It was his turn to get expelled »« Traces of a Triassic Kraken?

Comments

  1. Gregory Greenwood says

    Obsessive, whining tirades on the theme of ‘wut about teh menz!’ in 3… 2… 1

  2. Pierce R. Butler says

    Anyone who can raise a cloud of dust like that on a pedal-powered plastic trike must have swallowed more than one red pill…

  3. says

    Of all the comics I’d expect to find here, Sinfest wasn’t among them. Which, in hindsight, is actually pretty silly of me.

  4. Louis says

    I saw this and immediately thought of recent posts about atheists/feminism. After all a subset of the culture we are keen to educate about feminism are nerdy men (WOOT GO NERDS! MY PEOPLE!) and if a reference to The Matrix won’t do it, I have no idea what will!

    Louis

  5. Louis says

    @ Gregory Greenwood #4,

    Oh now THAT is plucking the low hanging fruit.

    Mind you I’m only complaining because I am no where near dumb enough to bet against you on this one. Now I has a sad. :-(

    Louis

  6. Dick the Damned says

    One of the items apparently constituting the patriarchy is make-up.

    If I tried to get my wife or daughters to give up on make-up, my life wouldn’t be worth living for many days to come, & then also on the odd days when they brought the subject up, to ridicule me. I can guarantee that this would go on for years.

  7. Aquaria says

    Anyone who can raise a cloud of dust like that on a pedal-powered plastic trike must have swallowed more than one red pill…

    Maybe they were in West Texas this past August.

  8. Muse says

    @Dick – I think perhaps you may be unclear on how the patriarchy works. Women absolutely enforce this sort of thing on other women, and in fact, on themselves. That doesn’t make it any better – in some ways it makes it worse.

  9. says

    @13 It doesn’t matter what you say, if they’ve been taught all their lives that women need painted faces to fit in (i.e. be acceptable to society), because only women who are attractive to men fit in, and you need to paint your face to make yourself look attractive.

    If our culture told us men would reject women who wore makeup, do you think they’d want to wear it? In fact, in the past (and in other cultures), this was the case. Women who wore makeup were considered prostitutes or promiscuous, so “decent” women shunned makeup. So yeah. Makeup is part of the patriarchy.

  10. anuran says

    I like Sinfest. But I can’t take too much of it before the style starts giving my ADHD a bad headache.

  11. says

    Oh, good! I’m so glad you saw that & posted it–I was trying and trying to figure out how to pass it on to, because it’s so good. Reading all those subliminal messages is hard, but I’ve heard every single one of them.

  12. says

    And that’s not even touching on the fact that women are judged primarily on their appearance whereas men are not. Or that men who are older or wrinkly or grey haired are considered “distinguished” or “rugged” and have “gravitas”, but women who don’t look under 25 are “ugly” “crones” “washed-up” “matronly” etc., thus the pressure to cover up any sign of aging on the part of women.

  13. Mattir says

    How about anyone can wear makeup (or jewelry or tattoos or shaved legs or whatever) if they want to, and we stop with the enforcing gender or grooming rules beyond a basic “please don’t smell bad.” That would let those of us who want to think about clothing style or don’t want to shave their legs or want to have an octopus tattooed on their left earlobe go for it.

    Seriously, the “makeup is part of the patriarchy and no good feminist should wear it” is tiresome and strikes this particular feminist as another way to control my behavior to conform with someone else’s ideas of how I should be.

  14. Maarten says

    I was wondering how long it would take for this comic to show up on PZ’s blog, it being right up his alley and all.

  15. Aquaria says

    Women who wore makeup were considered prostitutes or promiscuous, so “decent” women shunned makeup.

    This painting caused a sensation because the woman herself already had a reputation as a “fast” woman, but, moreover, people who saw it considered the pose, the attire–everything as suggesting too blatant of sexuality. A part of the sexual look was that she’s clearly wearing makeup. Observe that her ear is a far different color than the rest of her and that she has a “purple” tinge to her skin–the purple came from her cosmetic powder, and she used it to heighten her complexion.

    So, yes, makeup has been in and out of favor, depending on how the patriarchy viewed it.

  16. Dick the Damned says

    #16 – I agree 100 %.
    #17 – “…if they’ve been taught all their lives that women need painted faces to fit in…”
    I don’t know that it’s just a matter of being taught. This is almost certainly a nurture/nature issue. My feeling is that women are at least as complicit in this as men, & probably much more so.

