TBBS and treatment of women
- Thread starter Robert Maxwell
- Start date
- Status
Nietzsche did advocate those wishing peace should be ready for war.I guess peace was never an option.
I had absolutely no intention of posting in this thread again. And I don't intend to get back into the mire of how things should be on this board in particular. But I find myself unwilling to pass this one by.
Jenee - I have often found you to be articulate and wise in threads. I agree with things you say more often than not. And sometimes seeing your dancing avatar triggers a positive Pavlovian response that I'm probably going to enjoy your post.
So please believe that I'm speaking purely from a place of ideological difference on this one point when I say fuck that shit.
Sexism did not magically go away with the introduction of various equal opportunities laws and policies in the last couple of decades and you have absolutely no right to pass judgement on younger women's experience and declare every woman under 30 to be a princess of the post-feminist utopia. I mean, I'm guessing part of that was rhetorical hyperbole, but dismissing any women who have lost things ranging from friends to jobs to their lives due to causes that have their roots in gender-hierarchies as princesses who don't know how good they have it is wrong.
I am stupendously grateful for changes wrought by second-wavers. I benefit from them every day. But sexism is still a very effective tool in the arsenal of anybody intent on screwing over those with less power. And there are lots of such people quite happy to use that tool. It's still a massive problem, and it's still worth making a stink over.
/humourless feminazi etc
Last edited:
I couldn't help noting the line in that article: "spastic is considered the second-most offensive disability-related insult in British/Commonwealth English".
It's an unreferenced claim in the wiki article, which made me think: which is the most offensive disability-related insult in British English? I can't instantly think of which one it would be.
French, Belgian, both?
You are correct and I am amply chastised.
I appreciate you words, but I've never felt I was particularly articulate on these boards specifically for the reasons you expressed. My thoughts are complete and extensive, but in attempting to put them in writing I've always tried to keep them concise - thereby cutting off major concepts and ideas and the entire gist of what I was trying to say is lost.
I know sexism still exists and that's why we (older people) haven't given up the fight.
However, to clarify my words - and what I think RJ was trying to say - most women (not all, but most) do speak of men in the same fashion that most men (not all, but most) speak of women.
Some women (in that group of most) want to be able to say what they want, but not be offended by the things men say.
Some women - regardless of which group they belong to think women should never be spoken of in sexual or derogatory terms. Which, in my opinion, is so completely Victorian that I cringe just writing it.
Those are the women I speak of when I speak of "princesses". They want the knight in shining armor to worship her from afar, but never sully her by speaking of her in anything less than glowing terms.
And that is sexism - it's what we fought against. and I will fight tooth and nail against any woman who wants to bring it back.
Really? I thought it would be obvious. The first word that popped into my mind was "retard".
For what that article is basing it on is a reference from Wikipedia's article on the term spastic, which cites the claim from an poll done by Ouch!. Ouch! appears to be a BBC run site that specialises in providing content for those with disabilities and I would assume those who are impacted by those with disabilities (family, friends, etc).
I agree that the board as a whole doesn't treat women badly, but IMO there's no denying that there are a handful of creeps, and that the problem is how to deal with them when they continually cross the line. Continuous lack of respect is the issue.
In the survey non-disabled people voted it as the most offensive according to the break down shown in Jadzia's link. Disabled voters placed it second.
That breakdown is interesting in that the term non-disabled voters voted as the second most offensive received the least votes from disabled voters.
Jenee, what you are talking about, and what actually goes on in this forum are two different things. You are missing several important factors:
1. Women are the minority here - it easy for some posters to assume all posters have/should have masculine minds, and if they don't, that's WRONG. Due to the numbers difference, there is a whole lot of aggressive steamrollering going on.
2. No one here says they have a problem with women being sexualised, they have a problem with sexually derogatory language and behaviour. This is an important distinction which has so far been lost on you, and others.
3. You fail to see a lot of the language you are using is belittling in the extreme: wanting to be "special", "princesses", "naive", that any woman born after 1980 is not worth listening to on this subject... all of these things are precisely part of the problem; just because you are a woman yourself, does not make you any less sexist. Like I said - inverted sexism. And you are absolutely oblivious to it.
4) Just because your intent is not to be sexist, it does not necessary follow that some of your behaviour has not been sexist nevertheless. In such a hypothetical situation, if it has been pointed out to you (general you), and you persist, then you have just moved from being an unconscious sexist to a very much conscious sexist.
You can say this and that is NOT sexist till you are blue in the face, doesn't make you right and others wrong though. Insisting harder does not make it more true. You will have to persuade, rather than belittle, and I am not thus far persuaded.
I am beginning to think you are winding the topic up a little, as several different posters have already patiently tried to explain things to you that you had muddled up to mean something exaggerated and ridiculous. I will give you the benefit of the doubt maybe you were not reading carefully, rather than murkying the waters because you personally have expressed a vested interest in the old ways remaining.
1. Women are the minority here - it easy for some posters to assume all posters have/should have masculine minds, and if they don't, that's WRONG. Due to the numbers difference, there is a whole lot of aggressive steamrollering going on.
2. No one here says they have a problem with women being sexualised, they have a problem with sexually derogatory language and behaviour. This is an important distinction which has so far been lost on you, and others.
