[Post update/movietime] The thrilling conclusion of "Why feminism is facing a backlash" or "Who wants to see a grown man cry? ;D

[–][deleted] 11 points11 points11 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]ReginleiferOnly Zombies want female brains[S] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Sansa_Culotte_-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ReginleiferOnly Zombies want female brains[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Sansa_Culotte_0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ReginleiferOnly Zombies want female brains[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PhokusProgressive-Lazy Christian-Leans RP4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]We_Are_LegionAutumn Red7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]We_Are_LegionAutumn Red5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

Despite you utterly ignoring the crux of my comment(first para) lemme say this:

Look, I'm not going to sit here and search through the web finding evidence to prove to you the notion that people en-masse accosted and criticized the man/his shirt till he apologized in tears. You can believe what you like what these feminists did or didn't do.

All I know is, the Philae Lander touched down on November 12th. For me, its now Nov 17. So within the span of 5 days, there was bitching, there was incomprehension about the bitching, and then there was a tearful apology by Matt to the people he offended... followed by a fever-pitch of feminist-hate. Which happens to be today.

Now we have feminists doing what feminists do best: play the victim. We didn't do anything wrong. I'm sure you'll find reason to be offended in it but there's a jezebel article about a woman being "threatened" for disliking a shirt. The "threats" read like your standard conversation on xbox live. Or the internet large for anyone. i.e. saying "jump off a cliff" becomes the news headline: Woman recieves death-threat.

i.e She can start the #shirtstorm/#shirtgate then cry foul when she gets called on it. Convenient standard.

Doubtful as his apology came unrequested at an interview that had nothing to do with his shirt.

You believe what you like, mate. What is factual was that there was jostling enough in media until his shirt was just as consequential as the landing. And not at all most of it was focusing on the stupid-fuckery of this SJWism.

[–]yaseedog will hunt2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points4 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]yaseedog will hunt1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]namae_nanka3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]namae_nanka3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]namae_nanka0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (90 children) | Copy Link

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–]We_Are_LegionAutumn Red0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ReginleiferOnly Zombies want female brains[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Anonymity is necessary because of the imbalance of power between individuals and the state/corporations. In a world where we have to reveal our identities, they have the power and the means to harm people who disagree with them.

It's the entire principle behind the FBI really, information is a sort of power, power that Hoover used to try to twist people into doing their bidding. (See MLK) People like Will Wheaton are against it because they reckon since they're on the mainstream side of things, they'd get off quite well from ending it. It'd certainly make life easier for them who already have a soapbox and friends who could defend, attack others in other words connections... might stop some of the harassment that comes with being a public figure.

The rest of us however..... we'd be fucked if someone on HuffPo or Gawker got our names and addresses.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2259306/Gawker-publishes-licensed-gun-owner-New-York-City.html

[–]namae_nanka0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

lol TRP is waaay far out. Consider,

A lack of political diversity in psychology is said to lead to a number of pernicious outcomes, including biased research and active discrimination against conservatives. The authors of this study surveyed a large number (combined N = 800) of social and personality psychologists and discovered several interesting facts. First, although only 6% described themselves as conservative “overall,” there was more diversity of political opinion on economic issues and foreign policy. Second, respondents significantly underestimated the proportion of conservatives among their colleagues. Third, conservatives fear negative consequences of revealing their political beliefs to their colleagues. Finally, they are right to do so: In decisions ranging from paper reviews to hiring, many social and personality psychologists said that they would discriminate against openly conservative colleagues. The more liberal respondents were, the more they said they would discriminate.

And the author of Feminists Say the Darndest Things.

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

spoiled brats can be honest about what they think, whether it's politically correct or not, it's the crying about social reaction to what they think (which is just society being honest) that makes one a spoiled brat. you are free to behave however you want, and others are free to react however they want. do your critical thinking skills grasp that? ultimately no one is entirely free, your behavior effects others and vice versa. you can shun a girl because she has had too many partners or is too independent, AND likewise others can shun you based on what they think of your behavior, views. by hiding who you are, you seek to maximize your freedom and minimize the freedom of others, similar to if a girl who has had a lot of partners hides who she is from you. you are too weak (or desire too much social power) to be honest about who you are.

[–]ReginleiferOnly Zombies want female brains[S] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points2 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

That's quite a disingenuous parallel to draw.

...It's not a "parallel", it's just a description of the situation.

There is not institutionalized discrimination against women in STEM.

There are numerous forms of discrimination against women in STEM, but most notably is the fact that simply having a male name will make you more likely to be hired, more likely to be viewed as competent, and offered a higher starting salary.

In fact, it's quite the opposite. Between a similarly qualified man and woman applying for the same job a woman is more likely to be chosen in order to fill a quota.

Huh? Don't you realise that those quotas exist precisely because, when faced with similarly qualified men and women, men are disproportionately chosen entirely on the basis of sexism? The fact that quotas exist means that an imbalance is there.

Women like you will never be satisfied until all men are stay at home dad's and all women are miserable worker drones.