  17. Anat says

    To Dick (#13) and Ibis3 (#20):

    And it’s the girls’/women’s peers who will enforce it, even contra to example at home and attempts at pre-emptive education at home. ‘Cause what does mom know anyway?

    (I don’t use make-up. I don’t own make-up. My husband expressed dislike of and disgust with make-up. We showed our daughter videos about the propaganda of the beauty industry. She decided to wear make-up anyway. At least she has to buy it herself from her allowance. Maybe one day something else might have higher priority. One can hope.)

  18. manocheese says

    @20.

    “And that’s not even touching on the fact that women are judged primarily on their appearance whereas men are not” What a load of bollocks. Women get it more, in a more obvious way. But men are far from being free of sexism. This is not a ‘what about the men?’ post, I’m just pointing out that you are incorrect.

    The ‘incubator’ reference does not apply where I am (UK) very much, I think the majority of people are past that sort sexism. That doesn’t mean I should call it over the top, because I know that there are places where that is the norm. There are places where it is much worse, like Iran, where a women has been sentenced to prison and 40 lashes for appear in an Australian movie about western culture.

  19. mythusmage says

    Somebody just turned 13. That’s the age when kids start noticing things they had never noticed before.

  20. Muse says

    @Mattir – I’m with you on that. People should be able to choose to do what they like with their bodies. I just wish that we didn’t have the idea that a made-up face is the only pretty face for a woman.

    @Dick – Hang on – don’t run too far with that. It’s still problematic, and I’m not letting the patriarchy off the hook. What I said was not “women bully each other it’s all women’s fault.”

  21. Kazim says

    I’ve been reading this SinFest plotline for the past week or two, and I suspect it’s satirical. The little girl is going around irritating all the people in the strip with her feminist jargon, and it feels to me like she’s not really being portrayed in a good light. I suspect that Tatsuya Ishida is trying to make some point that is actually ridiculing feminists. But I guess we’ll have to wait and see how this character winds up. (On the other hand, knowing SinFest it’s highly likely that there’s no resolution coming, and Li’l Feminist is about to become a new recurring character who just rolls in and stirs up trouble whenever the action might be getting slow.)

  22. Aquaria says

    “makeup is part of the patriarchy and no good feminist should wear it” is tiresome and strikes this particular feminist as another way to control my behavior to conform with someone else’s ideas of how I should be.

    I don’t think anyone’s saying that, only that how the patriarchy views makeup or skirt length or hairstyle, etc, dictates whether or not those things are considered acceptable or unacceptable for women.

    Today, few women would be without makeup if they’re going to elite events, working at a high-level job or having an important photo taken; they’re expected to wear it. 130 years ago, a painting of a woman whose makeup played a part in the patriarchy considering her and the painting of her too sexually blatant. Her reputation in society was destroyed, and John Singer Sargent, the artist would never exhibit at the Salon in Paris ever again.

  23. Beatrice, anormalement indécente says

    ..octopus tattooed on their left earlobe go for it

    If only I wasn’t afraid of pain.

  24. Louis says

    Kazim, #31,

    Perhaps. I’ve also followed the plot and see what you are saying. However, even if Tatsuya intends differently, that piece is so very illustrative of what it’s like to realise there’s all this social conditioning around you (in this case the patriarchy/sexism) that it’s damn good intended or no.

    Louis

  25. Dick the Damned says

    #26, I, like your husband, don’t like make-up, & i congratulate you.

    But I have to say, it does make my wife look younger than she is, & we both like that. A preference for looking at young, rather than old women, is undoubtedly an evolved characteristic of our species. (I believe this isn’t necessarily the case for our closest relatives, the chimpanzees.)

  26. Beatrice, anormalement indécente says

    That first strip is a little bit annoying, mainly for the same reasons Mattir stated in #22. But I don’t think it was meant to be satirical. It was an introduction into the rest of the cartoon and main character’s questioning of patriarchy. If the whole thing had ended with the main character putting on a long shirt, I might have thought differently, but this way we don’t know what she did. She’s more aware and can now make an informed decision about what she wants to do with herself, but what the right decision would be isn’t pushed on us.

  27. says

    I’ve been reading this SinFest plotline for the past week or two, and I suspect it’s satirical. The little girl is going around irritating all the people in the strip with her feminist jargon, and it feels to me like she’s not really being portrayed in a good light.

    interesting projection of your own sentiments, there. I perceived the same strip quite differently.

