~ archived since 2018 ~

The hipocrisy

TisNotOverYet

November 20, 2014

34 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	The hipocrisy
Author	TisNotOverYet
Upvotes	34
Comments	17
Date	November 20, 2014 6:56 AM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/mensrights/comments/2mutr2/the-hipocrisy/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/the-hipocrisy.1623146 https://theredarchive.com/post/1623146

Comments

[–]Ted83673 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lightwater-5 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]HashtagRebbit3 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lightwater1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ponyflash1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]HashtagRebbit1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ponyflash1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]HashtagRebbit2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]phatphace0 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I promised myself I wouldn't engage anyone on this...

You have heard the term 'slut-shaming' in one setting and are now applying it in contexts where it makes no sense.

'Slut-shaming' refers to a choice. An example of slut-shaming a fictional woman would be in a movie where she wears a revealing outfit to a club, is sexually assaulted, and people critiquing the movie ask, "Well, what was she expecting?"

The woman depicted on the shirt didn't choose to wear bondage clothing and hold guns - the artist chose that. She is just an image, not a character with any form of narrative. The artist is being critiqued, not the character.

The clothing and poses mimic those of comic books and games which have a long history of hyper-sexualised depictions of women.

But really, it just requires a modicum critical thought. Think of a profession in which men are underrepresented - child care, for example. (I'll humour the Men's Rights narrative for a moment and pretend this disparity is due to discrimination.)

Do you really think it would be suitable for a woman holding an internationally broadcast conference to wear a shirt depicting men in underwear wearing bibs and sucking dummies? - yes, even if it was a male friend who made it.

No one cares that he owns the shirt; we just care that he decided to put it on that day, had interacted with countless staff, colleagues and producers and no one throughout this process thought it was inappropriate before wearing it live. We care about how this reflects the values of the community and its well documented issue with gender bias and sexism.

Here are some studies:

1, 2, 3 and 4 (which is a link dump of peer reviewed articles).

[–]HashtagRebbit1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

you are trying to make this incredibly specific to fit your narrative.

He wore a shirt that depicted a woman wearing similar cloths to the women in slut walk. That is a fact. They are shaming him for wearing a shirt depicting a woman who dresses like a slut walker. That is a fact.

Are they slut shaming? I dont give a shit what you call it and what your specific definition of slut shaming is. It is still hypocrisy.

The artist is being critiqued, not the character.

That is a lie. I havent heard a single person critique the woman who made his shirt.

The clothing and poses mimic those of comic books and games which have a long history of hyper-sexualised depictions of women.

that's your agenda talking. All I see is a cartoon woman in revealing clothing with guns. If the woman who designed this shirt stated that she set out to mimic the hyper sexualised female game characters I would believe you. But she never said that

Do you really think it would be suitable for a woman holding an internationally broadcast conference to wear a shirt depicting men in underwear wearing bibs and sucking dummies?

if a woman landed a spacecraft on a comet and she wore a shirt of a bare chested man with a gun you would not give a shit. You crated a retarded scenario with bibs and dummies because you know that whenever you swap the genders feminists lose the debate.

As many have said, if this shirt is keeping you out of space travel then good riddance to you. We dont need feminist bitches in space.

[–]phatphace1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]HashtagRebbit1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

A t-shirt isn't keeping women out of science

good. Then stop talking about the t-shirt

sexism and gender discrimination is

no it isnt. A "subtle" bias doesnt stop anyone from doing anything. An invisible, undefined, shadowy culture is just a cop out from actually dealing with the whole picture. It's like a hippie saying "it's the system, man".

'Slut-shaming' is a term with an actual definition

except its use is flexible. The women at slut walks are not necessarily sluts. Some may just dress like sluts. In fact I'm sure some of them would never get laid.

Trying to repress womens sexuality could be and has been labeled slut shaming. To suggest that female sexuality is crass and un-ladylike could be and has been called slut shaming. It isnt a huge stretch to say that shaming the depiction of a strong woman in revealing dress is slut shaming.

