Don't write or read the letter of apology... You did nothing wrong. they should be writing one to you!
Comment has been collapsed.
In highschool (Grade 11) I got sent to the office for saying Hitler was a genius...(history class) Obviously what he did was cruel and wrong... my country helped the jewish ppl... But he was a genius... an evil genius. So I had to write a letter of apology to my teacher lol so I told principal to blow me and I got a 1 week suspension?
Thats so wrong, I don't think I did anything wrong...
Comment has been collapsed.
Yea people are panzy douche bags now a days, can't understand the truth in other contexts and to play "safe" they just write it off as hate speech, If this is the entire truth of the story I say more power to you bro, for speaking FACTS. I wouldn't go back to that sorry school either, get a G.E.D, you sound intelligent enough to be able to skip the classes and just take the tests (wish I did that because the magnet school I went to was just a big waste of life imo)
(and I don't ever use 4chan so I guess I'm talkin to myself here LOL)
Comment has been collapsed.
You probably got that suspension for telling your principal to "blow you" and not really for your saying that Hitler was an evil genius.
Granted, they're infringing on your right to free speech depending on where you live. You're entitled to your opinion as a human being, and people who can't take it need to just build a bridge and get over it. If you think Hitler was a genius, then that's your opinion.
Comment has been collapsed.
Could be fake you know? It is /b/ afterall. lol
Also reminds me of the whole recent GOW:A bullshit.
Comment has been collapsed.
Adam Sessler and a bunch of people got super pissed at a trophy in GOW:A being called "BROS BEFORE HOS" And lots of people threw a bitchfit so now they are changing the name to "BROS BEFORE FOES".
Comment has been collapsed.
Adam was being quite a little bitch about it, saying what happened to the EVIL/BAD PERSON female was the most brutal thing he has ever saw(Nothing compared to other GOW scenes.) and he said it was out of context when it was. Found out through a spoiler(wasn't that big to me.) but yea. It wasn't out of context.
Never cared for Sessler but now I somehow care for him even less.
Comment has been collapsed.
The way you keep carrying on about it, I suspect you're not a native English speaker. 'Bitching' is commonly used in everyday speech as a synonym for 'complaining,' and my entire life, I've never made any connection with a pejorative term relating to women. It just doesn't occur to me or pretty much anyone I've ever known. It's a little like you're asking people to stop talking about atoms because it reminds you of atomic weapons and they upset you. I can only assume you're either trolling or just unfamiliar with English and you've drawn some amusing conclusions.
Comment has been collapsed.
and my entire life, I've never made any connection with a pejorative term relating to women
You can't be serious o_O
So when some rapper goes on about his 'bitches 'n hoes', do you think he's referring to complaining prostitutes ?
EDIT: Kind old Mr. Webster has this to say:
Definition of BITCH
1: the female of the dog or some other carnivorous mammals
2 a : a lewd or immoral woman
b: a malicious, spiteful, or overbearing woman —sometimes used as a generalized term of abuse
3: something that is extremely difficult, objectionable, or unpleasant
4: complaint
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe you would like to take a look at wbarton's statement I quoted again (with my emphasis):
and my entire life, I've never made any connection with a pejorative term relating to women
Definition 2 shows that such a connection clearly can be made. The fact there are other definitions that do not imply such a connection does not invalidate this.
Comment has been collapsed.
but 4 is a separate definition from 2 just as its separate from 1.
just because a connection can be made between a prostitute and a agricultural tool doesn't mean that a man plows his fields by plowing the ho.
context of a word means alot. if you say "quit bitching" you can generally assume it doesn't mean "quit 'a malicious woman'-ing" unless that person has a really poor grasp on english.
a homosexual isn't happy just because they took that word and changed its use, a "fucking computer"(such as when it breaks and shows that sad apple face and pinwheel) is in no way related to copulation as that word also means "generic expletive" in addition to "intercourse"
niggardly has nothing to do with black people(but if used today it probably would just because homophone), and although bastard once questioned somebody's parentage now its more the male version of "you're being a bitch"
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm, I was born and raised in New York. I'm painfully aware of how bitch is used. That's a pretty stupid assumption for you to make.
Gee, a pejorative for complaining is related to women, who in the patriarchal society are often accused of complaining. Who would have thought.
Comment has been collapsed.
That doesn't change the fact that the problem lies entirely in your mind and your choice to interpret it that way. I have never once heard anyone ever raise a complaint about this. I can't even be outraged because it's so laughable. How can anyone who lives in New York be so thin-skinned? Or do you mean upstate?
Comment has been collapsed.
Long Island, thank you very much.
Look, all the insults I have a problem with can be traced very plainly to something used to bring a minority group down. Bitch specifically, in it's original context is used to describe a female dog. The reason it started to be used to describe women is because men would literally describe sexually permiscious women as bitches, like they were dogs in heat. It came to be used in it's modern context (outside of feminist circles at least) because in the popular culture women are commonly considered "uppity", or obnoxious.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm aware of that. What seems to elude you, however, is that usage changes over time. No one in their right mind who uses the term 'bitching' these days is implying anything negative about women or anyone else. In that context, it has no such meaning. In fact, the only use of 'bitching' in a descriptive fashion is actually positive, as in, "That's a totally bitching shirt you're wearing. It really makes the whole ensemble." If you were objecting to a genuinely insulting or otherwise inappropriate usage of the word, I wouldn't care, but this whole thing is just silly.
