feel they have to in order to come closer to society's insane beauty standard. That sounds like a singular reason to me.


Look at the context with which my comment was made. Es99's original statement was in message 1682744:

I suppose if she'd spent it on a handbag or a boob job it would be ok and no one would have anything to say about it.


My original comment was in response to that and that alone.

I somehow knew that if I didn't properly address your generalization and lumping of all things body-modification, you would attempt to use an argument such as this. Obviously what you are talking about here is not something I object to, and is outside the scope of what my argument is. At least, it should have been obvious based upon the original comment and my somewhat flippant response.

Sorry, but what is obvious for you is not so obvious for me. I can't look in your head to see what you think and how you think it. I have to rely on what you write, and sadly that means some of the more subtle parts of human communication don't work as well as they would if we were having this conversation face to face. Please keep this in mind.


Again, it is with your approach. If you don't know what's going on in my mind, then you should seek to understand more about me, and not falsely state my opinions based upon how you read them. Please keep that in mind.

It would have also been a safe generalization to assume that since my namesake is OzzFan, indicating that I am into heavy metal, and have previously stated an affinity for counter-culture, that I would celebrate all things unorthodox. Yet somehow, here in this discussion, it was automatically assumed about me that I am against these things as well. Then I am quickly blamed for these automatic assumptions simply because I allegedly stated my part poorly - and all this was based upon a singular, off-handed comment.

Sorry, but I don't know you well enough to know that you are into metal and have an affinity with counter culture. And usernames are not a reliable source of information about the person itself (just look at my username). And again, you are relying on me having prior knowledge about you and your cultural affinities when I formed a response to what you have said. I don't know you that well, so don't rely on it and don't hold it against someone when they make assumptions on the only things they do know about you, namely the things you've literally written.


Then it would behoove you to get to know people espousing opinions rather than inferring their opinions from simple statements.
ID: 1683786 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15682
Credit: 83,213,477
RAC: 16,322
United States
Message 1683790 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 19:22:37 UTC - in response to Message 1683784.  

No, I heard it. What I am going on about is misuse of the label, and how doing so is alienating those that might otherwise agree with you.

I don't think I or the others here who have also pointed it out, have misused the label.


And that seems to be the fundamental breakdown in our communication. Why should I accept the label and change my future behavior if I disagree? Maybe you don't really care if I do. I don't know.

It also appears to me that you want me to flatter and manipulate you into seeing my side of the argument, rather than confronting you outright.


So you do think being confrontational and adversarial is a better approach?
ID: 1683790 · Report as offensive
Profile Es99
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 10872
Credit: 350,402
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1683794 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 19:38:16 UTC - in response to Message 1683790.  

It also appears to me that you want me to flatter and manipulate you into seeing my side of the argument, rather than confronting you outright.


So you do think being confrontational and adversarial is a better approach?

I am quite convinced that I am no more adversarial and confrontational than you are.

I am also aware that women are expected to get what they want by being flattering and manipulative, so when I feel pressure to behave in that way I resist it for obvious reasons. So either we both need to be less adversarial and confrontational, or you need to examine why you expect a different arguing style from me than you do from yourself.
Reality Internet Personality
ID: 1683794 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15682
Credit: 83,213,477
RAC: 16,322
United States
Message 1683798 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 19:51:58 UTC - in response to Message 1683794.  
Last modified: 24 May 2015, 19:54:55 UTC

It also appears to me that you want me to flatter and manipulate you into seeing my side of the argument, rather than confronting you outright.


So you do think being confrontational and adversarial is a better approach?

I am quite convinced that I am no more adversarial and confrontational than you are.


But you said I'm being defensive. Certainly my defensiveness is borne from a confrontational approach?

I am also aware that women are expected to get what they want by being flattering and manipulative, so when I feel pressure to behave in that way I resist it for obvious reasons.


Correction: I do not think being diplomatic and friendly is the same as being flattering and manipulative. If it makes a difference, I expect the same from men too. It makes it difficult for me because my fight for more civility from everyone is now being construed as an expectation that women behave a particular way. It would help the conversation if that wasn't an automatic response to such an expectation.

So either we both need to be less adversarial and confrontational, or you need to examine why you expect a different arguing style from me than you do from yourself.


Given what I just said, the second part of your comment doesn't apply, leaving only the first part. It is important to point out that this started because of an adversarial and confrontational approach by you and those that agree with you. Again, I would have responded better with a more diplomatic approach, but you choose to see this as manipulative and flattering. I'm not sure how to proceed in helping you adjust that approach. Maybe you don't want to adjust your approach, in which case that makes discussion with you that much more difficult to start with.
ID: 1683798 · Report as offensive
Sirius B
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 21106
Credit: 2,947,787
RAC: 718
Ireland
Message 1683800 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 20:10:53 UTC - in response to Message 1683768.  

Even 10 years ago, this would've been impossible, so maybe there is a real social change taking place

Its great to have some good news, isn't it?

Yep, just "one little corner left"...

