Agreed. I've always said that deep down, racism, homophobia, misogyny are merely manifestations of fear.

I've always wanted to go to a white power rally or something and give them a big hug and say "don't worry, the scary black people aren't out to get you. You don't need to be afraid" and then watch the racist idiots squirm.

Bah, she's a two faced manipulator who pulled a cheap stunt (ie. crying discrimination/misogyny) because her popularity was in the shitcan. If you saw her operate during the Howard years in opposition, she was one of the most effective attack dogs the ALP had. She didn't allow being a woman to slow her down then, but as soon as the opinion polls fell away, suddenly the mean ol' men are treating her badly... /eyeroll

This is the same woman who doesn't believe in marriage equality...

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/01/julia-gillard-equal-marriage

Discrimination is okay as long as you're not the one being discriminated against... So fuck her and fuck her sniveling "Oh poor me" bullshit. Equality is something everyone should have, not just a convenience to be exploited for political gain.

2 meh's from the peanut-gallery, one for you and bareboards2-Can't so much stand the holier-than-thou tossing-around of the convenient misogyny label like candy-corns from Halloween houses on the cheap...*edit, can't agree with your black or white sentence beginning with 'just' Engels, do agree however that to suggest that someone act for you according to your desire (like when a mother makes you go kiss yer aunt, etc.) is completely fucked-up programming.

Hope that edit cheered you up a bit there eric, sorry if I altered yer heart rate in some deleterious fashion....

Acting shocked when women do things better than men is the last bastion of misogyny.

I think we have to give them artistic license to show as many examples as possible of the worst it can be, but at the same time it paints a pretty bleak picture where every single "man" acts compulsively and exaggeratedly sexist whenever they're within earshot of a "woman".

I don't like the more subtle aspects either - "men" peeing in alleyways? I've seen women peeing in alleyways and i consider it equally disgusting as men peeing in alleyways. Whoever does it is gross or utterly desperate, and by dint of easier access men are probably more inclined to take the risk of it. This embellishes the misogyny.

The clothing comparisons made is another example - they compare loose fitting shirt and shorts with (for example) skin tight, see through, almost naked stuff. Her dialogue at the end makes me think the author was being quite a bit tongue-in-cheek about that and therefore other bits. Topless jogging? How many would want to do that? Doesn't make good mechanical sense to me and i think you'd find a topless woman walking around my neighbourhood would be shopped in by the women who saw her, not the men.

I think if they're going to try to make a point with the rape scene then they needed to be less tongue-in-cheek with the goofy stuff that i think is added for a level of humour.

Disgusting videos made by disgusting people. These mens rights losers only appeared AFTER feminism came to exist. The reason being all these losers feel they've lost something simply because woman have caught up a little. Half of these guys are losers that don't know how to talk to woman. They call themselves the beta males and hate alpha males that have social skills and the woman that like these men. Call these loser out they shout mangina, faggot, or pussy. Fucking hilarious. Apparently if you don't hate woman, you're a 'pussy' because a pussy is bad thing to these guys. I love pussy. These guys ADORE cock.

They claim you 'can't stick up for yourself' even if you are breathing down their throats. These guys have a lunatic like men vs woman misogyny that is jaw dropping. If you're a woman and get them angry with reality, they threaten to rape, beat, and kill you. If you're a man, they claim you're a woman or that you have no balls and are controlled by woman. These animals contribute to why the world is a horrible place. Humanity is garbage because of people like this.

If men where to have a group where they asked for equal rights in areas they were not equal, it would be called misogyny, and immediately attacked for being anti female. Feminists are not asking for equality, they are asking for advantages. Feminists complain about being oppressed at the top end of the financial spectrum, but they have numerous advantages at the bottom end of the financial spectrum that they call equality. When huge numbers are in poverty (much more than those looking for executive positions), in numerous states women are able to get housing and food stamps, healthcare and welfare, all where men cannot in the same circumstance.

For me to support feminism, I would have to see them pushing for equality in all circumstances, not just "equal for me, fuck you for asking for more".

You know, initially, I thought this was a good vid. Now that I've learned more about the content, I can see how unfair it is. Quite misleading. I think I have to retract my "good on you" thoughts. I'm allowed to be wrong, I think.