Comment has been collapsed.
female isn't a minority group they're half the population....actually last I checked I think they had a slight lead in numbers by random chance.
should really have a problem with "thats so lame"(remember those adds to kill "thats so gay" well think that but for crippled people and for some reason promoted by that same commercial as an inoffensive alternative) "welshing on a bet"(the welshmen are weasels) and "i got gypped"(gypsies are swindlers(you may as well say somebody jewed you of your money)) instead
Comment has been collapsed.
A minority is related to how much power a group holds, not their actual numbers.
Also yes to the first and last, although I've never heard of "welshing" before.
Comment has been collapsed.
Lol, I didn't realize that I was pathetic for not liking sexism.
Comment has been collapsed.
What's so sexist about "Bro's before Ho's"?
It's a silly little comment used mainly by teens for humour.
The female equivalent of the phrase (Chicks before Dicks), is just as stupid.
Taking offence because somebody said a harmless phrase, or incorporated a harmless phrase into game, is pathetic.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's all about context, buddy. It's nowhere near a harmless phrase, especially when it's played just a few minutes after you got done stomping on a woman's face and impaling her on a spike.
Comment has been collapsed.
I still don't see why it would be offensive.
If it were to be the other way round, and a women just got done stomping on a man's face and impaling him on a spike, I wouldn't take offence, and neither would anyone else, and neither would it have turned into some newsworthy topic, because no one would care.
It's not insulting female's in any way, so no one should be getting up in arms about it.
Comment has been collapsed.
If the same situation happened, male boss/female character whatever, and she got saved by some other lady which got me a trophy called "chicks before dicks" I'd also probably call it out as being pretty stupid. It would have nowhere near the same context within western society, however.
Comment has been collapsed.
What if I say "I like pizza" before I murder you and wear your skin,would your family and later the world find those words offensive because of the context ? People need to stop being such little cry babies over every goddamn thing,some people are blind and/or deaf,some people lost their legs/arms in accidents but you don't hear them bitching,why should little emotional babies like these be granted special rights just because they feel offended ?!
I just don't get the whole "I'm so offended" thing,no matter the sex,race or other bullshit.
When will the human race grow up and stop dealing with imaginary problems ?
Though,yea,there are lots of assholes that say offensive stuff but if you let that stop you,then you kind of deserve it.
If someone's offended because of racism,then yea,they've got the right to say "I'm offended" once,but if they say it more it just turns into a meaningless pathethic whine.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wonderful Stephen Fry's quote. Progress is not preventing people to say/hear "offensive" terms but making that words lose the "power" that suceptible people gives to it. In other words, the solution is not censorship but learning how to just get over with. Words are just words. I came from a generation who deals bullying by dismissing any importance to the insults and in today's world people only fight it by overprotecting the "offended" and punishing the "offensors" when the truth is that the one who gives the true power of the words, the one who must change are the receptors, not the emitters.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why? Because we have a couple of generations raised to be hypersensitive about anything and everything that might be construed as being "offensive" to "somebody" or possibly causing "hurt feelings." "Politically correct" has become the mantra of the day, even though it turns us into a nation of sheep.
It wasn't that long ago that Americans were tough as nails. They survived the Depression and two world wars, and being knocked down, dragged out, stomped on, spit on, and left in the dirt was a normal occurrence. Instead of whining about it, people were expected to pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and get on with their life. In today's society, however, a large portion of the population is ruled by emotion and wishful thinking rather than intelligence and determination.
And guess who's voting whom into office to run things?
Comment has been collapsed.
politically correct is inherently racist anyway.
Remember the big fuss over Microsoft's walking gps tweaking your rout based on violent crime statistics? People immediately ceased on it as politically incorrect somehow. Dubbed it the "avoid ghetto app" whined about how it doesn't take equal weight for white collar crime(cause thats white people crime(also racist assumption, both against whites and by implying blacks are violent criminals)) cause walking past the home of a shady hedge fund manager is totally as much of a concern as a street that had 3 stabbings in the last 2 months to somebody following a gps to the nearest gas station.
You see apparently somebody(almost certainly white and liberal) saw this app and immediately his(did i mention probably male*) mind went to "those bastards, depriving the hard working black man of his only source of income.....mugging white people who wander into his hood. I must complain about this" Now whos the bigger racist that guy or microsoft?
Comment has been collapsed.
"I like pizza" doesn't have anything to do with anyone's race, sexuality, or gender. But please, ya'll keep posting paragraphs about how america is being ruined because people are starting to consider the things that they say and how it affects people. :V
Comment has been collapsed.
Words are only worth as much as you wish.If you value words so much then no wonder you like promises,no wonder everyone fools everyone.I thought that society tries to teach us that facts speak louder than words.I guess I was wrong.
Let's forget about important problems,about the bigger picture,let's worry about words and how they hurt hypersensitive flowers.Go ahead,the universe is waiting.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah I know it could be fake (though I've been told it's not).