Haha, lovely attempt at psychoanalysis, buddy. You got a couple of things wrong though:

I'm not a woman
I don't want all men to be stay at home dad's (I hate kids and love my job as a scientist)
I don't want all women to be workers (drone or otherwise), I simply want them to be able to choose.

Seriously though, if you want to continue this conversation then you need to control your emotions and engage in some rational discussion. It's not enough to keep screaming, "Muh feelz! Muh feelz!". I don't give a shit how you feel, I don't care that you're insecure and upset, etc etc, just grow up and talk like an adult.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]stubingPurple Pillz Here!-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]stubingPurple Pillz Here!-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The problem with the shirt was that it was another instance of the problems of sexism within science. If you reverse genders then the shirt is no longer another instance of problems of sexism within science, so the shirt isn't a problem on those grounds.

I like how we are just supposed to just believe there is a lot of sexism at that STEM company just because you say so.

It can still be unprofessional, it might be a problem in the sense that it's disrespectful to men to walk around with half-naked men on your shirt, etc, but it's not comparable to the situation.

Feminist equality everyone! Because we assume that we are oppressed, it just isn't the same when we do something we hate men for.

I would agree with you that it wasn't a professional shirt, but that shirt wasn't fucking sexist! I'm tired of everyone taking sex negative Feminists seriously. Female nudity =/= sexism! (yeah, even if they are wearing leather)

[–]mrsamsa2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I like how we are just supposed to just believe there is a lot of sexism at that STEM company just because you say so.

It's more the fact that sexism in STEM fields is a non-controversial issue. We know there are less women there, we know that they are hired less on the basis of their gender, we know they are paid less on the basis of their gender, etc etc.

Surely that's not in debate?

Feminist equality everyone! Because we assume that we are oppressed, it just isn't the same when we do something we hate men for.

No need to "assume", it's undeniably true. I've explained why it isn't the same and so far you haven't been able to present an argument against it.

I would agree with you that it wasn't a professional shirt, but that shirt wasn't fucking sexist! I'm tired of everyone taking sex negative Feminists seriously. Female nudity =/= sexism! (yeah, even if they are wearing leather)

Uh...what are you talking about? Nobody is attacking the shirt for being "sexist" on the basis of sex negativity. Is that what you thought the debate was about?

Jesus, no wonder you thought it was stupid, that's absurd!

No, god no. The problem is that you already have a sexist work environment in STEM areas and so things like having pin-up girl calendars only adds to the hostility of the work environment. It's got nothing to do with thinking sex is "dirty" which is why I think every feminist arguing against it are also sex positive feminists.

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

[–]stubingPurple Pillz Here!1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]stubingPurple Pillz Here!0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Uh no, that's a very outdated understanding of feminism. That was maybe true of the older feminists who were trying to gain equality by showing that they can be just like men so deserve equal treatment but current feminism (anything in the last few decades) is focused on choice.

That's why so many feminists get annoyed when feminism is disregarded as being "man hating, hairy legged, masculine women" because many of them are feminists who are typical "girly girls", and some even want to be traditional housewives. They can even want the men to be the head of their households, for them to have financial control, and they want to be the primary caregivers.

Their only point is that women should be free to choose that life if they want OR free to choose a career (or both if possible).

If women want to be more masculine then they can. If they want to be more feminine then they can. Feminism is the position that they should be allowed to do either and not be unfairly judged for it.

[–]namae_nanka0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

That is perhaps your definition. There is more than one. And even that is wrong.

...No, it's a rigorously defined scientific concept, not a matter of opinion.

When it comes to child care does society prefer masculine over feminine?

Feminine, quite clearly.

Can it explain the women are wonderful effect?

Yes, because the "women are wonderful" effect refers to women being associated with more positive social traits and feminine traits are usually things like being sociable, kind, caring, etc, so obviously positive descriptors are attached to them.

Incidentally, those traits are the ones that are devalued in society - look at the pay of nurses, old age carers, nannies, etc.

Also if that were the case masculine women would be held in higher esteem than feminine women. Which isn't really true.

It's not true because of gender essentialism. Women who "act like men" are described as being "bossy" and make people angry by refusing to stick to their gender category.

That's why women get shafted in job negotiations, as negotiating is a very masculine trait and so men are viewed more positively when they negotiate whereas women are viewed more negatively when they negotiate.

Think about an imam in rural Pakistan. An actual patriarch in a patriarchal society. Now imagine him being forced to apologize by women to women for offending them. Seems absurd right?

What do you mean by "actual patriarchal society"? There is no debate that all societies in the world are, and have always been, patriarchal.

What you're describing is simply a cultural difference where there is an even greater emphasis on women being subordinate but that doesn't mean patriarchal processes suddenly stop existing in the rest of the world.

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

...No, it's a rigorously defined scientific concept, not a matter of opinion.

One use of the word is precise. That used by anthropology and related fields.

However the feminist usage of the word is quite different.

Feminine, quite clearly.

False. We live in a patriarchy which values the masculine above the feminine. You said as much.

Why if we valued men over women in some ways and women over men in others then it wouldn't be a patriarchy at all, but rather a mixed bag of gender norms that sometimes harm and sometimes hurt each gender.

