Double standards.

[evkl]

I didn't mean to stifle all debate on this issue but it's kind of interesting that everyone stopped talking when you had to stop being mean to one another...

 

[Dialgarules]

We don't want to violate the rules. We're scared. I feel nervous even writing this.

 

[evkl]

Oh please. A selection of quotes that are absolutely egregious, from this thread:

Oh... my... god... LOL. I am amused and yet deeply embarrassed for you. You are like a bottomless well of sheer fail.

You are a feminist tool. Gooday.

Not to nitpick, and not calling out the original posters. But I think you get my point. We can debate without that stuff, no...?

 

[Fig]

Finally... I didn't intentionally call you a liar, and sorry if it came across that way. But I still think you're mistaken if you think feminism as a whole needs to be held accountable for an outspoken fringe minority. Also, I haven't heard of anything similar to those examples happening in other countries. Was Quebec more egalitarian to begin with than the average?

Held accountable...I wouldn't say I hold feminists-at-large accountable for what the vocal minority says. I hold them accountable for not stepping up to the plate and denouncing that vocal minority.

Regarding the daycares, other than the fact the proposal came from a conservative party, nothing really. The worry seemed to be simply that giving parents the option of having one of them stay home and look after the children (without any gender distinction) amounted to sending women back to the kitchen, which is a pretty far leap. (And, of course, something that angers me - my mother stayed at home, by her own free choice, to look after her children, and I tend to take very dim views on people who look down on her for that. And on governments that exclude her from their parenting helps policies)

As for being more egalitarian, though question. Not historically, but Quebec is a place that redefined itself socially a great deal over the past forty years - there is, in the average Quebec mentality, a clean break between "society back then" and "society now", and as such Feminism may have been able to enjoy a lot more success here. So it's possible that by now Quebec is more egalitarian than most.

 

[Nomura]

Exactly how loud did you say this? Was it like under your breath thinking out loud, or did you verbally say it with intentions of it being overheard. If it's the former and not the latter, nobody had any right to invade your personal space and chastise you for something that was a personal moment, and was not intended for the audible consumption of others. That is on the level of stubbing your toe, saying "damn" under your breath, and instantly having a prude jump you for "yelling the d-word."

Like I said, Laura(my co-worker) was right next to me. I didn't mean for it to happen, but for you guys here, you know how some things slip out. But, it was indeed like a quiet whisper, that shouldn't have even been paid attention to. She only heard it because she was right next to me. So yes, like the stubbing of the toe example you gave.

 

[Lethal Carnivine]

Like I said before, I don't think Nomura should have been chastised for his actions. Especially if they were under his breath. Though I realize it's probably not best to risk it not because it's offensive, but because some people are looking for any way to get money, including a law suit for sexual harassment.

Edit: Once again, I do apologize. I was feeling a lot of stress that day and should have conducted myself a bit better even though I was feeling that. I mean all of the things I said, but I should have toned down my words drastically.

 

[Blackjack Gabbiani]

Jo-Jo, belief doesn't lead to conviction right away, since you still have to be able to *prove* it. All you can really prove beyond a doubt is that Person A and Person B had sex. To convict on rape you have to prove that there was any degree of unwillingness, and that's very very hard to prove. Either way, women are encouraged to report rape. Men are not. Pay attention to the public service messages--they're all about female victim/male assaulter, and pretty much denying any other combination as being possible.

And I don't see anything wrong with saying "wow" when you see something you like, including a pretty person.


Another double standard is that pretty much every time you hear about abuse in schools, it's sexually based. But there's a LOT more going on there. I was abused by teachers, and the only times they touched me was to smack me. That's not sexual, but it's still abuse, and it's still horrible, but every single article about abuse in the schools that ran in the Oregonian last year went on and on about only sexual, and didn't even seem to think anything else was worth mentioning, even though the articles claimed to be about "abuse" in general without modifiers.

 

[Jo-Jo]

Held accountable...I wouldn't say I hold feminists-at-large accountable for what the vocal minority says. I hold them accountable for not stepping up to the plate and denouncing that vocal minority.

Isn't that rather unfair? For all you know, they do, and you just haven't read it because you don't look at feminist sites (or do you? I don't want to assume). I don't see a lot of evidence that the fringe minority is particularly offensive or dangerous, just that they're annoying. For example, out of your examples from Quebec, only the last one about the schools seemed to show any direct harm being caused to males as a result of the feminists' stonewalling. So other feminists speaking out against the vocal ones wouldn't be 'defending men', they'd just be telling a bunch of women not to speak their minds, which is problematic for obvious reasons. When you add in the fact that most feminists get called crazy anyway, either because somebody hasn't understood them, hasn't bothered to take their argument seriously or just plain doesn't like women, it gets muddied even further.