I personally have seen similar (though slightly less extreme) intimidation go on in classes where a trendy, politically correct ideology is taught as self-evident and above criticism. I've also heard the, "you're white/male/American/capitalist/part of Western society/etc so your opinion does not count," before also.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm pretty sure I've seen that in a copypasta repository with key words madlib'd, ready to be reused wherever, but I can relate, in some way to the sentiment. I had something similar happen to me with an alternate outcome.
High school, senior english class. Teacher, Christian man of intelligence (an important note for later), was rather creative with assignments, and this quarter was to have each student to bring in a song for the entire class to analyze. One girl, a known Christian sheeple (as opposed to a believer), brought in a song by Creed (can't remember which one). After playing the song, she was given first analysis which was, properly, Christian values, betterment of self and life through belief in God, etc.
When she sat down I didn't even raise my hand and wait to be called on. I shot straight up before the teacher could ask for another analysis. He looked at me with, looking back, an almost knowing smirk and nodded for me to begin. I started with a note that my analysis was based off of the context of the song in reference to the songwriter, Scott Stapp, and his history with his father effectively beating religion into him. I turned all of the song's iconography towards freedom from religion. Multiple times during my analysis she grumped, but the teacher shushed her and said to "wait 'til he's finished".
When I finished, I sat down, and she erupted. I was called a satanist for corrupting religious belief (it went on longer than that, but I'm condensing it), and generally bashed for having a dissenting view. I just sat and took it, grinning the entire time, which seemed to piss her off even more. During this, the teacher walked to his desk, produced a Bible, and stopping her amid another "satanist" insult, said, "Are you familiar with Timothy 2:12? No? 'I do not allow a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; instead, she is to be silent.'" She was dumbstruck. While she stumbled over a response he placed the bible on her desk to look over the verse while he crooned the opening of the song It Ain't Necessarily So, then stated, "It's fine to have faith. We go to the same church after all. But you, dear, are an engine of the Crusades."
Comment has been collapsed.
He was. Every friday, the class was devoted entirely to free subject essay writing, completed by end of class or not, with the room silent except for classical music. Since we were his last period he'd let most students leave early if they finished early and he deemed the essay complete of acceptable quality. One friday, I was going a little stir crazy for some reason. Just had the itch to be outside. The high school I went to had these trees that, in the summer, shed papery seed pods shaped like valentine hearts; in a light breeze they rained like the stereotypical anime cherry blossom image. This was one of those days. I broke the calm of the class and asked, from my desk, if I could go outside with a clipboard and write my essay under one of the trees within view of the classroom. He looked at me, blinked, then walked to my desk with a clipboard and told me to go enjoy myself. So I went outside, picked a tree, and finished my essay 20 minutes early. He read it, then told me to go home early. The class was pissed. He was one of the few teachers I ever got along with, and one of fewer that treated students as equals to himself.
Comment has been collapsed.
yes but being an ass don't make the point any less valid. even the town fool can have a revaluation but totally sounds like a troll post. if legit he was probably suspended for his colorfull mouth than his point. he prabably called the teachers all kinds of names but he got suspend in his head for "being an outspoken male".
Comment has been collapsed.
That's plausible, though I think the fact that those words were incidental descriptors he used late in the post, rather than beginning his tale by saying something like, "Fuck all those bitches, dykes, fags, etc" seems to suggest he is not quite the hothead.
Impossible to say though. Also, I agree with you, while I don't support his choice of language or his implied opinions about homosexuals, I do strongly support the ability to question one's teachers and to expect to get an intelligent explanation or discussion out of it. I think it is dangerous for everyone, no matter one's ideology, if a reasoned discussion cannot take place.
Comment has been collapsed.
That would be a comforting thought, but then, there is the internet.
Also, while (as I've said elsewhere) I do not agree with his implied opinions about homosexuals, I do not think that precludes such a person from having other more logical opinions or questions.
Comment has been collapsed.
Until that douchebag expounds on his further opinions, speculating on them is pointless. What we can speculate on, however, is how much of an asshole he is. Not only does his version of history ignore matriarchal societies, his claim that women are physically incapable of harvesting wheat or mining ore is simply wrong.
"dyke", "fagot", "women submitted to the authority of men as a reward for their willingness to sacrifice their bodies" blah blah fucking blah. I can't believe anyone would take anything this guy says seriously.
Comment has been collapsed.
Lack of sophistication=/=lack of intelligence. But more often a "lack of sophistication" is simply adaptation to current environment. Intellectual conversation can and does happen on 4chan, but in more of a "bar room" discussion manner.
I suddenly want to go to one of the "tie required" restaurants in my area, but wear the tie around my forehead. They're obligated to admit, but most that do it are goofs and jerks. I'll be upstanding, kind, and refined ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, the Dyke/Faggot remarks make me think that, as presented on the internet, while his argument is worth including in a discussion, he may very well be deserving of whatever bullshit ISS is. "Woe is me, 3 days of like an hour (maybe) each day of extra school at the middle/highschool level."
I'm guessing based on the post that there is a decent amount of missing dialogue, that may very well have included hate speech.
Comment has been collapsed.
I tuned out when the guy objected to women being oppressed throughout history. I get that 4chan kiddies hate feminism because they don't understand it, but holy shit there's literally no facts to back up that wonderful little opinion.