Yes, because the "women are wonderful" effect refers to women being associated with more positive social traits and feminine traits are usually things like being sociable, kind, caring, etc, so obviously positive descriptors are attached to them.

But you claimed we value masculine traits more highly.

Incidentally, those traits are the ones that are devalued in society - look at the pay of nurses, old age carers, nannies, etc.

So we value things like honesty and not being a violent criminal lowly?

Also how do coal miners and janitors fit in to that scale?

It's not true because of gender essentialism. Women who "act like men" are described as being "bossy" and make people angry by refusing to stick to their gender category.

And men who act feminine are likewise shamed.

That suggests a society that values gender stereotypes. Not one that values men over women.

That's why women get shafted in job negotiations, as negotiating is a very masculine trait and so men are viewed more positively when they negotiate whereas women are viewed more negatively when they negotiate.

It doesn't explain why men get "shafted" in other areas.

I'd rather be a woman applying to quite a few jobs. Or facing a judge.

What do you mean by "actual patriarchal society"? There is no debate that all societies in the world are, and have always been, patriarchal.

Patriarchal by the actual meaning of the word.

But not according to how feminists use it.

You seem to not grasp that one group might use a word one way while another group uses it differently.

What you're describing is simply a cultural difference where there is an even greater emphasis on women being subordinate but that doesn't mean patriarchal processes suddenly stop existing in the rest of the world.

It is hard to see how in a real patriarchy something like that would occur. If men are held above women how can women make such demands of men?

Imagine an actual imbalanced society like say by race in apartheid south africa. Could black africans have reduced a white citizen to tears by tearing him apart for his choice of dress to the extent that he had to apologize to them while the rest of the white community sat idly by or glared angrily at him?

Seems unlikely.

[–]mrsamsa0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

One use of the word is precise. That used by anthropology and related fields. However the feminist usage of the word is quite different.

Indeed, and the only relevant definition here is the sociological one, which is the one I'm using. It's not a matter of opinion or interpretation.

False. We live in a patriarchy which values the masculine above the feminine. You said as much. Why if we valued men over women in some ways and women over men in others then it wouldn't be a patriarchy at all, but rather a mixed bag of gender norms that sometimes harm and sometimes hurt each gender.

Are you serious?

The concept of patriarchy doesn't claim that masculine norms are always viewed positively, the point is that it's a societal trend and that it's normally associated with more positive things.

The fact that feminine traits are associated with childcare is perfectly consistent with patriarchal society given that childcare is viewed as a low-status thing.

But you claimed we value masculine traits more highly.

Indeed, and what I said is consistent with that.

So we value things like honesty and not being a violent criminal lowly?

...What?

Also how do coal miners and janitors fit in to that scale?

Coal miners are paid extremely generously and janitors are paid relatively poorly due to the perceived menial nature of their work, but compared to similarly menial work with women, they get paid more. For example, maids and janitors are comparable jobs in terms of duties, and yet janitors get paid more.

And men who act feminine are likewise shamed. That suggests a society that values gender stereotypes. Not one that values men over women.

No, it shows a society that cares about gender stereotypes and one that privileges masculine traits over feminine ones (both examples of patriarchy).

The point is that being feminine is a bad thing, even for women. Ever heard: "You throw like a girl!", or "Stop bitching", etc. All references to feminine traits.

Patriarchal by the actual meaning of the word. But not according to how feminists use it. You seem to not grasp that one group might use a word one way while another group uses it differently.

The point is that the sociological definition of the word is the only relevant one here. What are you even talking about, are you using a dictionary definition or something?

It is hard to see how in a real patriarchy something like that would occur. If men are held above women how can women make such demands of men?

Because societies are more complex than one factor.

Imagine an actual imbalanced society like say by race in apartheid south africa. Could black africans have reduced a white citizen to tears by tearing him apart for his choice of dress to the extent that he had to apologize to them while the rest of the white community sat idly by or glared angrily at him? Seems unlikely.

...Are you serious? Of course they can, and they did.

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Indeed, and the only relevant definition here is the sociological one, which is the one I'm using. It's not a matter of opinion or interpretation.

So defining how feminists use the word differently from others isn't relevant in a discussion about how feminists use the word?

Um . . . k . . .

The concept of patriarchy doesn't claim that masculine norms are always viewed positively, the point is that it's a societal trend and that it's normally associated with more positive things.

Imagine a rapist. Spousal abuser. Serial killer. Corrupt politician. Pedophile.

What gender was the person you imagined?

The fact that feminine traits are associated with childcare is perfectly consistent with patriarchal society given that childcare is viewed as a low-status thing.

Really? So we never hear politicians and the like describe it as the hardest and most important job in the world?

We grant mothers no particular regard?

Indeed, and what I said is consistent with that.

So basically we value masculine traits more highly except where we value feminine traits more highly but that doesn't count because that's really just valuing women for things that don't matter.

Coal miners are paid extremely generously

So as a feminist you should be fighting to get more women in to this industry so they can enjoy the benefits of working in an underground claustrophobic hell.

Why are no feminists doing so?

janitors are paid relatively poorly due to the perceived menial nature of their work

False. It's a masculine job so it's highly valued. So janitors earn more than teachers per hour worked.