Regarding the daycares, other than the fact the proposal came from a conservative party, nothing really. The worry seemed to be simply that giving parents the option of having one of them stay home and look after the children (without any gender distinction) amounted to sending women back to the kitchen, which is a pretty far leap.

But I thought you said the proposal was to replace the cheap daycare with giving money directly to parents. If this would have made it less economical to use the daycare services and more economical for a parent to just stay home, then wouldn't the feminists have a legitimate point there? Let's face it, the overwhelming bulk of stay-at-homes are women, and it's not always by choice - women make less money than men on average for working the same hours, so if one spouse is going to quit his/her job, the wife will usually be the one earning less, making it more logical for her to quit even if she doesn't want to.

And the fact that a conservative group was pushing this bill could be more relevant than you think. A lot of conservatives are, well, douchebags when it comes to gender equality. I wouldn't put it past some of them to try to get women to stay home rather than use daycare services. Is it conceivable they had that as part of their agenda when they pushed the bill?

(And, of course, something that angers me - my mother stayed at home, by her own free choice, to look after her children, and I tend to take very dim views on people who look down on her for that. And on governments that exclude her from their parenting helps policies)

But feminists don't have a problem with stay-at-home mothers, just the social expectation that women should automatically take on the bulk of parenting duties.

Like I said before, I don't think Nomura should have been chastised for his actions. Especially if they were under his breath.

I think you're ignoring a good-sized chunk of what is problematic about that story. Namely that Nomura believes it is his right "as a man" to be allowed to check out chicks in the office and talk about it openly with the other guys, regardless of whether it makes the women uncomfortable. If somebody doesn't like your behaviour, you have a social obligation to take their feelings into account and not bitch about how they're taking away your inalienable privilege to say whatever you want.

Though I realize it's probably not best to risk it not because it's offensive, but because some people are looking for any way to get money, including a law suit for sexual harassment.

Yeeeeeah. That's why you shouldn't commit sexual harassment. Because dem bitches will take your moneyz.

Jo-Jo, belief doesn't lead to conviction right away, since you still have to be able to *prove* it.

I'm perfectly aware of that. I never said that accusing someone should lead to an automatic conviction. But the conviction rate used to be something like 40% in the 60s, and now it's dropped to 5.8%. Why is this?

All you can really prove beyond a doubt is that Person A and Person B had sex. To convict on rape you have to prove that there was any degree of unwillingness, and that's very very hard to prove.

You can also prove that the attacker used force. Of course, that's usually dismissed as consensual rough sex in court. Or you can prove that the victim was so drunk at the time of the sex she would have been practically unconscious, but then it'll be claimed that drunken sex doesn't count as rape, even though legally it totally does if you're completely blotto... also the victim obviously just regretted having sex later and pretended it was rape to soothe her feelings (...how?). Or sometimes the attacker conveniently videotaped the assault, in which case it'll be probably claimed that the victim was playing a part in an amateur necrophiliac porno (google Greg Haidl if you want to turn your stomach).

Thing is, date rape cases and any case where there's no evidence to go on but the victim's word tend not to make it to court at all. The biggest reason the conviction rate is so low is because defense lawyers still employ the tactic of smearing the victim's character in court, and juries still hold conservative views that the victim was to blame if she was drunk or let herself be left alone with the rapist.

Either way, women are encouraged to report rape. Men are not.

That's because women make up the vast majority of victims. Most of them still don't report it anyway.

But if you want more men to feel able to report rape and more likely to be believed, feminism can help!

Pay attention to the public service messages--they're all about female victim/male assaulter, and pretty much denying any other combination as being possible.

Most of the public service messages I've seen were telling women not to drink, lest they bring rape down on themselves. It would be nice if more adverts encouraged men not to assault people, rather than telling women not to have as much fun as men because they're likelier to suffer for it.

 

[Blackjack Gabbiani]

Jo-Jo, the reason feminists get dismissed as "crazy" is because of the manhating fringe. The vast majority of people *do* believe in equality, but won't call themselves feminists because thos nutcases are the ones who get all the press. Which is really sad.

 

[Nomura]

Jo-Jo, I do believe I stated that we are not allowed to do such things. It's an unwritten rule. Our boss is strict about it. No one does these things, so there has never been a chance to test the waters(until my incident). Even if I wanted to talk with the guys about that, the boss doesn't let us GUYS do it.