  28. Sally Strange, OM says

    A preference for looking at young, rather than old women, is undoubtedly an evolved characteristic of our species. (I believe this isn’t necessarily the case for our closest relatives, the chimpanzees.)

    Do you intend to mate with every woman you look at? If not, then this makes zero sense.

  29. Beatrice, anormalement indécente says

    To add to my last post.
    That in the end one option or the other isn’t pushed on us, makes up for that first panel. I like how the whole thing turned out.

  30. says

    Do you intend to mate with every woman you look at? If not, then this makes zero sense.

    also, it assumes that the male gaze is imperative. compare with the fact that it might be similarly evolutionarily wired to prefer young, virile men, but in plenty of cultures, men made themselves look older; because the female gaze didn’t matter.

  31. says

    That in the end one option or the other isn’t pushed on us, makes up for that first panel. I like how the whole thing turned out.

    ditto. and note that in this cartoon, she’s still wearing that same shirt. being made aware =! dictating behavior.

  32. Aquaria says

    Oh, and I’ve been a makeup wearer, most of the time, because I have always had dark circles under my eyes that make me look like Riff Raff from Rocky Horror. So I wear the makeup to cover up the circles. Nobody would believe the amount of concealer I go through in a given year.

  33. Muse says

    @Dick – so, why exactly do you think that it’s an evolutionary imperative? Assuming that it is, why is is one that we should pay attention to? Why aren’t men looking younger too?

  34. Dick the Damned says

    I guess it might also be worthwhile for me to suggest that the patriarchy is not a constant in human society.

    I have a foot on both sides of the Atlantic. I think the patriarchy is stronger in North America than what it is in the UK. This, quite possibly, is due the more recent history of pioneering in North America.

    As a family, we are working on returning to Canada after a very long absence, & one of its attractions is the more old fashioned nature of society, at the inter-personal level, there. Yes, my wife & daughter think that, too.

  35. Sally Strange, OM says

    Choosing to wear makeup isn’t necessarily supportive of patriarchy or misogyny.

    The misogynist part comes in when women are expected to wear makeup to the office EVERY DAY, otherwise they look “unprofessional.”

    It amounts to a tax on being a woman, as do many of the sartorial conventions in our culture.

  36. The Laughing Coyote says

    #26, I, like your husband, don’t like make-up, & i congratulate you.

    But I have to say, it does make my wife look younger than she is, & we both like that. A preference for looking at young, rather than old women, is undoubtedly an evolved characteristic of our species. (I believe this isn’t necessarily the case for our closest relatives, the chimpanzees.)

    “I don’t like makeup, but I gotta say it makes women look younger and hotter and I kinda prefer that. Evolutionary Psychology.”

    am I getting the gist of your post right?

  37. Sally Strange, OM says

    I have a foot on both sides of the Atlantic. I think the patriarchy is stronger in North America than what it is in the UK. This, quite possibly, is due the more recent history of pioneering in North America.

    You’re just making shit up. You have no idea what you’re talking about. If you want an education, stick around. If you prefer to wallow in your ignorance, I’d suggest leaving right now.

  38. Dick the Damned says

    #39 & #44, wow!

    Women have a short reproductive life compared to men. Evolution would then work on that.

  39. Tifu says

    “interesting projection of your own sentiments, there. I perceived the same strip quite differently.”
    Of course he’s the one projecting and you are perceiving it correctly. No possible alternative to be considered :|

  40. Beatrice, anormalement indécente says

    Wasn’t there a thread a couple of months ago about a famous brand in UK firing a woman who didn’t want to wear full make up every day for work? I think it caused quite an influx of information about ridiculous regulations for women that some work places have, on both sides of the Atlantic.

  41. Muse says

    @Dick… what exactly do you think men’s lifespan has been for most of human history? And don’t think I didn’t notice you didn’t answer the question.

    And when you say “Old-fashioned” what exactly do you mean?

    Also – bullshit on the patriarchy not being a constant. Name me a society.

    Also, you’re arguing that it’s evolutionarily determined but not a constant for humans?

  42. says

    Of course he’s the one projecting and you are perceiving it correctly. No possible alternative to be considered :|

    I’ll pay you $100 if you can show me where I said that my perception was the correct one.