Because patriarchy.

For example, maids and janitors are comparable jobs in terms of duties, and yet janitors get paid more.

[citation]

No, it shows a society that cares about gender stereotypes and one that privileges masculine traits over feminine ones (both examples of patriarchy).

Which is why women live shorter lives, are more likely to die violently, on the streets, or in jail and get proportionally lower social spending thrown their way.

. . . .

The point is that being feminine is a bad thing, even for women. Ever heard: "You throw like a girl!", or "Stop bitching", etc. All references to feminine traits.

Ever heard negative comments about being a dick or a "dudebro" or a macho idiot or any of the other thousand slurs thrown at men as well?

"Look at that guy's massive truck . . . I bet he has a tiny dick".

I've heard that one.

"Look at that ladies bright pink minivan, I bet she has a massive vag".

That's a new one.

Yes I will concede that if you deliberately exclude everything negative aimed at men what you get is a society where all negatives are aimed at women.

But that's pretty meaningless. You could just as easily reverse it.

The point is that the sociological definition of the word is the only relevant one here. What are you even talking about, are you using a dictionary definition or something?

Actual definition: a society run by men.

Feminist definition: a lot of nonsense on top of that.

Because societies are more complex than one factor.

And yet feminists define society by it being a patriarchy and use that to explain pretty much every social interaction.

...Are you serious? Of course they can, and they did.

Wow. You really don't have a clue do you?

Black south africans under apartheid did not go up to white south africans and start laying in to them. That's not how the power dynamic works in an actual oppressive society like the mythical patriarchy you envisage.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]TexasRoseWood-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (95 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pointless_Endeavors14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (56 children) | Copy Link

[–]mafiaking19363 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (53 children) | Copy Link

[–]ECoast_ManRed Pill Man6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ECoast_ManRed Pill Man5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 years ago* (19 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]oxydercesBlue Pill Woman4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]namae_nanka1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]oxydercesBlue Pill Woman4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]namae_nanka-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I don't have a "rosy view," I've got the field of sociology.

lmao, and?

girls currently make higher grades than boys on all subjects through their school years

Umm you don't seem to get it. Girls getting better grades on all subjects including maths when they are based on homework in large part proves that girls put more effort than boys even in the fields that they are less likely to choose than boys. Even GCSEs saw the same pattern until homework was removed from the maths exam.

Maybe do some basic reading on the topic.

John List on stereotype threat:

So we designed the experiment to test that, and we found that we could not even induce stereotype threat. We did everything we could to try to get it. We announced to them, “Women do not perform as well as men on this test and we want you now to put your gender on the top of the test.” And other social scientists would say, that’s crazy — if you do that, you will get stereotype threat every time. But we still didn’t get it.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]oxydercesBlue Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]stubingPurple Pillz Here!-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]stubingPurple Pillz Here!1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]drok007Not white enough to be blue pill5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]Sansa_Culotte_-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrsamsa1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]mrsamsa1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]drok007Not white enough to be blue pill1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics-2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[–]We_Are_LegionAutumn Red2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago* (13 children) | Copy Link

Allow me to butt in with my own interpretation because I'm not sure his explanation will convey what you're not getting:

We all hate MRAs right? Well, the only thing worse than an MRA is a feminist. We're just learning to treat them the same. You are going to encounter this treatment everywhere.

See, you did just state that this episode (which is factually about this man's shirt being representative of discrimination in science) was an opportunity to have a reasonable conversation on the "issue".

I really want to skip the controversy and get to the meat of why you're wrong: I think the sentiment is just too reminiscent of your standard woman's solipsistic shit-test.

"Oh you built a machine that goes into space and lands on a comet? WHAT ABOUT MY FEELINGS?!?!?!"

And that's really all it is. So I do agree with you that this should never have become a shit-storm, or that this man should've stopped to apologize to the feminists. I don't even agree with /u/M_rafay's questioning of people who think this is/could be reflective of an issue of why it is. I mean, you don't argue with a woman's emotions. You tell her she's adorable, and to get back to the kitchen. (A time-out is precisely what she needs.)

So as you can see, the point cannot be whether we are done bullying this man over his shirt and want to move to ~~gaming journalism~~...- err... what was it again... atmospheric...background... cultural... assumptions... or not. The window is gone.

But don't worry, the window itself wasn't worth much anyway. There is no atmosphere in science ~~against women~~ neglecting to be pandering to women that cannot be solved by women being interested in and pursuing said science. To the evidence of every other STEM field that women do take an interest in. All this talk is untalented women making mountains out of molehills because they really have nothing better to complain about.

[–]powerkickPoly, Bi, Blue, Betafag0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Look, nobody is doubting the ability of this scientist. He get the shit up into space and that does deserve praise. That being said, this event is very big for someone like him and WHAT did he choose to wear? What did he choose to wear--a fucking bowling shirt with tits on it? For him, that was a really big deal that was supposed to be handled with the utmost professionalism, and professionalism is the opposite of what he abided by.

