Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Why is sexism such a difficult topic?
Comments
-
Said in a passive-aggressive style so people would wonder what he meant - under the guise of pretending he doesn't want to offend anyone. The usual.Seomra Mushie wrote: »Eric Cartman wrote: »millicent - very brave for posting that , cheers , Im going to leave this thread now before i get banned. beliefs reinforced...
0 -
-
-
-
stupidusername wrote: »This attitude annoys me. what difference does it make that she's a woman?:mad:
Apparently, if I defend women's issues as a woman, I'm a man hater. If I were a man, I might be a white knight. To be honest, I'm not sure how all this works exactly. :pac:0 -
-
-
Micky Dolenz wrote: »How does this move the discussion forward?
that was meant to be an apology in my edit
0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
stupidusername wrote: »btw I wasn't agreeing with the post, I just hate this attitude that if you're a woman you must be all for feminism etc, and you're a traitor if you're not.
also, you know I like you milli, I never viewed you as a man-hater at all.
I got that. I don't think anyone is a traitor if they don't subscribe to the feminist ideology. It just happens to be the one for me.
And aw! Thank you kindly. I like you too! Glad you didn't perceive me as a man hater either.0 -
-
-
No? I didn't say anything remotely like that.
If a woman defends women when provoked, how the fuk does that look like man-hating?
It surely just looks like defending women when provoked. Millicent defends anyone if she finds what's being said about them really uncalled-for, including men. Pity there aren't more like her. Yet you see man-hating... :rolleyes:
What, remotely, in her manner is aggressive enough to warrant such a vile slur? She's really calm and level-headed and reasonable and fair and balanced from what I see.
And yeah, I do object to women objecting to women defending women, seeing as they're actually also being defended - and would be grateful for it if they needed it.0 -
-
-
No? I didn't say anything remotely like that.
If a woman defends women when provoked, how the fuk does that look like man-hating?
It surely just looks like defending women when provoked. Millicent defends anyone if she finds what's being said about them really uncalled-for, including men. Pity there aren't more like her. Yet you see man-hating... :rolleyes:
What, remotely, in her manner is aggressive enough to warrant such a vile slur? She's really calm and level-headed and reasonable and fair and balanced from what I see.
And yeah, I do object to women objecting to women defending women, seeing as they're actually also being defended - and would be grateful for it if they needed it.stupidusername wrote: »Nope, I can stand up for myself thanks.
Stupi, I know you can, and very well too. I'd still defend you or any group you might happen to belong to, same as I would anyone I perceived as being treated unreasonably or aggressively. I can't help myself.
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
No? I didn't say anything remotely like that.
If a woman defends women when provoked, how the fuk does that look like man-hating?
It surely just looks like defending women when provoked. Millicent defends anyone if she finds what's being said about them really uncalled-for, including men. Pity there aren't more like her. Yet you see man-hating... :rolleyes:
What, remotely, in her manner is aggressive enough to warrant such a vile slur? She's really calm and level-headed and reasonable and fair and balanced from what I see.
And yeah, I do object to women objecting to women defending women, seeing as they're actually also being defended - and would be grateful for it if they needed it.
It was not a vile slur, I used the word because millicent used it, I was just saying why people might think it.
There is no need for you to defend her, as you said she can defend herself.
I'm not getting into a debate over it. I can defend myself and don't expect anyone else to do it for me.
I don't think millicent took offence to my post, I hope she did not anyway.0 -
-
-
-
-
I'm red penning this cos it's late and it's easier.Not gonna trawl through the rest of this thread right at the moment - hope no-one's offended. But I'm glad the topic has been re-opened, the tail end of the last thread made me sad. I still have a few genuine questions I'd like answered, if anyone's got a moment.
First up, there are three concepts that a couple of (ex UCD Womens' Studies) friends have brought up:
"The global sisterhood" - the idea that there's a more profound connection between women all over the world that men can never understand or be part of. That a western middle class woman has more in common with another woman living in an African village than with a man from her own class and cultural background.
IMO, bollox. There are some things I may have in common with women in an African village and some things I can have no comprehension of. There are issues that unite me with women of a particular stance, but I do not necessarily have more in common with those than a man of my own class. It's a case-by-case thing for me. And psh, course men can understand it. If not always able to empathise with some issues particular to women they can sympathise. Depends on the man in question.
"Human history has primarily been defined by gender based oppression". We're gender roles not as much a function of the division of labour as of willful oppression? And isn't a male serf at least equally oppressed to a lady of the manor?
I think the point is, it doesn't matter why the roles were created, it's the impact that matters. By comparing a male serf with the lady of the manor, you aren't comparing like for like. He's still better off than the female serf.
"There would be no war in a world ruled by women", I give you Margaret Thatcher, Elizabeth I, etc.
Are these mainstream feminist opinions? Like, do people really believe this stuff? Not being hostile in any way, just want to get other perspectives.