Edit: Also shit_that_didn't_happen.jpg
Comment has been collapsed.
It is unfortunate that you "tuned out" since I think he alludes (albeit a little vaguely) to an important critique of feminism (at least certain simplistic statements like, "women have been oppressed throughout history"). An implied social contract between men and women is a plausible way of understanding sex relations, and should not be dismissed out of hand.
This does not mean that women did not lack for many rights men had in the past, or that those disparities were justified. However, it does mean that women staying home, raising children, and performing other work around the house / farm should not necessarily be seen as backwards or some kind of deprivation.
Also, saying "women have been oppressed through history" fails to capture the reality that women's rights have varied a lot between cultures, and while almost none would be as egalitarian as today's societies attempt to be, many were much more progressive than most people realize. Did you know, for instance, that women in Hellenistic Alexandria, even some slave women, had roles in commerce as traders and even providers of loans?
Comment has been collapsed.
Very few feminists object to women being the "head of the household". Most object to ONLY women being "head of the household."
Comment has been collapsed.
What? I was specifically replying to the person above. Also "bitch" is insanely pejorative, whether being used as a verb or a noun.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes. There are a million other words you can use besides "bitch", and most of them don't have sexist baggage related to them.
Comment has been collapsed.
But are you telling me you honestly go around and try to correct the language of every single person you run into? I can understand not appreciating the language, but this is the internet, you'll need some sort of filter to avoid it. You can't expect to just ask people not to use words, because that's all they are.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually yes, if people use words like cunt, bitch or faggot in front of me I'll usually call them out on it. I can very much expect to ask people not to use certain words, weather they'll stop or not is up to them.
Comment has been collapsed.
See, I do understand what you mean, because those other two words, I will knock someone's teeth out for. Bitch is a totally different animal. You can't say someone was cunting, so you told them to stop being such a whiner. Bitch is an official verb in the english language. I'm sorry you don't like that, but all you can do is learn to cope.
If someone starts calling you a bitch, feel free to go off on them. But it's all about context, as you said below/above. A verb is just a verb.
Comment has been collapsed.
Umm, faggot and cunt are also official words in the English language, both with meanings outside their insulting context. I've actually heard people say cunting, however :/ The nature of the english language dictates that you could use almost any word as a verb and it would still make sense.
Comment has been collapsed.
It used to be socially acceptable to call black people "negros" too.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a verb formed from the noun bitch, a sexist slur. If you are going to be against the other words, you don't really have a leg to stand on for bitch.
Comment has been collapsed.
You do know that, in feminist culture, bitch refers to a strong or cunning woman, right? There are words in use today that, even just a few decades ago, used to be considered socially unacceptable. It's slang, it's the evolution of language. Grow up.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey, I made it pretty clear that I don't care what language anyone uses, and even said that I use all of that language and worse. All I was doing was pointing out his hypocrisy for threatening to beat up anyone who used certain words, but was ok with others. So maybe you should learn to read before telling people to grow up.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's a present? Hopefully there's not a sweater inside. Get one every year for Christmas :'(
Comment has been collapsed.
"I will knock someone's teeth out" - "I only know how to handle problems with violence and can't have a mature discussion when someone offends me."
Comment has been collapsed.
I regularly use all of those words, and I'm a physics major with an IQ over 130 and am an active member of my college's debate club.
Comment has been collapsed.
Then you should be smart enough to know why they're idiotic things to say.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, apparently I'm not. I don't believe they are idiotic to say. I don't use them as a slur against any group of people, just as general derogatory words. For instance, when I call someone a faggot, I'm not saying they are actually a homosexual. I'm using it as a general derogatory term. Also, I'm extremely pro-equality and wouldn't discriminate against someone for any reason, except maybe when they are ignorant, and insist on both staying ignorant and spreading their ignorance to others.
Comment has been collapsed.
So you're trying to tell me it's not okay for me to use the word bitch - as a verb, mind you, I'm not advocating calling people bitches - but not be okay with the other two words, but it's okay for you to use words that clearly insult tons of people, using them on anybody you feel like using those words on?
Wow dude. I don't know how you've managed not to get kicked out of your "debate club".
Comment has been collapsed.
I never once told you what words to use or not. I merely told you that bitch has the exact same negativity associated with it as the other words. If you don't like the other words, then you shouldn't also like bitch. I, for one, don't care what words you choose to use to express yourself.
Comment has been collapsed.
Also, during mature discussions, I use mature language. Most of my discussions are online with people I don't know and will literally never meet in real life. It's all about the context.
Comment has been collapsed.
Have you ever wondered why the word faggot grew to be used to describe more then just gay men? I'll give you a hint, it's the same reason people call each-other gay.
Comment has been collapsed.
And I know they have negative connotations, but I hope that gradual acceptance of the term as a general derogatory term will remove such connotations over time.
Comment has been collapsed.
But maybe that is the moment when people might stop using them or using them less. Derogatory terms are used because of the "baggage" they have. If it is normal and much less "taboo", people might feel less inclined to use it, because it does not hold the same impact when said.
Comment has been collapsed.
Fuck has no discriminatory baggage. Many, many derogatory terms have no discriminatory baggage either, but they're still used.
Comment has been collapsed.