Jesus, what if I wore that to a job interview? Even WITH an incredible resume and incredible references, the fact that I would have been so cocky and/or clueless to wear a shirt like that to a job interview, a first impression that I couldn't afford to fail, would show them that I could accidentally fuck up delicate customer relationships or promote other kinds of microaggressions in the workplace. And they wouldn't hire me.

Now the guy apologized and I respect him for that, he clearly learned his lesson and I do think it's time to move on from this conversation, but you can't reasonably defend wearing such a tacky and offensive shirt to such a professional and unique event.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RedPill4LYFHeterosexual Red Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

You have a very permissive idea about what a relationship is because you even talk about sucking dicks alongside your girlfriend in group sex. So it's really hard for you to turn around and talk from a moral high ground about another man shamelessly displaying a mere shirt that depicts half-naked sexy women on it..

If you're this open about your sexuality, why are you turning around now and shaming a man for wearing a shirt that is at best, fun casual attire, and at worst, unprofessional? How can you honestly claim to be offended? To me, it's utterly ridiculous of you to claim to be upset by a shirt when you're so open and free about your sexuality.

What does that shirt have anything to do with his ability to conduct himself professionally in his work environment? How exactly do you find it offensive?

[–]oxydercesBlue Pill Woman1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]RedPill4LYFHeterosexual Red Pill Man1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]oxydercesBlue Pill Woman2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]RedPill4LYFHeterosexual Red Pill Man1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]powerkickPoly, Bi, Blue, Betafag2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Look, if he wants to wear that to a bar night out with his friends, fine.

If he wants to wear that to a party, fine.

Fuck, if he wants to wear that during late hours researching and doing work, fine.

I'm not walking into interviews listing my sexuality and relationships under "Professional Communication Experience" on my resume, and I wouldn't discuss polyamory with my interviewer in an attempt to make him or her more friendly. It would creep them out, at BEST.

I separate my sexuality from my professional and/or scholarly life. I wouldn't wear that shirt to school, work, a job interview, a class presentation, or a press meeting. That shirt is entirely inappropriate for those contexts.

It's like wearing one of those "Save a horse, ride a cowboy" t shirt. It would have gotten similar ridicule for the same reasons.

Imagine Bill Clinton wearing that shirt to the State of the Union. You don't think he's receive similar criticism?

[–]RedPill4LYFHeterosexual Red Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I separate my sexuality from my professional and/or scholarly life.

In what way did he express his sexuality during the interview? It's just a shirt with women on it that aren't even nude that caused this controversy, yet women show more skin while wearing bathing suits and nobody gets emotional about that.

I guess what I'm saying is why the hell does anyone care about looking professional in the first place when the bar is so low it's touching the floor these days? Why aren't we morally outraged collectively by women dressing in provocative attire out on the streets and in public spaces? Why is this only a problem during an interview when anyone with two braincells and a pulse can change the channel at any moment to look at (NSFW? ->) scandalous celebrity bullshit, or turn to the internet in a flash and watch hardcore porno?

If you want to say that the amount of skin a woman shows in the workplace is offensive and unprofessional, then what about women in professional environments wearing tops cut low enough to reveal cleavage? What about women who wear short dresses that reveal their legs? Aren't they too offensive? Shouldn't they be held to an even higher standard since they are the real thing?

This guy did something unprecedented, and you're honestly going to tell me you've really got a moral problem with his choice of shirt that couldn't possibly be any more PG by Disney standards?

I wouldn't wear that shirt to school, work, a job interview, a class presentation, or a press meeting. That shirt is entirely inappropriate for those contexts.

If we're really going to talk about looking inappropriate in professional environments, don't you think it's odd how nobody gives a shit about both his arms being covered in tattoos? Why is nobody offended about that if professionalism is the issue?

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That being said, this event is very big for someone like him and WHAT did he choose to wear?

He wore something that a close friend made for him for good luck for the mission and for his birthday: "Yes it was. I made it for his birthday recently and good luck with the mission."

Jesus, what if I wore that to a job interview? Even WITH an incredible resume and incredible references, the fact that I would have been so cocky and/or clueless to wear a shirt like that to a job interview, a first impression that I couldn't afford to fail, would show them that I could accidentally fuck up delicate customer relationships or promote other kinds of microaggressions in the workplace. And they wouldn't hire me.

Criticizing the professionalism of the shirt has become the only way to go now that we've reduced him to a sympathetic character. At least the accusations of sexist attitude are being dusted away.

It might be tacky, but you're overestimating his cockiness and the level of "professionalism" of engineers' attire. It varies based on what environment they are working in. As with everything, choice of attire is influenced by cultural factors. Whether that be around mostly businessmen in suits, or a bunch of other tired, overworked engineers in some back room. In the environment I'm currently in, most people are fairly relaxed about dress. Someone at least two levels above me, not an engineer, sometimes comes to work in PJs... influenced by everyone else's lax attitude towards dress code.

He also wears tattoos pretty proudly too. Maybe he should have covered those up. They're intimidating to some people, after all, and unprofessional to many.

In this case, there probably wasn't much interaction with "delicate customers". They're not actually selling a product to laymen. They're landing spacecraft on a comet. He also wasn't at a job interview. He was at a celebration for his and his coworkers' achievement.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

It registers as .0000001% of a fuck, hence the concept of microaggressions.