  43. Tifu says

    I’d have thought if that wasn’t your intention you wouldn’t have used the wording you did, but if that wasn’t your intent, my apologies.

  44. chigau () says

    Dick the Damned

    Yes, my wife & daughter think that, too.

    Do they also enjoy cooking your meals and fetching you a beer?

  45. says

    I’d have thought if that wasn’t your intention you wouldn’t have used the wording you did,

    I used the correct wording; they projected their perception of the behavior of the feminist onto the intent of the comic artist; I did the same, from a different perspective. I noted the difference, because I found it interesting.

  46. Erulóra Maikalambe says

    I used the correct wording; they projected their perception of the behavior of the feminist onto the intent of the comic artist; I did the same, from a different perspective. I noted the difference, because I found it interesting.

    Your comment was terse and I interpreted it the same way they did. You contrasted their ‘projection’ to your ‘perception’, thereby implying that you were not doing any projection of your own.

  47. Kazim says

    interesting projection of your own sentiments, there. I perceived the same strip quite differently.

    That’s uncalled for. They’re not my own sentiments. I agree with the feminist message, but I am also sensitive to an author who is creating a potential strawman version of my position. Straw atheists and straw liberals are everywhere; and I’ve seen plenty of straw feminists showing up in, say, Mallard Fillmore.

    I will say that Tatsuya’s wrap-up was a lot more nuanced than Mallard Fillmore could ever be.

  48. Ben says

    @37

    . If the whole thing had ended with the main character putting on a long shirt, I might have thought differently, but this way we don’t know what she did.

    The next strip is already up. I don’t know if it’s supposed to be the same character, but …

  49. Tethys says

    I had never heard of this comic until it was discussed in the most recent endless thread.

    My perception of the girl on the big-wheel (love that!) was not that she was going around “annoying” the other characters.

    I saw it more as raising awareness, and this latest strip seems compatible with that interpretation. It’s everywhere.

  50. Beatrice, anormalement indécente says

    Ben,
    It’s under a new title so I think it’s a new story line. (A regular reader of the comic may correct me if story lines are usually connected.)

  51. Pareidolius says

    I don’t think English is Dick’s first language, that or he slept through most of his grammar classes. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to fix the wheel on my connestoga and repair my flintlock . . .

  52. amphiox says

    I used the correct wording; they projected their perception of the behavior of the feminist onto the intent of the comic artist; I did the same, from a different perspective. I noted the difference, because I found it interesting.

    Exactly.

    And do not rule out the possibility that the artist considered the possibility of both reactions, if not several others, and deliberately intended to provoke them all.

    Or the possibility that he wanted to provoke one reaction first to setup his reader with a certain expectation, and then reverse it at the end for dramatic impact. Note how the first 3 short pieces tonally lean one way, the next three gradually shifts it back to neutral as it sets up the movie shout-out, and the final climactic long color strip turns the tone all the way around for the big WHAM! on the reader’s expectations.

  53. Sally Strange, OM says

    On the website, the next comic after this one has nothing to do with it. It’s something about a backpack belonging to a devil-girl. Different storyline title and everything.

    As for Dick, clearly he’s just longing to be the new chew-toy for the Horde. Should we make him beg for it?

  54. The Laughing Coyote says

    Tethys: The way I see it, both interpretations are kind of correct: Raising awareness does tend to ‘annoy people’. It’s such a bother, being asked to question themselves and their worldview.

  55. Dianne says

    Women have a short reproductive life compared to men.

    True, women have a life after their reproductive years are complete. Men continue to be technically fertile until death, but their chances of producing healthy offspring decrease every year. Therefore, there should be more evolutionary pressure for women to prefer young men, because older men are more likely to give them unhealthy children due to their aged sperm, whereas men are protected by menopause from having children with women whose oocytes are no longer optimal. Therefore, the evolutionary element, should favor women’s preference for young men and not so strongly favor men’s preference for younger women.

    Isn’t sociobiology fun? You can prove anything!

  56. says

    “A preference for looking at young, rather than old women,”

    There’s a whole spectrum of age, you know. I’ve always liked looking at women my own age. Currently I find laugh lines around the eyes and smile lines very sexy. I’ve always felt a little sad for the guys who get their libido caught in one slice of time and never outgrow it.

  57. Mattir says

    We should be nice to Dick the Damned – he’s probably grappling with the biological imperative,, first identified by Ogi Ogas, to tweet pictures of his privates to those awful young-looking makeup-wearing women.