Elevatorgate... This topic of misogyny in atheism... This entire subject still confuses the shit out of me. How it exploded into a huge deal, whether or not it was an exaggeration... God, it still has me feeling conflicted and confused to this day. The original video that sparked the whole thing was:
http://youtu.be/uKHwduG1Frk?t=4m35s

And rewatching it - I remember why it rubbed me the wrong way. Yeah, there were a ton of reasons why the dude shouldn't have done what he did. Yes, it was creepy. Yes, poor timing. Very poor. But it's the "sexualizing me creeps me out" comment that gets me. It wasn't the the fact that she was stuck on an elevator with some creepy dude who had no tact that creeped her out. It was the sexualization. That always rubbed me wrong - but I am pretty sure it's not what she meant.

If a guy likes her and asks for coffee because he's attracted to her, that's not a big deal. But that's not what happened - that leaves out the important bits. Everything else surrounding the coffee request was a big deal - and yeah, she has the right to say "Guys, don't corner girls you don't know in the elevator to ask them out or back to your hotel room. Not a smooth move and it's really scary. Seriously." But that's not what she said creeped her out... Pretty sure that's what she meant, though. Or something close to it. I very much doubt she meant "Guys, never try to flirt with me. Sexualizing me in any way creeps me out."

Words are a bitch and people read the wrong things into them. That term "sexualized" is probably the pivotal piece of the entire "controversy." Which is a shame, since the whole experience is a valuable lesson to socially awkward, dumbass dudes: don't do the shit that guy did, it's not good.

So from this flowered all sorts of controversy... That I'm still feeling awfully confused and conflicted about. I still feel like things got blown out of proportion in areas and I DO feel like I couldn't step into these communities and speak my mind, because I'm afraid I'd just get ostracized or attacked. Which is a shame. And it's probably those feelings which fuel any frustration or anger that I have because of the whole topic.

I'm also feeling conflicted, because I still wonder if I don't get it. Maybe there's some sort of serious problem I'm not seeing and I'm actually a misogynist and I have no idea. Hope not.

Not on here I don't.

Typical woman.

Now I do.

I wish people knew what misogyny was and how it is different from sexism. The two are not synonymous. Merely referring to gender does not qualify as either unless there is some kind of value judgement behind it.

Notice the thin veil of misogyny in the comments... especially on youtube.

>> ^A10anis:

Atheists cannot, even in a jocular fashion, be remotely compared to any cults like those of Koresh or Jones, they are the very opposite. In fact, atheists have no agenda other than freedom from the shackles of dark age myths. They do not want to have to confront religions/cults but have no choice when, daily, the destructive nature of them blight so many lives. If a "believer" wants to be a slave to some god and/or preacher, that's fine, they can do so in private. But they must keep their poisonous, controlling, brainwashing, tenets, out of our schools and government.


I believe the gray bloke is being snarky and referential, namely referring to the misogyny of the second two "preachers" and their hordes of MRA-holes (one would need to be up to date on the FtB/Reddit affairs). Condell must be in there for his perceived xenophobia.

I find her repugnant and not because she's a woman...

A bit more info on the case:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/09/speaker-australia-parliament-resign-text-message

Gillard has consistently used personal attacks (some of the certainly accurate) against Abbott to deflect attention away from her governments ongoing snafu's.

The slipper case is just the latest gigantic fuck up in a long line with Gillard's name all over it. This wonderfully outraged woman has steadfastly refused to fire the speaker knowing it would deprive her of another vote in an already slim minority government. The same guy that would say things like:

"Look at a bottle of mussel meat! Salty Cunts in brine!" he continued in his text message to former staffer James Ashby. "Been to thw (sic) fish shop yet to buy the bottle of shell less mussells (sic)?"

I'll be the first to admit that Abbott is neither a likeable person or good prime minister material, but with no viable third alternative, I'll take him and his misogyny over Roxon's 1984-esque data retention scheme and continual attempts to increase the states right at the expense of the citizens, Conroy's 'see no evil' compulsory internet filtering and the extension of the confounding NT 'intervention' scheme that continues to pump money in to a bottomless pit but doesn't actually result in better lives for the Australian Aboriginals it's supposed to help...

Gillard's character is plainly on display. She ignores the blatant sexism of the man she, and her AG Nicola Roxon, defended and refuse to hang out to dry, but when he is revealed to be exactly what she despises, she invokes her dead father and plays the "they're picking on me cos I'm a woman" card to try and divert attention from the trainwreck that is her government. She's not even a toenail clipping from Maggie Thatcher who took to the game of politics as if men had never owned it, never hiding behind the fact she was a woman.