3. You fail to see a lot of the language you are using is belittling in the extreme: wanting to be "special", "princesses", "naive", that any woman born after 1980 is not worth listening to on this subject... all of these things are precisely part of the problem; just because you are a woman yourself, does not make you any less sexist. Like I said - inverted sexism. And you are absolutely oblivious to it.
4) Just because your intent is not to be sexist, it does not necessary follow that some of your behaviour has not been sexist nevertheless. In such a hypothetical situation, if it has been pointed out to you (general you), and you persist, then you have just moved from being an unconscious sexist to a very much conscious sexist.
You can say this and that is NOT sexist till you are blue in the face, doesn't make you right and others wrong though. Insisting harder does not make it more true. You will have to persuade, rather than belittle, and I am not thus far persuaded.
I am beginning to think you are winding the topic up a little, as several different posters have already patiently tried to explain things to you that you had muddled up to mean something exaggerated and ridiculous. I will give you the benefit of the doubt maybe you were not reading carefully, rather than murkying the waters because you personally have expressed a vested interest in the old ways remaining.
That's certainly not the approach I have.
I do think that sex should come with far more respect than it often does in society, and I think that does come with a certain degree of privacy--a sense of the sacred.
And I think that women should not be objectified--neither spoken of nor portrayed in that manner.
BUT--I also think that men deserve the same respect. A man should not be treated as a walking sex toy with no feelings. Yes, men do have different feelings about sex, but I have seen women who take that and assume that men don't care and can't have their hearts broken. Or that it's fun to engage in that sort of emotional manipulation of men.
Those of you who know me from the DS9 forum have undoubtedly seen the displeasure I've expressed towards the characters of both James Kirk and Jadzia Dax. I saw them both as guilty of the exact same things. There is no standard of conduct that I apply to men that I do not apply to women in return. If I want to be respected for who I am and not for my physical attributes, then I had darned well better return the exact same respect towards men; otherwise it is hypocritical.
To An Officer: You're giving me the benefit of a doubt while telling me I've muddled the issues and my thinking is murky?
You want me to be clear. Then listen to this. If you post any message on any internet message board and cry because some man says "hello", then you're a fucking drama princess.
I'm not muddling anything. You're discussing "creepy" posters. Men that "step over the line" when complimenting women. If that hurts your feelings, stay home, read a book and get a dog. Because life is going to run you over.
Men and women are different. They express themselves differently. That doesn't make them sexist, it makes them different.
Not all women are alike. Some women like to express themselves attractively and like to be complimented. Other women not so much. Doesn't make one wrong or the other right, it makes them different.
Get over it.
You want me to be clear. Then listen to this. If you post any message on any internet message board and cry because some man says "hello", then you're a fucking drama princess.
I'm not muddling anything. You're discussing "creepy" posters. Men that "step over the line" when complimenting women. If that hurts your feelings, stay home, read a book and get a dog. Because life is going to run you over.
Men and women are different. They express themselves differently. That doesn't make them sexist, it makes them different.
Not all women are alike. Some women like to express themselves attractively and like to be complimented. Other women not so much. Doesn't make one wrong or the other right, it makes them different.
Get over it.
I did address this issue earlier. I've had men tell me they don't wish me to flirt with them, and I don't. Yet we are still able to have a conversation.
That's what I'm saying, if one does not wish to be addressed in such a manner, it's not a big deal to say "I appreciate your intent, however, I'd appreciate if you didn't speak to me like that." If the person persists, then put them on ignore.
Jenee, can i flirt with your little dancing avatar? 
As someone who has been following this thread (and the "commentary thread" in TNZ 
), I think there's basically a consensus here. People shouldn't be creepy or sexist, especially if told to stop it. And if they don't, moderators should step in once notified.
I feel like the disagreements left here mostly concern what exactly constitutes creepy or sexist behavior and obviously opinions will differ. It would be surprising if they would not.
So I would say, if you feel that you are being treated in a way that you don't like, try PMs, contacting mods, or if that doesn't work, contact T'Bonz as the ultima ratio (Hi Bonz!). I'm reasonably certain that one of those will lead to the situation at hand to be dealt with.
What I don't think will come out of this, is that the real problems brought up here will disappear entirely. What I mean by that is that many posters who are sexist, creepy, perceived to be creepy, do not intend to be that way intentionally. If only it were that simple.
Hopefully, this thread and ones like this one in the past and future will change some minds, I think that's what Robert tried to do here. But it's going to remain a struggle.
), I think there's basically a consensus here. People shouldn't be creepy or sexist, especially if told to stop it. And if they don't, moderators should step in once notified.I feel like the disagreements left here mostly concern what exactly constitutes creepy or sexist behavior and obviously opinions will differ. It would be surprising if they would not.
So I would say, if you feel that you are being treated in a way that you don't like, try PMs, contacting mods, or if that doesn't work, contact T'Bonz as the ultima ratio (Hi Bonz!
). I'm reasonably certain that one of those will lead to the situation at hand to be dealt with.What I don't think will come out of this, is that the real problems brought up here will disappear entirely. What I mean by that is that many posters who are sexist, creepy, perceived to be creepy, do not intend to be that way intentionally. If only it were that simple.
Hopefully, this thread and ones like this one in the past and future will change some minds, I think that's what Robert tried to do here. But it's going to remain a struggle.
Are you implying sexual aggression is the hallmark of a masculine mind?
No matter the person or the argument - this much is true.
As someone who has been following this thread (and the "commentary thread" in TNZ
- Status