 

[Jo-Jo]

Dude, feminists get dismissed as crazy no matter how reasonable they're being. Any feminist sentiment needs to be wrapped up in placatory remarks about how awesome men are in order to escape accusations of man-bashing. If you try to hold a conversation about problems faced by women, people come crashing in to ask why you aren't talking about men. You then have to spend the rest of the debate arguing about whether or not feminists hate men (kinda like this topic... lol), 'cause that's just WAY more important than arguing over whether society still hates women. The conclusion I draw from this is that holding conversations that do not include men is somehow threatening to many people*. I don't believe feminists are the problem here.

Incidentally, I read this Savage Love column just now, and the comments perfectly illustrate the typical attitudes rape victims can expect to receive from the general public: http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/SavageLove?oid=936054&view=comments#comments (not safe for work)

Please point out these ads insulting women, I see none of them.

Off the top of my head: there was a line of WCKD ads quite recently that all had slogans on them such as 'send your girlfriend somewhere cool... to the fridge for a pork pie!'. An ad on the underground for a used car dealership told a lovely story about a man who kept his nagging wife happy with a shiny new car - then used the extra cash from the awesome discount to go on a dirty weekend with the girlfriend. Then there's this ad for a gaming console, dreaming of a better world... a world in which women can't say no to sex! Wheee, happy rape time! For general stereotyping and amusing gentle satire, the entire Target Women back-catalogue rips the piss out of ads for yoghurt, cleaning products, wedding shows, etc.



* For example, a good friend of mine made a scornful remark about the 'Dancing Queen' sequence in Mamma Mia the movie: "oh, look at us, la la la, we're so happy and we hate men". Yep - going one song and dance routine without any men onscreen is proof positive of man-hatred. 'Dancing Queen'... it's, like, the misandrist's nation anthem. (...Ooooh, I would SO become a misandrist if I could have 'Dancing Queen' as my national anthem. Eeeeeee.) So there you have it. Feminists - we're here, and we're destroying the world through ABBA.

 

[Nomura]

Jo-Jo, you are right, feminist as a whole are not the problem. I know alot of feminist who I agree with(equal pay, same chances as men in work place, etc). They are not asking for much, but at the same time, they're voice goes unheard because of two reasons. One, the feminist who want world domination and hate men are the loudest. For every good feminist I speak to, there are five crazy ones who wish to tell me about how bad I am(and this is just when I'm standing around). Second, everytime a feminist gets to speak about women rights, whoever lets them speak usually makes certain that the crazy one's I mentioned are the one's who get heard(if it's not intentional it seems like it).

Even so, feminist are still part of the blame, but they are not alone. I'm sure I know where you were heading when you said "I don't believe feminist are the problem here" but I'll just leave you with my previous statements.

 

[Blackjack Gabbiani]

See, I wonder that too (about why people don't talk about the problems men face) because really there's not many problems that women *exclusively* face. Even things like gender discrimination can in fact be targeted against men. Just because they're not the majority doesn't mean they don't exist, and to cut them out of the picture entirely is a massive dismissal and belittles people with real problems.

The issue to face should be discrimination, in EVERY wicked form, because it's ALL wrong.

 

[Fig]

Jo-Jo - No, it's not unfair. The public behavior of the feminist fringe demand public answer from the feminist leadership. It's not enough to disagree with them on a feminist website, you have to come out in the open and say "Sorry, but no" when the fringe feminists speak out loud.

 

[Jo-Jo]

What "feminist leadership" are you talking about? We're not a cult.

I'm pretty sure you'd blanch with outrage if I told you that, as a man, you have no choice but to take responsibility and stage a public outcry every time a misogynist did something shitty to a woman. But feminists are supposed to spend all their time throwing each other to the wolves any time some dude gets butthurt over their mere existence? Given how utterly disproportionate the whining over mean annoying feminists is with the amount of actual damage feminists have done to the world/other people, I get the feeling we'd have to give up helping women entirely and take up defending teh menz full time in order to make these guys happy. Yikes, count me out.

See, I wonder that too (about why people don't talk about the problems men face) because really there's not many problems that women *exclusively* face.

What problems do men face that are unfairly inflicted upon them because they're men?

 

[TTEchidna]

There may be no leaders to the feminist movement as a whole, but there are leaders of feminist organizations. I don't see any real organizations run by men that are strictly for men, at least none that haven't become gender-diversified already, which even would take that kind of responsibility, since those that remain are likely completely anti-feminism. The fact remains that, like what would happen if some American went and blew up something in another country, the President would apologize on the behalf of the United States, so should the leadership of at least some feminist organization for the blatant femnazis who want to put men in labor camps and call it equality.