    (Seriously, I like evo psych as a field with a lot of promise. But it’s freaking excruciating to read and listen to the just-so-story adherents. Makeup can be fun. So can shaving your legs or getting tattooed. Everyone should be free to try whatever they want.)

  58. Sleeper says

    Coinidentaly I’d recently found myself thinking the Matrix could be co-opted as a metaphor for growing up in a religion.

  59. amphiox says

    The next strip is already up. I don’t know if it’s supposed to be the same character, but …

    It looks like the same character. But given the obvious change of season in the background, I wouldn’t read too much into the change of clothing. Especially considering the rest of the context of that strip.

    http://www.sinfest.net/archive_page.php?comicID=4052

  60. Sally Strange, OM says

    The character on the Big Wheel does a number of things.

    1. Informs the girl wearing a midriff-bearing shirt that she’s conforming to patriarchally-sanctioned fashion norms. Annoying? A bit.

    2. Intervenes during a moment of street sexual harassment. Annoying? To the harasser, yes. To the harassee, hardly.

    3. Gives the afore-mentioned midriff-bearing character the red pill so she can actually see the patriarchy all around her. Annoying? Not really.

    I agree with Coyote: both elements are there.

    I also agree with Jadehawk: describing her activities as primarily annoying is more revealing of the mindset of the person reading the comic than it is of the comic itself.

  61. chigau () says

    Sally Strange, OM
    re Dick the Damned
    I’d like to know what His Women-Folk™ think before we take any action.

  62. Dick the Damned says

    Me thinks some of you are reading too much into my comments. For instance, I always fetch my own beer, & I make my wife’s tea regularly, & take it to her, in bed too.

    I’m curious what faults will be found, or projected onto, the above.

  63. Mattir says

    Me, I’m glad I’ve reached “a certain age” in which I can wear makeup and jewelry or not and not have random strangers assume that I’m reproductively available for their skeevy attentions.

  64. Sally Strange, OM says

    Oh yeah, she also zooms by a young man reading books by Plate and Shakespeare and leaves books by Simone de Beauvoir, bell hooks, and Sappho on top of his pile. I don’t know if that’s annoying or not. Perhaps, if you hate reading.

  65. The Laughing Coyote says

    Here here Mattir, I love my tattoos.

    I also have a shortage of body hair though, and cherish every bit I own, so I’ll pass on the leg shaving.

  66. Ms. Daisy Cutter says

    Anat: Scroll up and read Mattir’s comment. You are not morally superior to those of us who wear makeup. And I very seldom wear it, but I am vehemently opposed to the kind of feminism that polices women for doing so.

    Dick: Words make worlds. Little things add up to big things. Here’s another comment of yours that’s ill considered: “A preference for looking at young, rather than old women, is undoubtedly an evolved characteristic of our species.” Whose preference? If you mean “straight men,” say “straight men,” and don’t equate “straight men” with “all people.”

    Manocheese: Yeah, you are playing “what about the menz.” I’m a Yank, but my British women friends don’t report that their country is a paradise of non-sexism, either. And “But it’s so much worse elsewhere!” is a classic derail.

  67. says

    Great comic. Cosmetics? I wore my fair share when younger, but I quit bothering when I was around 45 or so. I think it should be a personal choice, not a requirement and it is a requirement in too many places. I do use the stuff to paint with on occasion though.

    Dick, figure out the first rule of holes.

  68. Dianne says

    I don’t shave my legs because my boyfriend doesn’t like it. OTOH, I don’t wear makeup because I don’t like it. No one’s told me I have to, possibly because I’m too aspie to notice them telling me I have to.

  69. Kazim says

    This is probably going to get OT, but for new readers of Sinfest: It’s not the same character. The strip has a regular “heaven” and “hell” cast of characters, including a god who only appears as a giant hand, a Buddhist dragon thing, a devil who appears as a gentleman in a dapper suit, two succubi, a child fundie, and a corresponding child groupie of the devil.

    The hillbilly devil girl in this strip is a relatively new character. I haven’t quite understood what the point of her is yet, but she appears to have been created just a short time ago, and mentally acts like a very small child. Various other characters have been trying to project their value systems on her, and one of the succubi has already started drifting apart from the hell scene by falling in love, so it’s not clear where HBDG is going to wind up in the spectrum.