NI under pressure

"Diarmuid Martin, the archbishop of Dublin, said the church “needed a reality check” after the outcome. “I ask myself, most of these young people who voted yes are products of our Catholic school system for 12 years. I’m saying there’s a big challenge there to see how we get across the message of the church,” Martin said after Saturday’s result."

Simple answer - don't come across as damned dogmatic.
ID: 1683800 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 25890
Credit: 50,600,192
RAC: 19,789
United States
Message 1683801 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 20:21:50 UTC

I must be misreading ....

I'm getting that we have a person stating that large breasts are not his preference.

We have another person saying he can't have that preference because he is telling women what to do.

The twist is the person claiming women should go out and get large breasts, presumably so they feel they measure up better to a stereotype of sexual attraction, is a self proclaimed feminist who one would presume abhors sex stereotypes.

Then there is a huge argument over free speech, boob job or no boob job, that is entirely mislabeled as being about sexism.

Am I reading this about right?
ID: 1683801 · Report as offensive
Profile Es99
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 10872
Credit: 350,402
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1683804 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 20:34:03 UTC - in response to Message 1683801.  

I must be misreading ....

I'm getting that we have a person stating that large breasts are not his preference.

We have another person saying he can't have that preference because he is telling women what to do.

The twist is the person claiming women should go out and get large breasts, presumably so they feel they measure up better to a stereotype of sexual attraction, is a self proclaimed feminist who one would presume abhors sex stereotypes.

Then there is a huge argument over free speech, boob job or no boob job, that is entirely mislabeled as being about sexism.

Am I reading this about right?

No, not really.

He didn't claim large boobs were not his preference, he claimed that fake boobs were not his preference.

He can have whatever preference he wants, the minute he starts telling people what to do based on that is when we cross the line into sexism.

I didn't read anyone anywhere telling women they should go out and get large breasts.

This also isn't about free speech because no one is telling him he can't speak, what they are telling him is that if he speaks in a certain way it will be seen as sexist.

So no, you haven't got anything right.
Reality Internet Personality
ID: 1683804 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 25890
Credit: 50,600,192
RAC: 19,789
United States
Message 1683827 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 21:56:10 UTC - in response to Message 1683804.  
Last modified: 24 May 2015, 22:00:35 UTC

I must be misreading ....

I'm getting that we have a person stating that large breasts are not his preference.

We have another person saying he can't have that preference because he is telling women what to do.

The twist is the person claiming women should go out and get large breasts, presumably so they feel they measure up better to a stereotype of sexual attraction, is a self proclaimed feminist who one would presume abhors sex stereotypes.

Then there is a huge argument over free speech, boob job or no boob job, that is entirely mislabeled as being about sexism.

Am I reading this about right?

No, not really.

He didn't claim large boobs were not his preference, he claimed that fake boobs were not his preference.

I seriously doubt he was referring to reconstruction after mastectomy, and I seriously doubt you took it that way. As I know of no "fake" boob job that does not make them "larger" I find that statement disingenuous. If you think otherwise then we can start discussing silicone vs. saline and under or over muscle groups and other medical details of the many differences as to what a "fake" boob job is or is not.

He can have whatever preference he wants, the minute he starts telling people what to do based on that is when we cross the line into sexism.

So he can have a preference that people not speed and tell them so and that is sexist. The precision of your writing and ability to convey your thoughts to others is amazing.

I didn't read anyone anywhere telling women they should go out and get large breasts.

From here I didn't see much reading, I saw much writing.

This also isn't about free speech because no one is telling him he can't speak, what they are telling him is that if he speaks in a certain way it will be seen as sexist.

Speak isn't speech? Speak is sexism! Interesting thought process.

But boob job or not is as much free speech as burning an American flag is free speech.

Free speech is also expressing a preference. e.g. Don't do "it," for me.

Telling someone your thought process but not telling them you are making their choice for them is somehow sexism in your mind. Funny how I thought that was communication, but apparently it is sexism. And communication seems to be lacking here and now.

So no, you haven't got anything right.

I'd agree, you don't have anything right because you are too busy talking and not spending any time listening; you don't appear to be at all interested in communication, only being antagonistically argumentative and proving to yourself that you are correct IMHO.
ID: 1683827 · Report as offensive
Profile Es99
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 10872
Credit: 350,402
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1683830 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 22:03:15 UTC - in response to Message 1683827.  

... you don't appear to be at all interested in communication, only being antagonistically argumentative and proving to yourself that you are correct IMHO.

now there is irony.
Reality Internet Personality
ID: 1683830 · Report as offensive
Profile Es99
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 10872
Credit: 350,402
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1683838 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 23:09:18 UTC
Last modified: 24 May 2015, 23:11:14 UTC

MIT has put all their gender studies materials online for free.