I quoted exactly what you said, and then you defended your statement, and now you are saying "And obviously if that were the case, I wouldn't just go socking somebody." You can't have it both ways.
Comment has been collapsed.
I have eight words to say to you, welcome to the internet and enjoy your stay.
I do feel bad for you though, you're probably not a socially accepted person if you can't tolerate swearing. I mean, come on, we aren't in 3rd grade anymore. Normally if you say a swear word you don't intend the actual meaning of the word. If one of my friends calls me a "queer" for killing him in a game, I don't take that to offense and say "hey man that's not right to be insulting gay people and I'm not gay I'm going to call the police on you". I just laugh, and keep playing.
And if you use the excuse there might be kids online looking at that, I'll kill myself laughing.
Comment has been collapsed.
Watch out for the P.C Police brooooo.
+1 and please this is one of the only forums I belong to that doesn't mod me for typing a curse word, I appreciate that honestly.
Comment has been collapsed.
It does mean odd, but it also means homosexual.
Adjective: Strange; odd: "she had a queer feeling that they were being watched".
Noun: offensive. A homosexual man.
Verb: Spoil or ruin (an agreement, event, or situation): "Reg didn't want someone meddling and queering the deal at the last minute".
Comment has been collapsed.
I curse all the time, dude. Just because I object to the more pejorative curse words doesn't mean I'm opposed to them. Please stop straw-manning.
Comment has been collapsed.
So you get to say what curse words are allowed to be said and which are not? Interesting....
Comment has been collapsed.
I can say that you're an asshole for using curse words that belittle gender.
Comment has been collapsed.
He has a point, that belittles everyone technically in the way you used it, not just females when used.
Hypocrite.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, the way you used the word asshole in my point of view, was more offensive than using bitch. You used "asshole" with the intent to offend Hillary, people here has no intention when they say someone was bitching about something, so if there is a problem here it is you and those pseudo-moralists, the world isnt yours
Comment has been collapsed.
Do you know how words work at all? Saying "Well thats a bitch" isn't like saying "Wow she's such a bitch".
Let me further explain it: In the first example bitch meant "something that is extremely difficult, objectionable, or unpleasant". In the 2nd example it meant what you would consider belittling which is quite true: "a malicious, spiteful, or overbearing woman —sometimes used as a generalized term of abuse".
Words have more then one meaning, joshixpi used it in his first sentence as a complaint(4), not as a term to insult the female gender.
Do I really need to explain this? Damn...amazing.
Comment has been collapsed.
My god look as this long list of bitching. Honestly I see no wrong in your sentence, if it was "Feminists yell about bitches's rights and shit" then there would be a problem honestly, but the way you used it was not offensive in my views.
Comment has been collapsed.
Have no idea if that is fake or not, but I've seen that viewpoint far too many times to be able to say it isn't completely false.
And it is the stupidest point of view I've ever seen. All it is is encouraging more sexism and saying that two wrongs make a right. Sexism against men isn't any more right than sexism against women. No amount of oppression women have faced excuses treating someone else in that way. To me, such a view is saying that women aren't good enough to have equal standing with men, so we must bring men down to our level if we want equality, rather than expect to be treated as men are treated now. And I think that "feminists" who preach this view of encouraging sexism against men are doing more harm to women's rights than anything else ever could.
Comment has been collapsed.
His arguments were stupid, and he is the one telling his side of the events, even then he can't refrain from using words like dyke and fagot... So clearly he is an ass, and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that he was treated more nicely than he claims.
Comment has been collapsed.
He's a student. He can't be expected to know all of history and have a working knowledge of women's rights throughout it.
Comment has been collapsed.
It is a classroom. The teacher is supposed to teach, and just wholly dismissing an argument without explanation does not serve to instruct. What's more, while one of his facts (about women not being strong enough to harvest wheat) is inaccurate, the general idea that tasks were divided based on ability is not fallacious, especially in pre-history.
And no amount of fallacy in his argument is justification for the attempt to humiliate him, nor is the assertion that his opinion is invalid correct.
Comment has been collapsed.
Women were not treated as slaves. While men tended to have more power, the relationships were often complicated, especially for higher class women in relatively progressive empires.
The proposition that about the division of labor is to show that some (but not all) inequalities may very well have arisen for non-malicious reasons.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sure, not slaves, husband were just expected to beat and rape their wife into submission. Not all men did of course, but the law gave them that right. Yes some women managed to get some power, but that was in spite of the system.
That it has some natural bases is not the point, mostly the guy said that the men were not treating women very fairly, but that was ok ("calling that oppressive [...] was an extreme view") because the men were working for the women. "women submitted to the authority of men as a reward for their willingness to sacrifice their bodies for the benefit of the family" Could you make a sentence more sexist than that ? The man sacrifice himself willingly, the women don't sacrifice, don't even work it seems, they just get all the benefits.
Comment has been collapsed.
You make it seem that every single man out there beet their wife throughout the entirety of history. That is not the case. In many societies that would have had you arrested. Sure, it was OK in the early 1900's in America, but that doesn't mean that every society everywhere did it. Also, in many places, it wasn't that the law said they could, it was that their religion said they could. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam all say it's OK to beat wives. SO instead of criticizing men or the government, try criticizing religion for that.