But I feel like the arguement here assumes way too much weight on things being a metiocracy when that's hardly the case. For example different nationalities produce different outcomes due to inputs- as well as a "great man" view of history.

The reality is that the more meritocratic a system is (eg the public sector VS private, the more likely it is to be full of women and minorities.) We know from studies into graduate school inquires that identical female candidates are more likely to be ruled out than their male counterpart. We also know that cultural expectations governing everything from appearance to demeanor are not the same.

Then you ask why an intelligent, ambitious woman might say "fuck this shit, I'm going to aim to be head of nursing instead"?

Look, I think this is silly. I think the whole flap turned into ridiculous click bait crazy. I almost feel guilty continuing this discussion purely for his sake. But I do know after a lifetime of navigating boyzones, you learn to not only pick your battles but predict where you'll find them and a high quotient of boobs as object without a lot of counterbalancing goodies for you tell you you will be treated as not the intended audience.

Like let's say one of you guys got breast cancer (which does happen, although I hope it doesn't). And you're looking for support groups and funding and to participate and then you hit the ridiculous wall of pink that is the culture around that today. You would probably feel that they didn't care about pleasing you as much as women, right?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I can't speak to the topic of discrimination from these fields; I don't have any data to present to say one way or the other. However, I do think that the shirt thing couldn't even be considered a "micro-aggression". If I saw a woman wearing a shirt with a sexily-posed Chris Hemsworth, I'd get a chuckle maybe but it's certainly not worth calling her sexist over. The man cried. It was his big accomplishment and people made him cry over nothing. Over something that any adult would take one look at and appreciate the novelty of, and move on with their lives.

Like let's say one of you guys got breast cancer (which does happen, although I hope it doesn't). And you're looking for support groups and funding and to participate and then you hit the ridiculous wall of pink that is the culture around that today. You would probably feel that they didn't care about pleasing you as much as women, right?

I think this is a poor example. I think a better example would be me wanting to be a hairdresser, dental hygienist, or some other woman-dominated field. Sure, it may be difficult culturally and emotionally because I'm entering a field that other men typically don't enter, but if it's what I want to do then I should just do it even if it's more difficult. The job itself doesn't really owe me anything to "please me" as much as it pleases women. I should be pleased by the job itself, not shaming others into making sure my every feeling is addressed because I'm a minority. Discrimination based on sex is surely wrong, but what's being discussed isn't so much discrimination as it is pandering to make sure every woman, even the ones that don't actually work with the man who wore the shirt, aren't made uncomfortable by anything a male does in a male-dominated field.

In my example of me joining a woman-dominated job, I don't think the women of that job I've chosen should change their attire simply because I walked in the door and I might be offended. As someone with a sense of humor and sense of perspective, if I were to walk through the door of my job and see that there were a few women there with some out-of-the ordinary dress choices, I'd think that would be cool. In fact, I may choose some eccentric attire in that case.

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Right, I agree with you that there are people exceedingly interested in outrage and this wasn't fair- like to a point structures can't accommodate everyone.

I think the mechanism I am describing works as I suggest, but no system is perfect and anyone who brought this us as anything other than "an unthinking example..." is wrong. I think discussions on accomdation need to take place outside just "arrrrgh!" and nobody came out of this looking good.

Where the actual fuck up was with the ESA making that its public face- that's why he's being treated as representative. I feel they failed in their marketing and its whoever set up the broadcast who deserves actual censure for putting this poor scientist in harms way.

And I guess I'm personally more open to being asked to accommodate things- in my own personal moral code that's something important to me, so its understandable that my kittens and rainbows approach is getting a "whatzwrongwitchoo?!" attitude.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Where the actual fuck up was with the ESA making that its public face

It may not have been professional, but this man just did something a handful of people in the world could possibly do. Not only was it an incredible accomplishment for his program, but for mankind. He literally contributed something wonderful to the species. If I was his boss, you can bet your ass I'd let him wear something he felt comfortable in that his friend made for him. I'd let him have a comfortable, casual victory lap in the sun because he fucking earned it.

And I guess I'm personally more open to being asked to accommodate things- in my own personal moral code that's something important to me

In my opinion no one is entitled to anything in life. In the workplace you can reasonably expect to not be discriminated against, that's true, but I don't think anybody gets to demand much beyond that (outside of the obvious; harassment, etc.). I think that if something makes someone feel uncomfortable, they don't have to look at it or they can conduct themselves like adults and deal with it maturely. Notice that it wasn't anyone that works with him that had a problem with his attire. It was someone that probably has never seen this man in person that had an issue with what he was wearing on one of the best days of his life. They called him names for what he was wearing. It caused such a backlash in his life that he cried, after an accomplishment so monumental that the only tears he should have shed were of joy.