  70. KG says

    I don’t think anyone’s saying that, only that how the patriarchy views makeup or skirt length or hairstyle, etc, dictates whether or not those things are considered acceptable or unacceptable for women.

    Today, few women would be without makeup if they’re going to elite events, working at a high-level job or having an important photo taken; they’re expected to wear it. – Aquaria

    I’d say that’s less so in Britain. My wife never wears makeup, and while her job is perhaps not “high-level”, it and a charity board she is on involve a lot of official events, including occasionally with politicians, senior officials or company management. As far as I know (I’ll check!), she has never felt any pressure to wear it – or to dye her mostly grey hair. But thinking about it again, perhaps it’s because she’s in a “profession allied to medicine” – would they also be less constrained than say, lawyers or company executives, in the US?

  71. Sally Strange, OM says

    I need more tattoos. Well, I don’t NEED them. But I desperately want one in particular. Someday when I have money.

    Dick, why do you think that citing your daughter and wife’s opinions gives non-sexist credibility to your bullshit evo-psych just-so stories? As has already been noted in this thread, many women endorse and support patriarchal, misogynist viewpoints. How do you know they’re not caught in that trap? Can you even define patriarchy? Misogyny?

    Like I said, you come off like someone who knows absolutely nothing about the topic at hand. But for some reason that doesn’t stop you from pulling a bunch of silly, unsupported, already-refuted-many-times arguments out of your ass.

  72. says

    Responding to these as I read them:

    @Mattir

    Seriously, the “makeup is part of the patriarchy and no good feminist should wear it” is tiresome

    I just want to point out that I didn’t say anything about what women (or feminists) should or shouldn’t wear. I’m just saying that in the society we live in right now, the pressure for women to wear makeup is part of the patriarchal culture. It’s similar to other kinds of gender expectations and pressures, like women being the ones expected to want kids and stay home with them. Yes, there are women who do want these things and who probably would even in a completely egalitarian society, but that doesn’t say anything about the fact that women are currently being pressured by society into that role.

    @Dick

    I don’t know that it’s just a matter of being taught. This is almost certainly a nurture/nature issue. My feeling is that women are at least as complicit in this as men, & probably much more so.

    You must have missed the whole of my response. This is not a nature/nurture issue (seeing as we can see cultural expectations have changed over time and differ from culture to culture today). Unless you mean that there is a nature element in that females want to physically attract males on a basic level. If so, you’re missing the point.

    And need we point out yet again that much of patriarchy is enforced and imposed by women on each other? Such complicity by the subjected group is not unique to this issue.

    @manocheese

    What a load of bollocks. Women get it more, in a more obvious way. But men are far from being free of sexism.

    Where did I say that they were? I said women are primarily judged on appearance (or more accurately, fuckability) and men are primarily judged on other things.

    And with that I have to leave. Going to sister’s for turkey dinner.

  73. says

    Women have a short reproductive life compared to men. Evolution would then work on that.

    WTF?
    How is that even supposed to make sense?
    So, yeah, women have a (and I’m now going to put this into very incorrect terms) “use by date” that’s several decades before the men’s one. Which might be due to the fact that it comes with no additional cost for the men.
    If, as a woman, I’m past my reproductive age, I can use as much botox as I like, I won’t get it back. So evolution can’t work fuck on it.

    As for make-up:
    Really, if there’s something women really don’t need it’s more men telling them what they should do to be a good woman again.

  74. says

    Not the same character; the one taking the red pill and realizing the world is drenched in sexism is Mo’nique, the one in today’s strip is Li’l Devil Girl.

    I think Ishida is coming down fully on the side of feminism with the Sunday comic. It would be hard for someone implying that feminism=feminazi to be using the standard “mansplaining” slurs in that last panel…

  75. says

    Dianne:

    I don’t shave my legs because my boyfriend doesn’t like it.

    Heh. I have very little body hair, so I don’t have to think about ‘to shave or not to shave’ much. I shave my legs (calves only) about once every 7 or 8 months, that’s sufficient. I only need to shave under my arms once a year. I don’t think about it much.

  76. chigau () says

    Dick the Damned
    We (and, in this matter, I speak for the whole internets) have absolutely no reason to believe that you are actually, accurately representing what your wife and daughter think.

  77. Anri says

    Dick:

    I’m curious what faults will be found, or projected onto, the above.

    Alrighty, then, to make certain I don’t project, I’ll echo a question instead, from Muse @ #52:

    And when you say “Old-fashioned” what exactly do you mean?