Comment has been collapsed.
You missed the part where I said "Not all men did of course". And religion is so mixed with tradition it's hard to tell them apart, that's why every region has its own version of the religion where they pick and choose what the holy book says. And no women were rarely treated better elsewhere, have you heard of the gang-rape scandal in india recently ? Or about the number of abortions of female fetuses ? I honestly don't know that much of the parts of the world, but the global picture is pretty clear.
Putting all the blame on religion is stupid, as I said, religion and tradition/culture are mixed, they pick and choose as they please, but rarely in favor of women.
Comment has been collapsed.
The most abhorrent practices associated with religions tend to be more tied to cultural traditions and less to religious doctrine. Although an argument can be made that there is no one "Christianity" or "Judaism" or "Islam" or "Hinduism" or whatever, and that they must be each understood as related faith communities, this should not overshadow the fact that the sacred traditions and writings that are the basis for these communities honor women. It is true that men tend to be put in charge of the household, including women, and there are even passages (which can be disputed if you like) about disciplining wives. However, there are also many passages about loving, honoring, and respecting women.
One example that springs to mind from Islamic tradition (apologies to Muslims, I cannot remember if this is from the Quran or the Hadith) involves a man who came to ask the Prophet Muhammad who in all of the world he should honor the most. The Prophet Muhammad said "Your mother." The man asked for the second person after that, and the Prophet said "Your mother," again. The man asked for the third person in the list and the Prophet said, "Your mother" a third time. Three times, before anyone else, your mother is to be honored, then your father, then other family and friends.
Comment has been collapsed.
Religions say a lot of things, but what matter is the facts. I heard that argument (honoring the women) a few times but that's bullshit, it's used to excuse discrimination : "we don't won't them to work because we care so much for them".
Some catholic versions have began accepting women as priests, some haven't (hi vatican, any chance you pick a woman pope ? what ? you're still in the 19th century, nevermind), as I said, they pick and choose.
Comment has been collapsed.
First of all, what religions say, especially in their core sacred texts IS part of the body of facts. Secondly, just saying "it's bullshit" is entirely insufficient to ignore it, nor is your attempt once again to create a straw-man to argue with (you did it once before, ascribing a belief in raping and beating to me).
Interpretation of sacred texts is a difficult business, but it is not the one-sided, oppressive caricature you would have it be.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've never accused you of believing in raping and beating. I've just said you're free to not consider that oppression. That means if you don't believe it is oppression then I strongly disagree with you.
"Interpretation of sacred texts is a difficult business" I'm not sure what you mean by that, some people spend their life working on it, true, which I consider one very good reason to call it bullshit, if god wanted us to know something, he would make it clear, or is a bastard, or of course he's man-made and these countless books of contradicting shit is just shit.
Comment has been collapsed.
You are the one advocating for equality and tolerance and rights and that and just dismissed every single sacred text around the world with an argument so deep. There's a word for that, hypocrisy.
And saying that if God wanted us to know something it would have made it clear it's a bit of a fallacious statement, isn't it?
Comment has been collapsed.
That's no hypocrisy at all, I'm against religion, but people have the right to believe in any stupid shit they want, as long as they don't impose it on others and respect human rights. And I've got the right to say what I think of it.
I don't see that as fallacious at all, simply logical. All these religions tell us what god supposedly want us to do, yet there is not a single good reason to believe one over the other. So either he doesn't want to follow his laws, or he wants us to guess which laws are the right one without any valid clue, in that case all the religions are wrong. (or of course it's all man-made bullshit, which is so self-evident I'm constantly amazed to see people actually believe in this shit.)
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm against self entitled whinners like you. Does that suffice?
I mean I could reply, but there's really nor heads nor tails to be made out of any of your arguments here.
Comment has been collapsed.
You are exactly the problem that this post was meant to address. You cannot see past your own ideology and must attempt to humiliate others that question you rather than being willing to enter into a dialogue that might leave both parties the wiser for it.
Comment has been collapsed.
What ideology, that women in much of history were treated as property ? That's a fact.
You want some random examples, off the top of my head, in most countries women only got the right to vote in the 20th century. In the bible's 10 commandments, one of them is don't steal from your neighbor, an other is don't steal the wife of your neighbor (clearly women are not even being spoken to by god). In french, there is a word for boy, one for son, but only one for daughter/girl, one word for man, one for husband, only one for woman/wife, this is not french-specific, it just reflect the tradition in much of the world: the girl belong to the father until she is wedded, then she belongs to the husband, about the only time they were somewhat true is if the husband die. Rape and beating by the husband ? no law against that until not so long ago. And of course all this is still very much true or even worse in the less modernized parts of the world.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually no, that's pretty French-specific. Even its closest kin linguistically don't exhibit that sort of construction. It has all the hallmarks of being cherry-picked as window dressing for a specific argument. I'm sure you're just parroting what you heard elsewhere, but that's sloppy 'scholarship' bordering on the deceptive. I'd drop it in the future. Linguistic arguments aren't especially forceful in political arenas anyway.
Comment has been collapsed.
To say something was oppression is a value judgement and not a statement of fact. It is arguable that in some social sense the situation between the sexes, especially the pre-Medieval situation which believe it or not was more progressive, had at least some benefits for both sexes. There also certainly were in some cases religious reasons for the relations between the sexes.