That's what angers me about this story. Not to call you out personally as someone immoral, but I think people that feel entitled to have their feelings pandered and accommodated to over things that don't relate to them are ridiculous and borderline narcissistic. It's a societal poison to reduce a brilliant man to tears over something so insignificant as wearing a shirt his friend gave him during an interview. It's ridiculous and outrageous that it's somehow defensible for someone (the author of the article calling him out) with nowhere near the same life accomplishments can tear down at the fabric of a brilliant person just because of the fabric they have covering their skin. I find it almost as ridiculous that the fact that he wore the shirt is somehow a micro-aggression (as if that shirt in any way was directed at anyone he knew in an aggressive fashion [narcissism]) and that women are somehow so vulnerable that a shirt with scantily clad women is an example of why they don't join the sciences in greater numbers.

[–]namae_nanka0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]namae_nanka0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Personally I think this is asinine, but a conversation about atmospheric background cultural assumptions is not.

No, that is asinine too. Until you manage to articulate why it isn't. I am anxious to hear your actual answer to my point, instead of mock offence that I mentioned the shirt again. Pretend I didn't. Please demonstrate via polices and actual discriminiation. What effort currently left spared keeps women out of STEM? Why is this not extendable to STEM-fields women do excel in.

Why are women, in your view, such incorrigibly whiny and weak princesses that balk at any perceived pea under their mattress and refuse to lie in it until someone removes it for them? please sort my lack of patience with this bullshit and sort the previous sentence into a less partisan question. Believe it or not, I'm someone who is actually interested in the rosetta mission. shock horror, we exist. and... it annoys me that news and discussion is almost more about feminists and non-feminists fighting than... comets.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]namae_nanka2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ReginleiferOnly Zombies want female brains[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Except it's NOT a perfectly reasonable conversation.... the feminist fools saw a man point at the moon and you saw a finger.

Everyone's pissed for good reason because feminists unleashed a media frenzy and twitter shitstorm first. The capacity for reasonable discussion was lost, but it was not mainstream society's fault.

You guys defended Adria Richards and Watson because supposedly they were targeted for spreading their opinions (opinions which I may add, straight up insinuated negative things about their respective cliques) You guys used the reaction of a few prominent figures as proof as to why your precious feminism was needed.

But here is a man, who wore a shirt, and was viciously attacked for doing so...... and yet you'd assert to me he was MORE responsible for his predicament because of what he was wearing? ^.-

I don't think I'm the "blind" one here.

[–]myfatbrokethewallNon-Red Pill2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago* (16 children) | Copy Link

What was the guy thinking wearing a shirt like that? According to his sister, this guy lacks common sense (apparently he's bad at parking and finding his car): http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2832965/He-land-probe-comet-t-park-car-Sister-tattooed-Rosetta-scientist-Dr-Matt-Parker-reveals-poor-driving-skills.html Don't know if that's true of she's helping him do damage control.

I think wearing a shirt covered in partially naked women is extremely unprofessional, and I would argue it does create an environment unfriendly to women (just like putting pictures like that on the walls would). I understand he wore this shirt during a live streaming of the landing? What a terrible way to represent his organization and the mission.

Watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZR5nee3FSis

He's wearing the shirt with the sexy chicks on it and saying "Rosetta is the sexiest mission that's ever been. She is sexy, but I never said she was easy".

[–]ReginleiferOnly Zombies want female brains[S] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Christ man, that entire paragraph just looks like a slew of accusations you're hoping will stick.

I would argue it does create an environment unfriendly to women

Anything that isn't kissing feminist ass is "unfriendly to women", next. >.>

What a terrible way to represent his organization and the mission.

. Thing is SJW's don't really care about professionalism, when it's the woman or a trannie doing it. In which case judging people by tatoos and dyed hair becomes sexist in itself.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-tobia/genderqueer-professional-_b_5476239.html

Professionalism is a funny term, because it masquerades as neutral despite being loaded with immense oppression. As a concept, professionalism is racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, classist, imperialist and so much more

"Rosetta is the sexiest mission that's ever been. She is sexy, but I never said she was easy".

And this is how you justify breaking the man? :/ Jesus Christ, what's next with you people?

[–]kapten_krok6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]shitpostwhispererReality Contrarian3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]myfatbrokethewallNon-Red Pill4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

Anything that isn't kissing feminist ass is "unfriendly to women", next. >.>

Do you have a sister? A girlfriend? What if she told you that she got a job at a place where the other employees were mostly men and the big shot boss was wearing a shirt with partially naked women in sexualized poses and making jokes about sex and that this made her feel uncomfortable. Would you sympathize, or think she was some rabid feminist?

Thing is SJW's don't really care about professionalism, when it's the woman or a trannie doing it. In which case judging people by tatoos and dyed hair becomes sexist in itself.

I don't consider myself an SJW. But if I was in charge of an organization that was doing a big mission to land something on a comet, and during the big event the guy in charge wore a shirt covered in partially naked women in sexy poses I would be upset. I wouldn't want him making sex jokes either. If he wanted to wear a Star Trek themed shirt or something, okay, no problem. Wearing a shirt with partially naked women in sexy poses attracts the wrong kind of attention for the organization.

And this is how you justify breaking the man? :/ Jesus Christ, what's next with you people?

Breaking the man? How was he broken?

[–]ReginleiferOnly Zombies want female brains[S] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

Do you have a sister? A girlfriend?