>> ^scannex:

Certainly didn't take you long to resort to personal attacks. Sorry I annoy you.
Congratulations, you annoy me.
1. Your connection is ridiculous. I must somehow be privileged or sexist to have this view?
2. I guess I cannot figure out your point, since I only directly dealt with #3 in your post it sure sounded like "because she cannot turn off being fat, its nothing like smoking". Your other points are you soapboxing about how you want the world to be and are not something I am likely to convince you about.
3. She needs to binge eat in front of the camera to draw the conclusion that she overeats? I completely disagree with you that SHE is in a situation where being overweight is a necessity.
A point I will concede to: It is WILDLY more expensive to healthily than to eat garbage. Being on a local TV program however makes me think she is likely able to afford healthier choices.
3b. Please feel free to provide some hard numbers on the incidence of genetic obesity
4. I redefined behavior following you redefining behavior as essentially a state one can inhibit in the presence of others. Obesity is a behavioral problem. Feel free to use meriam webster if that link is insufficient for you.
5. I didn't ignore 1, and 2 of your post I just didn't reply to it. I don't agree with you. Period. It is tangential to our argument and while valid arguments will further take it off topic.I will say that you ascribe such heightened value to everything it makes me think you are on the brink of a nervous breakdown.
6. What do I care if what she said was not reprehensible? To be blunt, she cites this as a bullying event. It isn't. That is inaccurate. Its becoming the first warcry of those with hurt feelings. My main problem with it is that doing this has the effect of DEVALUING the term, and often when that happens people become desensitized to it. Not every statement is bullying. Not everyone who hears a negative utterance was bullied.
7. One said wasn't saying Shh. One side was privately making a statment. Voicing an opinion, however dickish. Was it his place? Nope. Was it nice? Nope. Was it his right? Yes if you live in any of the 50 states it is his right. A lot of assholes do things with words, like the westboro baptist church and gay soldiers funerals. When it reaches a point of bullying things need to be done (and in the westboro case something WAS done to stop them). That's a good thing. That differentiation between systemic hatred and one guy writing an email NEEDS to be made clear.
Last to your example of Chris Christie, people are BRUTAL to that guy. He gets his share of mail I assure you. People give him shit for the exact same reason of being int he public eye as well. The sexist/privelaged thing is just wild speculation on your part that only makes an angry situation seem angrier. That says a lot about you and your mindset, too.
>> ^hpqp:

Words



It's a fair point to call me out on making presumptions about you and linking your comments to those I've been reading elsewhere; my apologies for that.

You cannot dissociate my first 2 points above from the third: you do not go telling strangers, even in a passive-aggressive way, that they are unfit to be in the public eye. For someone so quick to see personal attacks in comments about you, you seem rather impervious to those in the letter you defend (then again, 'tis true that I'm not very subtle when pissed). The real tangent, one I should probably not have given so much weight to, is whether or not obesity is something one can show/not show and induce simply by showing it (my argument remains valid, btw, it's just not so important as to repeat it all over, and your strawmen are so obvious as to no longer require pointing out).

Your point as I understand it is twofold: the letter-writer has a right to send the anchor his personal criticism and is right to do so. I only agree with the first part; he has a right to do so ((so long) as it is not harassment/threats), but she is also right to call him out for it, and point out that such behaviour is wrong, and that it participates in a culture that tolerates bullying, by letting people think it's fine to say whatever they think to whomever without questioning whether it might be hurtful or not. And nobody's saying that something like this is as bad as WBC-style bullying or systemic racist bs, just like nobody would argue that a female politician being meowed in a session by a colleague is as bad a case of sexism/misogyny as a continually harassed or beaten wife, for example. They are, however, on a spectrum with a unifying underlying belief, namely "I can and should voice my opinions/(dis)tastes about others without taking how it affects them into consideration (and society has nothing to say about it)".

The reason I projected the whole sexism/privilege thing on your comments is because they contain the same "it's harmless/no big deal" and "just poor me self-victimisation" and "what's with making a private event/exchange public?" and "you're trampling his rights!" dismissals. It was wrong of me to do so, but at least now you can understand why I did.