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/womens-and-gender-studies/

As a suggestion, those interested could start with this one: Feminist Political Thought

"In this course we will examine the development of feminist theory over time. Some subjects we will examine in detail include suffrage and equality; radical feminism; psychoanalysis and feminism; theories of power; sexuality and gender; embodied knowledge; pornography; identities and global feminism; militarism; and the welfare state. Throughout the course we will analyze different ways of looking at power and political culture in modern societies, issues of race and class, poverty and welfare, sexuality and morality."
Reality Internet Personality
ID: 1683838 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 0
Sweden
Message 1683848 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 23:29:15 UTC
Last modified: 24 May 2015, 23:29:55 UTC

Lise Meitner is often mentioned as one of the most glaring examples of women's scientific achievement overlooked by the Nobel committee.
I have been to her house in Kungälv Sweden.
Otto Hahn got the prize and she had to go Sweden with no prize because she was a jew and a woman!
ID: 1683848 · Report as offensive
account
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 31 Dec 99
Posts: 1844
Credit: 6,325,711
RAC: 5
Saint Pierre and Miquelon
Message 1683853 - Posted: 24 May 2015, 23:44:12 UTC

Maybe being called a sexist, by a few, really isn't so bad.
Definitely not worth getting all worked up over.
The overuse of the accusation is in itself a form of sexism.
There are far greater problems in the world than a few people being rude to each other.
ID: 1683853 · Report as offensive
Profile Clyde "Liberal" Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Aug 99
Posts: 15525
Credit: 45,365,260
RAC: 731
United States
Message 1683917 - Posted: 25 May 2015, 4:47:31 UTC
Last modified: 25 May 2015, 5:11:04 UTC

OzzFan...

Don't take their false (as always) attacks against you seriously.

It is just their technique to have you leave this discussion to them.

They cannot defend their point of view. So they attempt to have you defend yourself, from their malicious and false attacks.

I, and hope you, understand their Agenda.

As I said: Don't defend yourself. Just point out their hatefilled posts, and their constant name calling, which they cannot stop. And leave it at that.

They are very unreasonable. A reasonable discussion, with them, is a waste of time.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
--- George Santayana

Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
--- Lord Acton
ID: 1683917 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 0
Sweden
Message 1683964 - Posted: 25 May 2015, 8:03:01 UTC
Last modified: 25 May 2015, 8:03:49 UTC

A total of 139 suspected migrant grave sites have been found in 28 human-trafficking camps close to the Thai border in north Malaysia, say police.
National police chief Khalid Abu Bakar said some of the graves, found since 11 May, may contain more than one body.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32872815
ID: 1683964 · Report as offensive
Sirius B
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 21106
Credit: 2,947,787
RAC: 718
Ireland
Message 1684017 - Posted: 25 May 2015, 12:28:03 UTC

For the past few months there have been some interesting & serious questions asked on this board.

They remain unanswered, instead just as this thread has shown by the last dozen or so posts, they get by-passed. However, I'm going to ask this one again - I'll take odds it never gets answered!

I think women should be allowed to do as they damm well please

Fair point, but at what cost?
ID: 1684017 · Report as offensive
Profile SUPER NATIONALIST&SUPER PRIVILEGED I'm **in' RACIST; I'm **in' BIGOTED; I'm **in' PREJUDICED; I'm **in' JUDGEMENTAL; I **In' Have ALL dA CONSCIOUS & UNCONSCIOUS BIAS & ALL Other NASTIEs a HuWoMan Can **in' Have. ALL AGENDAs ALL dA **in' Kind of Gender
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 02
Posts: 4410
Credit: 6,380,732
RAC: 200
Russia
Message 1684029 - Posted: 25 May 2015, 13:52:50 UTC

An Infinitesimal Amount of HuWoMans, In Da Vrold, Ascribe Attitudes Espoused by The 99 One.

This 'Attitude' is Why Most Causes, Whither and Disappear.

I Cheer this 'Extremism' of 'Attitude. 'It' 'is' 'Advertisement', which Drives Away 'Customers'.

A Fine Example of The 'Way', 'Causes' should be 'Promoted', 'is' Da Vonderful Job, Play B O Y Mag a zine has Done in 'its' 60 Plus Years of Existence.

Their 'Writings' in All Forms, are Elegance 'Personified'.

'They' have Done More to Enlighten All Generations, to The 'Rights' and 'Wrongs' of This Vrold, than Any 'News'Paper or TV 'Program'.

Or Any 'Teacher', or 'Forum' Extremist.

'Fake', or 'Real'. Large or Small.

Get A GOoD Grip.

Make 'Fun' of 'Every' 'One'.

Got 'Joke'? Questions?

No 'Answers' Here.

yO


ID: 1684029 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 0
Sweden
Message 1684036 - Posted: 25 May 2015, 14:49:01 UTC

Benny Hill.
A group of critics accused the show of sexism, but Hill said that female characters kept their dignity while the men who chase them were portrayed as buffoons.
I only remember this very funny episode.
No sex included:)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=191tBvVsqDs
ID: 1684036 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 . . . 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 . . . 53 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Against ALL women - Infanticide, Slavery, Rape, Trafficking... (#3)


 
©2019 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.