The day a woman in science can wear any of the outfits depicted on Matt's shirt to an internationally broadcast conference is the day people won't complain about him wearing the shirt.

But Matt didnt wear the outfit depicted on his shirt. And if he did he feminists would claim it is sexual harassment aimed at keeping women out of science.

If you want a fair comparison, what would happen if some quirky, alternative science chick wore a he-man t-shirt to a conference? No doubt, she would be held as a hero for being a woman who landed a spacecraft on a comet.

I admit the shirt is "unprofessional" as are his tattoos and unshaven face. But his achievements speak more than his image.

[–]phatphace1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The bias isn't 'subtle' - its quite huge and debilitating. The fact an elite scientist thinks its OK to wear a shirt like that is reflective of this. You didn't even read a study I linked; you're letting your hatred of women get in the way of looking at facts.

Typical MRA - link peer reviewed articles (as requested) and they don't even look at them and continue living in their fabricated world.

It isnt a huge stretch to say that shaming the depiction of a strong woman in revealing dress is slut shaming.

Link me to anywhere - ANYWHERE on the net where a feminist 'shames' the woman depicted on the shirt. I dare you.

he-man

How is he-man sexualised? How many women find this attractive? I can't believe you actually think that is an analogy.

I mean, if you're unwilling to respond with any actual arguments I'm not sure I should even keep responding.

The women at slut walks are not necessarily sluts. Some may just dress like sluts.

Surprise, surprise: you're an explicit misogynist, too.

[–]HashtagRebbit1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

its quite huge and debilitating

an elite scientist thinks its OK to wear a shirt

I would agree that it is quite huge if he actually raped a bunch of women. Wearing a shirt however...

The bias isn't 'subtle'

You didn't even read a study I linked

the study you linked me to described it as subtle. Did you even read them?

Link me to anywhere - ANYWHERE on the net where a feminist 'shames' the woman depicted on the shirt. I dare you.

you dont have a problem with the shirt. you have a problem with a white man wearing it. But you are shaming the depiction of a woman dressed in revealing cloths.

How is he-man sexualised?

if a woman wore a shirt depicting a shirtless mussel man would you treat it the same? I know you are unwilling to reverse the genders because all feminist arguments fall to pieces when the situations are reversed.

How many women find this attractive?

I dont know the specific number. Ask around.

How many men find cartoon women attractive?

I mean, if you're unwilling to respond with any actual arguments I'm not sure I should even keep responding.

i'm exposing your rhetoric. I'm not saying sexism doesn't exist. If you can prove any claims without jumping to conclusions and appeals to emotions, I'm all open ears.

Surprise, surprise: you're an explicit misogynist, too.

how? By calling a woman who identifies as a slut a slut? Why do women at slut walks dress a particular way? It must be because they believe that they are wearing slutty clothing.

you seem to be implying there is something wrong with being a slut. Are you a misogynist?

[–]phatphace1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]HashtagRebbit1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]phatphace1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You're being purposely obtuse, here.

First of all, its pretty obvious women don't like being called a slut. There's no concept of a slut in male terms - he's either a player or a stud. 'Slut Walks' are so radical because the women participating in them are wearing clothes as revealing as they'd like and remarking, "Wearing this doesn't make me a slut."

Its sooo obvious you have no idea what you're talking about. Its almost like you heard the term 'Slut Walk' and said to yourself, 'yep, I know exactly what that is about' without doing an iota of research. (And even when someone does the research for you still remain wilfully ignorant.)

'Subtle' sexism is not in reference to the sexism's effects but rather its nature. As in, scientist's aren't collectively coming out and saying (though I have heard words to this effect in my engineering degree), "Women aren't inherently good at sciences like men are." If you'd read that study (by the way, I love how I've linked multiple studies and, after reading one, you feel like an expert), or even the abstract, you'd might have noticed,

"Faculty participants rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant. These participants also selected a higher starting salary and offered more career mentoring to the male applicant."