Speaking of projection, presumption and personal attacks, you sure are quick to jump to (and stick to) the conclusion that the anchor is overweight because she has poor lifestyle choices (the same assumptions behind the letter), which is why I (and @bmacs27) went on the tangent of "there's-more-to-obesity-than-being-a-lazy-junkfood-gobler". The assumption that an overweight person is that way because s/he choses so is insulting and ignorant in and of itself, the same way the GOP's "poor people are that way cuz they're lazy moochers who don't pull themselves up by the bootstraps" is.

As for Chris Christie, I refer to point 1) of my comment above: public denunciation all 'round!

I hope that has clarified my argument. Otherwise, I refer you to @Thumper's comments, less contentious than mine and with which I wholly agree.

I forgot all about this comment. I didn't haunt as much as I knew a lot of them in the group, but the whole elevatorgate just soured me on them. ( http://videosift.com/video/Hey-kids-need-some-help-recognising-legitimate-rape?loadcomm=1#comment-1515449 )
In reply to this comment by hpqp:
I don't know which parts of FTB you haunt(ed), but I still read Pharyngula, Greta Cristina and (to a lesser extent) Blag Hag, and all have a pretty appropriate and ethical attitude when it comes to misogyny and co.

(I don't know what the comments look like though, "I only read it for the articles" ; )
In reply to this comment by gwiz665:
In fairness, a lot of them are. I've given up on Freethought blogs for instance.>> ^hpqp:

>> ^Kreegath:
How do you know if you're suffering from man hating and fear? ♫
I'll tell you how to spot, man hating and fear ♪
You're not sure you've got, man hating and fear ♬
Well here's a little lesson for you,
Tell me if the following things are true:
I think all rapists are men - man hating and fear
I think all victims are women - man hating and fear
I rub out all grey areas to prove a moot point - man hating and fear
Men should have no rights to defense against allegations of rape - man hating and fear ♬

Oh, looks like we've got an MRA-hole in the house. Let me guess: you're a white male with malignant priviligitis, amirite? Did any one line of the song suggest falsely accusing someone of rape? Or calling all men rapists? Or hating men?? Oh wait, you ticked the sarcasm tag, that makes it all an a-okay bit of humour right? Wrong.
Your kind disgusts me. And by that I don't mean "men"; no, real men (and women, and anyone in between) know to respect another person's consent and their choice to retract it at any given moment. No, by "your kind" I mean the slimy, any-one-who-points-out-the-sexism-in-our-society-is-a-man-hating-feminazi-and-fear-mongerer kind.
I won't stoop to the MRA-low of wishing rape on you, because I would not wish it on anyone. Instead, I'll kindly suggest you go fuck yourself, because anyone in their right mind, male female or otherwise, would not consent to it with you if they knew your sexist stance. /angry rant
quality song btw

I don't know which parts of FTB you haunt(ed), but I still read Pharyngula, Greta Cristina and (to a lesser extent) Blag Hag, and all have a pretty appropriate and ethical attitude when it comes to misogyny and co.

(I don't know what the comments look like though, "I only read it for the articles" )
In reply to this comment by gwiz665:
In fairness, a lot of them are. I've given up on Freethought blogs for instance.>> ^hpqp:

>> ^Kreegath:
How do you know if you're suffering from man hating and fear? ♫
I'll tell you how to spot, man hating and fear ♪
You're not sure you've got, man hating and fear ♬
Well here's a little lesson for you,
Tell me if the following things are true:
I think all rapists are men - man hating and fear
I think all victims are women - man hating and fear
I rub out all grey areas to prove a moot point - man hating and fear
Men should have no rights to defense against allegations of rape - man hating and fear ♬

Oh, looks like we've got an MRA-hole in the house. Let me guess: you're a white male with malignant priviligitis, amirite? Did any one line of the song suggest falsely accusing someone of rape? Or calling all men rapists? Or hating men?? Oh wait, you ticked the sarcasm tag, that makes it all an a-okay bit of humour right? Wrong.
Your kind disgusts me. And by that I don't mean "men"; no, real men (and women, and anyone in between) know to respect another person's consent and their choice to retract it at any given moment. No, by "your kind" I mean the slimy, any-one-who-points-out-the-sexism-in-our-society-is-a-man-hating-feminazi-and-fear-mongerer kind.
I won't stoop to the MRA-low of wishing rape on you, because I would not wish it on anyone. Instead, I'll kindly suggest you go fuck yourself, because anyone in their right mind, male female or otherwise, would not consent to it with you if they knew your sexist stance. /angry rant
quality song btw