Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Willfor]

Yes so the discussion is

Is Systematic sexism towards males... Sexism?

Yes.

Why would you think that it isn't?

[Neonivek]

Yes so the discussion is

Is Systematic sexism towards males... Sexism?

Yes.

Why would you think that it isn't?

I know it is... but people have jumbled that issue up with a ton of crud to try to build up something that isn't there.

It is a simple issue at heart.

That Commercial is sexist because it is sexist. The advantage one has over the other doesn't negate it. The fact that it has less of an impact doesn't matter.

In terms of "systematic prejudice towards society is clearly unaffected by that commercial" and is thus unsexist I think the issue gail doesn't see is that the presence of that commercial is there BECAUSE there is a systematic prejudice (a sexism) towards males. If you were to say that it isn't sexist because it wasn't meant to be representative of males but rather of this one and comparing that one to a cave man... then sure there is something there but that certainly wasn't what she said.

It isn't a complex issue but people constantly are fighting this silly equality contest where the one most disadvantaged wins. Where "Men can't have disadvantages because otherwise women don't get points for the equality contest".

[GlyphGryph]

Sometimes I feel like we might be better off coming up with new words instead of using two identical words for different but related things. That's basically a recipe for misery in communication, and this is an area  where communication, clear communication, is of pretty vital importance.

[Vector]

Sometimes I feel like we might be better off coming up with new words instead of using two identical words for different but related things. That's basically a recipe for misery in communication, and this is an area  where communication, clear communication, is of pretty vital importance.

That would be why we have the "feminists' definition" for sexism.  Stereotyping and prejudice mean that there is something systemic behind it.  Otherwise it'd merely be "hey, I randomly don't like that dude Joe."

[Neonivek]

All I know is that I am a thousand times more caustic in a conversation when I am genuinely angry about something... then when I am just being negative.

This being one of the times I am genuinely upset.

That would be why we have the "feminists' definition" for sexism

Right but it still paints sexism towards males as sexism. It doesn't excuse anything, so I don't know why we bring it up as a way to justify what Gail is saying.

Gail wasn't bringing up definition B, Gail is just one of those people who honestly believes in "acceptable targets"

especially since sexism is both A and B. You don't take B without taking A.

[GlyphGryph]

If you decide to have a "feminist definition" for something, you've already fucked up your cause significantly by doing so.

And people are perfectly capable of having deeply personal stereotypes and prejudices, so... no, it doesn't mean that there is something systemic behind it... assuming you are implying there some system of which the individual is a part, rather than some personal system they USE. And assuming that you aren't using special feminist versions of stereotypes and prejudices.

And see, this is exactly the problem, here. Communicating poorly just means that even if you're right, you're wrong. Because people will respond to what they think you mean, rather than what you actually mean, because it's impossible to know what anyone actually means and that is the closest any of us can get.

And then you'll be arguing about something completely stupid and semantic and completely unrelated to anything of actual importance. See: The discussion with Neonivek.

[Neonivek]

I don't know...

Would the commercial be less sexist if while they were putting it out they had a gender swapped one where it was a blonde on the couch watching a show called "Dumb blondes" where they were all going duhhhhhhhhh and she was going duhhhhh and then the man put on Smart TV?

And then you'll be arguing about something completely stupid and semantic and completely unrelated to anything of actual importance. See: The discussion with Neonivek.

Ok I've been insulted enough... I'll get serious.

[Neonivek]

So let me start.

But it can’t be sexist. Just like a black person can’t be racist. Sexism is a word with a very specific meaning, which is a certain group having more access than another group to the things that make life worth living, such as high wages and good housing

There we go. Now here we see that sexism is being defined as an advantage over the other. In otherwords there is systematic sexism from males to females because males have a advantage.

The commercial isn't sexist because it doesn't alter this balance is the basic premise Gail is talking about. It can be offensive, but it cannot be sexist.

So lets play by Gail's rules. Something is only sexist if it is part of a systematic unbalance of "things that make life worth living"?

Well the first thing you have to ask yourself is what are the things that make "Life worth living" well as you can see "High wages" and "good housing" are included. So lets go to Immanuel Kants pyramid of life for a second.

These are: Physiological needs, Safety, Love and Belonging, Esteem, and Self Actualization.

These ARE the things that make life worth living period.

[Willfor]

I don't really understand what you're trying to say Neon.

[Neonivek]

I don't really understand what you're trying to say Neon.

I am taking Gail's own words and revealing why the commercial is sexist by the rules being enforced. 'A' feminist definition of sexism.

Which as you know can ONLY exist if it is a gender based imposition of disproportion equality on the requirements of human life and flourishing. Which I provided using Immanuel Kant's pyramid.

The reason WHY I am doing this is because it is a stretching of the definition of sexism intentionally created so that it only applies to women. It clearly is and is plainly so, but let me deconstruct it using its own logic.

[penguinofhonor]

If you decide to have a "feminist definition" for something, you've already fucked up your cause significantly by doing so.

Really? I just feel like it means your cause has created enough ideas to require its own vocabulary. That doesn't seem particularly fucked up.

[Dutchling]

So, this is going to be the Feminism Thread now?

[Vector]

Which I provided using Immanuel Kant's pyramid.

Maslow.  You're, uh... looking for Maslow.

So, this is going to be the Feminism Thread now?

Apparently


Novel, I'll try to answer some of your questions from the beginning in a while.  Haven't forgotten about them.

[Neonivek]

So, this is going to be the Feminism Thread now?

It is a sexism thread... but Feminism is an entire Pseudoscience/Science/philosophy based around sexism. So it is impossible to ignore.

---

Anyhow so all there needs to be in order for something to be sexist is in order for there to be an imbalance between males and females within a subset group.

In this case it is enforcing an imbalance between how males and females interact with each other (males who are in relationships with certain females), as well as being enforcing legal proceedings that benefit females over males (because males so stupid)

Certainly that commercial cannot affect the overall relationship between males and females, it certainly can give advantages and disadvantages in some of the areas that exists.

Thus the commercial is sexist.

[Vector]

. . . Pseudoscience?  Really?

I'll thank you again for defining feminism for us.