It also does not follow that all inequalities originate from a malicious intent (something I think may have been the point of the person whose story I linked).
While you may not agree with the conclusions that some draw from the facts, or with the religious beliefs they hold, it does not make your conclusions facts. They are ultimately your ideology.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oppression is a judgment, but when it reach that point, it's hard to objectively call it anything else. I'd like to hear some of these benefits women had.
I didn't see the non-malicious origin as being the main point, or a point at all. And anyway, men had plenty of time to fix it, but didn't until very recently.
But sure, you are free to believe that having the right to rape and beat your wife into submission (to take one of the most telling of so many examples) is not oppressive. And I'm free to believe that's ridiculous
Comment has been collapsed.
To list a few possible benefits for women: protection from wild animals, protection from other men, the provision of food and materials that women might find more difficult to obtain, helping create and raise children.
My point about non-malicious origins is related to my perception of "oppression" as an active thing. Someone oppresses someone else. While it might be unfortunate that laws were not more universally progressive, or that local custom often made the laws not be applied evenly (as I alluded to in another post, middle and upper class women were much more likely to have freedoms and to be able to exercise legal rights than lower class women) I think calling it "oppression" gives it the wrong connotation. Clearly this connotation has made an impression on the more sneering and condescending feminists that are sometimes encountered.
Nowhere did I say that I believe that I believe in beating or raping anyone, nor is my assertion ever that that is not oppression. Rather, originally we were dealing with a blanket statement that women across history have been oppressed. You implied that this sweeping interpretation of world history and culture was self-evident and that I was stupid for not just accepting it. That is, as I said before, an attempt to humiliate rather than reason, in order to promote your ideological interpretation of reality.
Comment has been collapsed.
Of course it's hard being more specific without specifying a period of history, maybe you are talking about pre-history, but in an organized society, the police/law should protect men and women, and as for the food and materials, there is commerce. I was thinking you were talking about benefits in rights that they would have got in exchange for the many rights they didn't have.
Oppression: "the exercise of authority or power in a burdensome, cruel, or unjust manner"
And sure, money helps, but that is really not the point. Beside, almost the only way for a woman in those times to be rich was to be born rich, or marry a rich guy or one that will become rich.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not just talking about pre-history. Well into early-modern period (and even in some remote areas today) a specialized police force was an oddity. Justice was often administered by families, villages, or other communities. This was especially true of more rural or lower class crime. Yes by the time that there was commerce they could have acquired material resources through trade, but that is the whole point isn't it, that marriage is a form of trade.
Your definition of oppression only supports my point. For something to be exercised it must have an agent, and thus be active. I am unconvinced that we can assign agency to those that unwittingly let a tradition stand.
Comment has been collapsed.
Marriage as a trade of women rights in exchange for protection and materials was one of the point of the guy yes. The problem is that women didn't really have a choice in that trade, except maybe which guy to choose.
There's not much of a difference between the oppression of women and the oppression of black slaves. Slaving wasn't about being bad to blacks, just to have free labor (a kind of division of labor), it just evolved into a system where when a black were not equal with whites, both in the law and in practice, just like women were not equal to men both in the law and in practice. When a woman complains about a crime or injustice and, instead of being helped, is punished by the authority, I call that oppression. (random link : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalene_asylum)
Anyway, to get back to this guy and what he said, the main reason I reacted that rudely is that he clearly is a misogynist, as, in particular, this sentence shows : "women submitted to the authority of men as a reward for their willingness to sacrifice their bodies for the benefit of the family" and I've got some expectation on how a guy like that (calls people dyke and fagots...) behave, so I expect he behaved like the ass is is, and got what he deserved, and of course he claims of being oppressed by feminazis and sees himself as a victim. And then you come here and expect sympathy for him, sorry, but no.
And I'll leave on this, I've wasted way too much time on it, and I think we've made our views clear.
Comment has been collapsed.
'women being physically incapable of harvesting wheat'?he's just a dumb little twat and his teacher overreacted if it wasn't fake anyway
Comment has been collapsed.
Lol that guy is a sexist. LET THE SEA OF ANGER DROWN HIM!
Comment has been collapsed.
Well he thinks that women are too weak to "harvest wheat" and men can. Obviously implying that women's physical
strength is low, but some men can be weak too? Anyone can pull out wheat and then replant them. If that is not sexist
then what is? Don't argue with me about the truth. I am not standing on anyone's side, I am just saying.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a scientific fact that women are, on average, weaker than men. In no way is that statement sexist. I could also say that it's a scientific fact that women are, on average, more emotionally intelligent than men. That statement is also not sexist. Since adding "on average" to every statement bogs the sentence down, it isn't necessary when it's obvious it isn't a blanket statement for every single member. So nothing about that was sexist. What it was, was ignorant. I don't mean that in an insulting way either. He genuinely believed that throughout history men did the harvesting, and he ascribed that belief to thinking harvesting was hard and men are stronger. He didn't realize that harvesting was generally only hard in the sense that it took a lot of time and required a lot of bending over, it didn't actually require physical strength.
tl;dr, it's not sexist, it's just ignorant.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't see anything worth getting so butthurt over. Life goes on, y'know.