    I would add: What do you like/prefer about it?
    And what do your wife & daughter like/prefer about it?

    This way, we can know what you actually think rather than making assumptions. Win-win, right?

  78. Sally Strange, OM says

    Can you even define patriarchy? Misogyny?

    Do ya suppose Dick knows all about the kyriarchy?

    Oh, no doubt. He’s an expert on all that stuff. That’s why he’s sharing his blindingly brilliant insights with us.

  79. Ugh says

    “Women have a short reproductive life compared to men. Evolution would then work on that.”

    You do know on an Evolutionary timescale actually living long enough to pass your reproductive window is quite new, right?

  80. Unaspammer says

    @Muse,

    @Dick… what exactly do you think men’s lifespan has been for most of human history? And don’t think I didn’t notice you didn’t answer the question.

    For the ones that survived childhood, only about a decade less than it is now. I’m not defending Dick, but please don’t use that argument. It’s true that life expectancy has doubled or so in the past 150 years, but those figures are normally given as life expectancy from birth, and the difference is largely due to significant reductions in infant mortality. If you made it to 10, you were already over the main hump.

  81. ikesolem says

    These days, decrying racist and sexist behavior is politically acceptable, even encouraged, within the overall structure of major governmental and business institutions.

    With a few minor edits, however, we can convert it to a politically unacceptable statement – the kind of thing that can lead to career termination and widespread media censure. How do we do this?

    This is the corporatocracy.
    A social-economic construct that bombards us with propaganda.
    It’s a program of hierarchical domination that permeates society at all levels.
    The workplace… academia… home…
    It keeps people locked in unequal socio-economic relationships…
    An untenable situation that leads to discontent, alienation…
    Most people can’t see the corporatocracy. They’re too immersed.
    Until they are freed, they are agents of the system, colluders.
    Was I… am I… a colluder?
    Everyone is. But you’re awake now. You can see.

    Yes, female CEOs and investment bankers and shareholders are just as greedy, ruthless and anti-democratic as their male counterparts – even if males still hold more of those top positions in the corporatocracy, the behavioral selection on the rungs of the corporate (or corporate-academic) ladder is the same for both genders.

    That’s what the Wall Street protests are about, isn’t it?

  82. cicely, Inadvertent Phytocidal Maniac says

    A preference for looking at young, rather than old women, is undoubtedly an evolved characteristic of our species. (I believe this isn’t necessarily the case for our closest relatives, the chimpanzees.)

    Yes; the Prime Directive is that all women must look fuckable, all the time.

    I think the patriarchy is stronger in North America than what it is in the UK. This, quite possibly, is due the more recent history of pioneering in North America.

    So, what you’re claiming is that the UK has “grown out of it”?
    -

  83. Dianne says

    @99: 1850 to present is by no means most of human history and from 1850 to current the difference for men is closer to two decades than one.

  84. Tethys says

    I guess I’m weird, but I’ve always appreciated having my preconceptions challenged.

    I have never worn much make-up as my skin really doesn’t seem to appreciate it. I would be pretty up in arms if anyone ever suggested that I was required to wear it.

  85. Sally Strange, OM says

    These days, decrying racist and sexist behavior is politically acceptable, even encouraged, within the overall structure of major governmental and business institutions.

    Mmmhmmm, sure. Except when it isn’t.

    Yes, female CEOs and investment bankers and shareholders are just as greedy, ruthless and anti-democratic as their male counterparts – even if males still hold more of those top positions in the corporatocracy, the behavioral selection on the rungs of the corporate (or corporate-academic) ladder is the same for both genders.

    Golly, you mean women who succeed in highly patriarchal structures adopt patriarchal values and norms? No way.

    That’s what the Wall Street protests are about, isn’t it?

    The Wall Street protests are about female CEOs being just as greedy and ruthless as male CEOs? Probably not. Or was that not what you were trying to say? It’s hard to tell.

  86. Unaspammer says

    Coinidentaly I’d recently found myself thinking the Matrix could be co-opted as a metaphor for growing up in a religion.

    The film already takes religion in the opposite direction, though. Neo is portrayed as a messianic figure who will lead his people out of the slavery of the Matrix.

    Back in high school I once wrote a comparison piece linking the spiritual themes of The Matrix to The Grapes of Wrath. Unfortunately it’s been lost. I was a lot more wooly-headed back then, so I wish I could go back and reread it and see how much of it I still find to be true.