They should at the very least say "We don't believe that. That woman is crazy and really needs to work out her issues. Men and women should be equal, with neither subservient to the other." That's it. Some people hear "feminist" and do associate it with the "LOL MEN SUCK WOMYN UNITE!!!", and in all honestly, that will sadly always be the case. The idiot extremists who don't ever shut up end up becoming the public appearance for any group.

The same situation exists with the extreme right-wing Republicans who want the US to have the Constitution replaced with the Bible and the extreme left-wing Democrats who want to ban any and all words from the English language which might be considered offensive somehow to someone. Normal Republicans and Democrats don't act like that. Only the nuts. But yet, due to the nuts who never shut up, those who normally would sway slightly left end up going "REPUBLICANS ALL SUCK", while those who normally sway right go "DEMOCRATS ALL SUCK".

So all in all, yeah. Someone should say something. And about saying something every time a dude acts like a dick? If I knew it happened, I would apologize. I can't be constantly screaming "I'M SORRY I HAVE A PENIS" to every woman I meet, but if I were somewhere and a guy was acting like that, damn right I'd be one of the ones waiting to kick him out and apologize to whoever he was being like that to.

 

[MetaRobo]

What "feminist leadership" are you talking about? We're not a cult.

I'm pretty sure you'd blanch with outrage if I told you that, as a man, you have no choice but to take responsibility and stage a public outcry every time a misogynist did something shitty to a woman. But feminists are supposed to spend all their time throwing each other to the wolves any time some dude gets butthurt over their mere existence? Given how utterly disproportionate the whining over mean annoying feminists is with the amount of actual damage feminists have done to the world/other people, I get the feeling we'd have to give up helping women entirely and take up defending teh menz full time in order to make these guys happy. Yikes, count me out.


What problems do men face that are unfairly inflicted upon them because they're men?

The stereotype of a man as portrayed by society is a drunk, brick-for-brains brutish asshole that thinks only of sex. Mind you, a similarly nasty stereotype of women exists as well, but the fact is both genders are villified by prejudice. And yes, indeed men as a whole have to take responsibility for the inconsiderate actions of several terrible husbands, which is why negative stereotypes of men exist. Like Blackjack said, all prejudice has to be confronted to be eradicated, and ignoring one side like you seem to be doing now merely helps tip the discrimination scale.

 

[Blackjack Gabbiani]

What problems do men face that are unfairly inflicted upon them because they're men?

Let's see here...men are expected to die for their country in most places (the vast majority of countries with drafts have it men-only). Men are expected to be emotionless and if they express emotion to any real degree they're seen as lesser beings. Men are seen as a single force of imposition rather than as individuals (ie, thinking that because an individual man is violent that all men must be that way, wheras a female violent offender is seen as a single person). Men are viewed as absent parents no matter how much they're involved with their kids. Men are a lot more likely to be accused of crimes they didn't commit (not sure of the exact numbers). Men are regularly portrayed as idiots and dimwits if not outright brutes. Men are expected to achieve more *because* they're men, which leads to depression and deflated expectations. If a man is a victim of a crime, he's seen as a weakling for "letting" it happen.


Yeah, the list is pretty long.




Anyway, more double standards, cultural this time--why is it OK for, say, Japan to take the story of Macbeth and set it there, but not for the US to take a story from overseas and set it here? Why is it OK for Hispanics to play whites, but not for whites to play Hispanics?

 

[The Outrage]

Originally Posted by Jo-Jo
What problems do men face that are unfairly inflicted upon them because they're men?

• According to my mom and sister, I should be able to fix our car eventhough I can't even drive.
• You are a pussy if you show emotions.
• No matter how much a woman may be hitting you, you can't hit them back without looking like the bad guy.
• etc....

 

[Nekusagi]

* For example, a good friend of mine made a scornful remark about the 'Dancing Queen' sequence in Mamma Mia the movie: "oh, look at us, la la la, we're so happy and we hate men". Yep - going one song and dance routine without any men onscreen is proof positive of man-hatred. 'Dancing Queen'... it's, like, the misandrist's nation anthem. (...Ooooh, I would SO become a misandrist if I could have 'Dancing Queen' as my national anthem. Eeeeeee.) So there you have it. Feminists - we're here, and we're destroying the world through ABBA.

That is possibly the least misandric movie I have ever seen in my life (apart from Donna's early attitudes in it). Not to mention that's probably the least misandric song I've ever heard in my life, too (searching for love on the dance floor?).

Your friend has some... odd ideas, to say the least.