'sides, if you're trying to argue with a feminist, you have to argue using feminist theory.
"Saying that women throughout history were automatically classified as oppressed denigrates the role of pioneers in female leadership like Catherine of Russia, Queen Elizabeth I of England, or even Cleopatra! Or are we just dismissing their achievements as mere abnormalities amongst womankind?"
Bam.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't see what "Catherine of Russia, Queen Elizabeth I of England, or even Cleopatra" have to do with this, they were royalty so above the men who were above the women. If anything it proves what women were capable of when the stupid system reluctantly (because it couldn't find male royalty) gave them power.
Comment has been collapsed.
Its prejudice, not racism but he has a argument and even if he didn't its the teachers responsibility to teach him why he is incorrect, that teacher saying "Shut up" is fucking bonkers, that is not how you learn. If this article is even true that is, I remember once in my sociology class in college I was given an article about Obama's wife, basically it was about how womens rights(Feminists) groups were upset about her deciding on raising her kids and not doing 101 things to better the country or have her hands in politics. I found this extremely hypocritical of the feminist groups because what they were doing was trying to control her right to decide, kinda ass backwards right? Of course the class was all against me except for this one African American girl(She never talked and was from Brooklyn, class sickened her) that sat next to me and knew that everyone in the class was kinda stupid to put it bluntly.
This is also the class that I got laughed at by everyone when the discussion of human instincts(Apparently most of the class came to the conclusion that we are not mammals) came into play and one girl uttered "I don't have motherly or any kind of other instincts" which is when I replied "Yes yes you do, you are human, which is a animal whether you like it or not", everyone laughed at me for saying that human beings were animals, 95% of the class truly thought that they were not animals, let me point out that this campus is located in Staten Island, NY, or as I like to call it the borough of idiots(I live here and its....god awful), I went to colleges in Manhattan and Brooklyn also, this sort of thing would not happen and I get along with the students much better.
TLDR: People are dumb and the blame can be partly be placed on the education systems.
Comment has been collapsed.
It boggles my mind whenever I hear stories such as these, thinking how can people so stupid be real? I've never really met one as such in real life, and I hope I never do. It feels so stupid to BE that stupid (weird, but that's how I feel) and ignorant, that I might just outright kill that person then and there if it happens. What the God damn fuck is this world coming to? sigh
Calm down, gooooosfrabaaaa.
Comment has been collapsed.
Honestly, you are lucky, that class infuriated me to the point where I was getting mad in class(Not in a bad way mind you, just a lot of disagreeing but I guess you can see the annoyed anger in my face), the teacher became afraid of me I think(She wasn't super bright also and was quite timid and shy, did not fit as a sociology teacher imo) and gave me an automatic A actually even though I didn't do half the homework(Told her half the homework she handed out was mind bogglingly stupid, always explained why I wasn't doing certain assignments, Example: The Obama's wife article, questions were basically "Why is she doing the wrong thing for the female sex".) and only took half the finale, she said I didn't need to come in for the second half O_o.
Whole experience was crazy, I mean I had other classes that were dense but this one was really bad.
Comment has been collapsed.
man unlucky with the sociology class, i took sociology in college and luckily my teacher was pretty open to peoples opinion and pretty much dismissed anyone who said to another person that their opinion was wrong. pretty post-modern view on stuff tbh.
still it sounds sooooo dumb to think that your class did'nt think humans were mammals, I think that speciest but im not sure:p
Comment has been collapsed.
You should all be ashamed of yourself, you rape apologists
EDIT
Eventhough that pic is from /b/ or /pol/ it could be very much real, considering how closeminded and shallow is this new wave of tumbl feminism.
We live in a society where too many people have opinions on things they know nothing about. And the more ignorant they are, the more opinions they have. Just dont give them any attention, thats what they feed on
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for sharing that... a very good example of the kind of mindless extremism that is out there.
I also have this video which was linked to it extremely interesting. This woman who founded a series of shelters talks about how in many cases the women in these violent homes can be as violent as men, and how the feminist movement really was a bunch of Marxists that shifted their focus from capitalists to all men.
Comment has been collapsed.
What's with all this whining and bitching? Women are property. Now, go make me a sandwich, each and every one of you! There, that should provide enough equality. Unless some of the sandwiches don't meet my standards. Then you get the whip.
Comment has been collapsed.
11 Comments - Last post 7 minutes ago by bat0
7 Comments - Last post 9 minutes ago by bat0
14 Comments - Last post 33 minutes ago by m0r1arty
2,177 Comments - Last post 40 minutes ago by CheeseTuber
7 Comments - Last post 41 minutes ago by Axelflox
1,099 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Gamy7
743 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by BlazeHaze
37 Comments - Last post 29 seconds ago by Ignition365
13 Comments - Last post 10 minutes ago by quijote3000
74 Comments - Last post 23 minutes ago by vigaristti
105 Comments - Last post 31 minutes ago by Kyog
503 Comments - Last post 58 minutes ago by Fitz10024
21 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by m0r1arty
81 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Kappaking
Student Humiliated in Class and Suspended for Questioning Extreme Feminist Rhetoric
Fuck this world.
Comment has been collapsed.