Typical attempt at a guilt trip. Honestly pretty soon we're going to be able to flowchart the BP arguments. I live in San Francisco..... one of the gayest cities in the fucking world, where until recently it was legal for old dudes to strut around nude. Where I've seen some of the most degenerate acts known to man in public transportation, where butt plug conventions are the norm..... I'm not going to sympathize with someone over a shirt. Someone is making you uncomfortable? Welcome to life.

Wearing a shirt with partially naked women in sexy poses attracts the wrong kind of attention for the organization.

Seems the only people who got the wrong kind of attention were the feminists, who once again flipped their shit over some stupid detail, ignoring this man's contribution to humanity over some stupid attire choice. These are not the kind of people I want making STEM decisions....... I could only imagine how fucked we'd be if we allowed some overly sensitive SJW turn away von Braun.

Breaking the man? How was he broken?

The man was bawling on public tv, over a casual attire choice for chrissakes, nigga was denutted, emasculated, forced into submission..... by a propaganda machine that only knows how to play the victim. >.>

Edit: Honest question, why do you seem to think that we ought to modify our behaviors to satisfy the easily offended? Do you think this t shirt is enough to give this man the full press treatment?

[–]myfatbrokethewallNon-Red Pill4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]shitpostwhispererReality Contrarian1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]myfatbrokethewallNon-Red Pill4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ECoast_ManRed Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ExpendableOneNeither-2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If I knew someone that felt uncomfortable because some guy(and, being in the lead position doesn't make him a boss) was wearing a shirt with sexy women(not even entirely naked), I would tell her she needs to seek therapy or she has some very serious insecurities/issues that she needs to work on. Or maybe that, she needs to question exactly why the male interest in sexy women makes her uncomfortable, and why she might come to the conclusion that a guy who loves sexy women can't respect women because of it. Men are able to see women in a platonic and romantic way.

If my brother or son didn't want to enter a field, or felt uncomfortable, because a prominent character, who just accomplished something amazing, wore a shirt with a half-naked jacob black on it, I would tell him that he seriously needs to question his attitude there. If I had a daughter, sister or girlfriend who just accomplished something really cool, I would be really pissed off if SJW decided to attack her, demolish her character and present her like a complete douchebag of a woman, just because she wore a shirt with sexy video game characters on it or something. The shirt was demeaning to women. Art of the female form is not demeaning to women and you are a lunatic if you think women can't be both sexy and respected. I have seen women get away with shirts which were a lot more hostile(intentionally hostile, which makes it worse actually) and distasteful than the one he was wearing.

[–]myfatbrokethewallNon-Red Pill6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't know if reversing the genders works in this analogy. Also, maybe as a man you see the sexualization of men by women as a positive thing and so can't imagine why women might be uncomfortable with it?

So I'll try to give you another analogy.

Imagine most men in society are gay, and have created a society where men are often sexually objectified (lots of sexualized men in the media). Imagine gay men are 2x physically stronger than straight men. Imagine you work in an environment with mostly gay men (I'm assuming most people in that workplace were male, and in my analogy gay men=straight men), and for an important event that was being live streamed, the lead man on the team you're on wore a shirt with a bunch of sexualized men on it. Would this make you feel at all uncomfortable?

This analogy is not perfect either.

What levels of depictions of sexualized women in professional environments are you okay with? You seem to be okay with a man wearing a shirt with pictures of sexualized women on it, but would you be okay if he put posters of these women all over his office? All over the workplace? Would you be okay with nudity? Depictions of sexual acts?

At what level of images of sexualized women in the workplace would you say a woman who feels uncomfortable is reacting normally rather than needs therapy?

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PhokusProgressive-Lazy Christian-Leans RP-2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cascadecombo1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Those_Who_RemainIrrelevant Homosexual0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Those_Who_RemainIrrelevant Homosexual0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LeGrandDiableBlancParochial Altruist2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh man, I wish I could send that guy a message ... Something along the lines of

"Dude, those people you "offended" are not defending the core principles of feminism or women. You are not a mysoginist because of a sillly shirt, that honestly, isn't offensive to anyone outside of America and the Internet. Everyone with a few healthy cells of brain left can see that. Your team and you (a team of men AND women) achieved something amazing, please don't let this hate group shit on that, because that's why they are - a hate group. You didn't really offend anyone, you just happened to make yourself the target of a group of people whose standard position is offended - This is pretty much the same as if you were black and a group of white suprecamcists was attacking you for that. The shirt is irrelevant, you are a man, that makes you their enemy. The shirt just was the bull's eye.

Keep being awesome!

[–]Sansa_Culotte_0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–][deleted] -7 points-7 points-7 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]namae_nanka-3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	[Post update/movietime] The thrilling conclusion of "Why feminism is facing a backlash" or "Who wants to see a grown man cry? ;D
Author	Reginleifer
Upvotes	8
Comments	171
Date	November 16, 2014 7:42 AM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2mg95a/post_updatemovietime_the_thrilling_conclusion_of/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/post-updatemovietime-the-thrilling-conclusion-of.284356 https://theredarchive.com/post/284356

Comments