AFAIK, not a mainstream feminist opinion, more of a "The View" opinion of things. I think there may be some basis for it given the nurturing aspect of prescribed feminine roles. When you are taught to nurture all around you, you don't want to see them hurt unnecessarily. However, take away those gender roles and there would be, IMO, no difference between the willingness to fight between the genders. Some women would want to fight and some men would. Currently, though, women are encouraged to talk, men are taught to fight back. Bit of a generalisation but I don't mean to use broad brush strokes. There are always exceptions, and sometimes sizeable ones, on either side.
Also, why do we need to cling on to feminism, when a broader more inclusive approach could be more effective? As you have seen, lots of men won't support feminism, not through misogyny or anything like it, but because of feminism's adversarial approach, but would broadly support many "feminist" aims. Why not inclusive egalitarianism? Or is identity politics rather than equality the main thing?
Because, as I see it, the issues facing women are not resolved. There are still issues to be sorted through. Feminism is still a very young movement in the history of the world--that's not to say a more egalitarian movement wouldn't be more suitable in the future.
I take your point that many men could feel excluded from feminism due to the misconception that feminists are adversarial. Not all are. There are far more moderate feminists than radical ones. I'd encourage any man who's not aware of moderate feminism to give feminist works a read. "Female Chauvinist Pigs" is a good one to start with. Gives some good examples of why the feminist movement is not over.
Replies would be appreciated, thankee.
Hope that helps. 0 -
Advertisement
-
It was not a vile slur, I used the word because millicent used it, I was just saying why people might think it.
There is no need for you to defend her, as you said she can defend herself.
I'm not getting into a debate over it. I can defend myself and don't expect anyone else to do it for me.
I don't think millicent took offence to my post, I hope she did not anyway.
I didn't for the record. It does usually provoke a knee jerk response of anger from me (I'm particularly zen this evening
) but I understand why Dudess is reacting to the word in that way. It does get trotted out to dismiss whole viewpoints and can be extremely infuriating because of it. 0 -
-
-
I'd say sexism is such a hard topic because it usually brings out the flamers on both sides; for the most part, it's easy to get a rise out of the others. Some would have gone through Millicents post with a fine tooth comb to get a rise out of what she said.
Sexism is probably a difficult topic as there are a few viewpoints;
The "male privilege"; some men have not had to think about something as it never affected them. They may have never had to think of something, and thus never considered it as sexist, as it never impacted their life, and thus they may not know about it.
The "male bastard" that doesn't care about the womens perspective if it makes them do things differently.
The "male rights activist" who will defend a mans right to do stuff, but if a women doesn't see where they are coming from, may be lumped into the above category.
The "politically correct" male who thinks more rights should be given to women. You could call some of them a "male feminist".
The "female feminist" who is the equal of the "male rights activist".
The "female feminazi", who'd be like the "male bastard" but who also wants all your bases.
The middle three (MRA, PC/MF, FF) are on this thread now.
The male privilege may accidentally walk into a thread with a mouth filled with C4 which they thought was candy, and blow everyone away with a simple question that even blows the MRA away.
The "male bastard" and the "female feminazi" tend to kill threads, as neither want to give the "other side" an inch.
In heated debate, the MP and MRA will be seen as the MB by the otherside, and unless you agree with the male side, you'll most likely be seen as a feminazi.
=-=
I'd say most laws regarding sexism went through a lot of heated debate, but with anonymity, some people may not see the point in debating it civilly, and go all out thus making it such a difficult topic.
I'll hopefully be back tomorrow (if I'm not banned for accidentally offending someone) to answer questions, and to ask some of my own.
Before I go, I'd like to thank Millicent for her post: you get a few posters open their heart, and as Eric Cartman said "it ticks boxes". When you read about peoples lives in the politics forums, you'll see where they come from, how their viewpoint was formed, and that they, in some cases, were not trolling, but truly believed in their point of view (KeithAFC, for example). I'm unsure how EC meant it, but when I quoted the "it ticks boxes" I mean I see where your point of view comes from, and why you fight for what you believe in.
I hope you find your true metal brothers and sisters who don't care what metal you listen to and rock onthe fact that my heavy metal/alt/grunge tastes were treated with derision and suspicion by male fans and friends, who did their best to trip me up with the third degree on my tastes 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
Chuck Stone wrote: »Eric Cartman wrote: »I have certain beliefs....
Why do you think anyone should give a flying fuck about your beliefs?
Agreed but i for one would be interested in seeing his checklist 0 -
-
-
-
Roy Yummy Grenade wrote: »Agreed but i for one would be interested in seeing his checklist
His beliefs don't amount to a hill of shite unless they have some basis in fact.0 -
-
-
-
Roy Yummy Grenade wrote: »Agreed but i for one would be interested in seeing his checklistChuck Stone wrote: »His beliefs don't amount to a hill of shite unless they have some basis in fact.
I'm genuinely interested in discussing the checklist. If it can be presented in a respectful way, I will respond to it and agree or counter the points within.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement