Print

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

[Khan Boyzitbig]

Niece?

[scriver]

Right, that's it. All Niece before Zod!

[Egan_BW]

(lolol, that's about the least effective insult to attempt on me. I dont care to be attractive, because I am not trying to attract a mate. Like-- AT ALL.)

Hey, not seeking a mate is no reason to not try and look as awesome as possible.

[Frumple]

Today's first breakfast is apparently a pizza/pancake sandwich. I'm still not entirely sure how the thought came about, but it's... pretty alright. Horrible for you but tasty. The bottom slice of "bread" is a small pepperoni pizza. The top slice of "bread" is a small maple pancake. Bit of extra pepperoni, cheese, and a slice of honey roasted turkey. Pepperoni, turkey, and cheese pizzacake sandwich.

[Reelya]

The Hawaiian government needed to put out a community announcement warning people not to roast marshmallow in lava. Are all you DF players in Hawaii taking advantage of the opportunity for !!Magma!! cooking?

[McTraveller]

I can see roasting marshmallow over lava, but not in it.

I guess they just don't want people getting that close?

[Reelya]

Yeah, I meant "over". But it's a bad idea, you'll get gassed and fall in.

[pikachu17]

How was I doing a rhetorical whataboutist trick? I was just noting that she said she said something sexist, and ironic at that.
And then I noted the flaws in her statement.
How was that wrong? I am not "just asking questions", I seriously want to know how it was a rhetorical whataboutist trick.

"But what about the oppression of men" is by now an all-time classic, is all, for reasons already mentioned and elaborated upon with relation to race, some of them in this very post!

True. Mysogynistic people(both men and women) often use that. Except I wasn't reacting to sexism against women by saying "But you're sexist too!".
I was noting that that statement of hers was sexist. Whether it was sexist aginst men or women is unimportant.
And besides, pretending women are never sexist is certainly not going to help anyone.
I would prefer that men and women be equal, and if someone claims something sexist against either sex, I will dislike it.
There are double standards against men, and one of those is if they note sexism or double standards against men, people will act as if they are automatically mysognystic for that, when a woman won't(at least not by the same people) be called misandrist for pointing out sexism and double standards against women.
If you don't believe there are double standards against men, look at the TV Tropes page, Double Standards. I also recommend the page, The Unfair Sex.
I am not being sexist against women.
I am just noting sexism.
Sexism is always bad, and it should not be tolerated, not against either men or women.

[Doomblade187]

Thank you for clarifying. It's really easy to come off as defending sexism to some people (like me, for example) because other people have used similar lines in the past.

[Reelya]

I'm not sure, because if you ever were to bring up any sort of stat for male victims, as a topic in it's own right, it's fairly certain someone butts in with "oh but it's worse for women". Which is ... sort of the same derailment technique. I think it would actually be more likely in terms of frequency that if you brought up male victimization someone would interject with the female side of things, rather than each time female victimization is brought up, someone would interject with the male side of things. e.g. if you bring up rape against females, there's some chance the figures of rape against men would enter the conversation. But if you ever bring up rape against males, then it's far more certain that the figures of rape against women would be brought up. So no, I don't see much evidence that derailment with "what about gender X" goes only one way, or that that way is entirely biased to derailing discussions of female victimization. Female victimization is just brought up as a discussion topic far more often so you notice it more.

I had this conversation the other day btw. it was effectively a god of the gaps tactic. "it only happens to women" => cite evidence it happens to men => "yes, but it happens to women more" => cite evidence it happens to men and women equally => "yes, but it doesn't really affect men when it happens" => cite evidence men are affected => "yes, but women are affected more worser". Now at this stage, it's merely hard to find a good study which shows which gender is more "hurt" (psychologically) by a type of victimization that happens to both equally often so at this point the argument ends. But I have a good idea that if I had such a study handy and showed that, then this person would have had another convenient "yes, but" to say why it matters more when it happens to their preferred gender vs the other gender.

Always "yes, but". This sort of thing is pure confirmation bias from the other side.

[Lord Shonus]

From personal experience, this is quite true. It is extremely frustrating to be told that the sexual harassment you have experienced "doesn't count" because you are a guy, and "guys get harassed so rarely that we can pretend it doesn't exist".

[Kagus]

Damascus goats are pretty neat. I'm also a fan of Jacobs sheep.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[Reelya]

From personal experience, this is quite true. It is extremely frustrating to be told that the sexual harassment you have experienced "doesn't count" because you are a guy, and "guys get harassed so rarely that we can pretend it doesn't exist".

Yeah, i mean if you look at the figures, here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_harassment_in_education_in_the_United_States

81% or eight out of 10 students experience sexual harassment in school
83% of girls have been sexually harassed
78% of boys have been sexually harassed

That speaks for itself. Virtually everyone reports some amount of sexual harassment. However, if 78% of boys are saying they're sexually harassed you can read that two ways: either virtually the entire school is being sexually harassed, or the definition of harassment used was extremely broad.

But they almost always only cite the female victim data in the summaries for these types of reports, so if they used an excessively broad definition, then the only logical explanation as to why is that it was deliberate in order to maximize the apparent number of female victims, knowing that they could merely fail to mention the male results later.

So they almost certainly use an extremely loose definition, and then only reported this as "83% of highschool girls report being sexually harassed", without citing any male figures. These two things combined leave you with the desired impression: that all girls are the victims of all boys.

And that's not an outlier. The above survey was by AAUW (American Association of University Women) at middle schools in 2000, and their figures for colleges in 2006 read:

62% of female college students and 61% of male college students report having been sexually harassed at their university.

Again, when you apply identical methodology to male and female students you get virtual indistinguishable results. There's little excuse for only reporting on the female survey results for these particular types of studies. It's misleading at best, and deliberate academic fraud at worst.

[Lord Shonus]

When I was in highschool, at least, any male complaints about sexual harassment (at least, the male-on-male variety that I was subjected to) was ignored, and the people who were being groped were told "They're trying to creep you out. Just play along and they will get creeped out instead." This was in the early 00s.

In the workplace, the female-on-male harassment I've had to deal with has either been laughed at, or else had the woman in question simply told "stop doing that" with no write-up, as opposed to the immediate termination male-on-female harassers are subjected to. Note that most places I've had this problem at have surveliance cameras, so there was usually solid proof instead of "he-said/she-said" in both situations outside of the bathrooms.

[Il Palazzo]

AH YES. THE ADORABLE DAMASCUS GOAT
Such majesty!
SUCH GRACE!

The people of Damascus appear to have high proclivity towards folding things unto themselves. These goats must have been folded at least gorillion times. I bet they can cut a tank in half.