  87. Erulóra Maikalambe says

    Caine,

    Do ya suppose Dick knows all about the kyriarchy?

    The Mr. Mister song?

  88. Muse says

    @Unaspammer – I’d be happy to be wrong on this, but that was 1850… I’m talking quite a bit longer than that. If we’re talking time for evolution to have made significant changes, I’d like data showing me wrong for more than 150 years.

  89. says

    Yes; the Prime Directive is that all women must look fuckable, all the time.

    Wait, you mean you can’t do that anymore after you’ve reached the menopause?
    Fuck, that’s hard.
    I must have fallen asleep some time during basic biology classes when they mentioned that.

  90. Gregory Greenwood says

    Louis @ 11;

    Mind you I’m only complaining because I am no where near dumb enough to bet against you on this one.

    Judging by some of the posts on the thread*, you were probably wise not to take that bet.

    * Dick the Damned and ikesolem, I’m looking at you…

  91. Dan L. says

    Coinidentaly I’d recently found myself thinking the Matrix could be co-opted as a metaphor for growing up in a religion.

    The Matrix is already a metaphor for something way deeper than that. That is like the Woody Allen joke about reading Moby Dick and being like “It was about a whale.”

    Note that the Wachowski brothers repeatedly beat the audience over the head with religious imagery throughout the trilogy. The Matrix is a metaphor for growing up in a society and religion is important to the metaphor as both a critique and a reinforcement of that society’s conventions.

    If you’re not catching on, here’s another hint: the red pill is like the red fruit in the beginning of the world’s most popular sci fi/fantasy saga. If anything, I think the Matrix actually makes a better case for the profundity of the Bible than religious people ever have.

  92. Zerple says

    To me, it seems like gender equality is a zero-sum game. Give women more stuff and you’re taking from men and vice-versa. I found the dad, incubator, minions line a tad offensive.

  93. Unaspammer says

    @102,

    True, but most of the change in life expectancy is typically ascribed to medical advances in the past couple of centuries. We can’t really talk with much certainty about life expectancies over most of human history, because we lack any actual statistical data.

  94. Beatrice, anormalement indécente says

    To me, it seems like gender equality is a zero-sum game. Give women more stuff and you’re taking from men and vice-versa.

    Is this opposite day and no one told me?

  95. Tethys says

    Zerple,

    Please explain how giving any minority equal rights is equivalent to taking away rights from the privileged group?

  96. chigau () says

    Golly, you mean women who succeed in highly patriarchal structures adopt patriarchal values and norms? No way.

    So all those cookies I took to the office were wasted?
    I’m not getting the promotion????
    Fuck.

  97. Richard Austin says

    Today’s bonus hint:

    Equality is not a resource to be horded. Much like stupidity, it can be created at will in copious amounts. Unlike stupidity, though, it doesn’t burn if you get it on you.

    If you think the act of treating people as people instead of things relies on a limited resource, you may be part of the problem.

  98. says

    Zerple:

    I found the dad, incubator, minions line a tad offensive.

    Aaaw, poor you. Perhaps when men are considered to be nothing but baby bakers, walking incubators who certainly should have no say in whether or not they wish to bake a baby we’ll have more to talk about. Perhaps when men need to be worried about getting pregnant and being able to get a/o afford contraceptives, we’ll have more to talk about. Perhaps when men are considered and called sluts, harlots, bitches and whores for daring to have a sex life that isn’t bound up in married procreation, we’ll have more to talk about. And so on…

    In shorter words, you can take your tad’s worth of being offended and shove it up your rosy red rectum.

  99. Sally Strange, OM says

    Please explain how giving any minority equal rights is equivalent to taking away rights from the privileged group?

    It all hinges on how you define the word “right.”

    The things Zerple calls “rights” are probably what most of us would call “privileges.”

    For example, if Zerple thinks he has the right to grab the ass of any passing woman, then naturally the passage of laws ensuring the right of ALL people to go to work without being sexually molested would infringe on his “rights.”

  100. says

    Zerple:

    Give women more stuff and you’re taking from men

    “Stuff”? Care to expand on that, Cupcake? Gee, give women education, contraceptives and let her out of the kitchen and the world goes to hell, eh?

  101. Muse says

    @Unaspammer – 50 however is still right around women’s menopause. Point then, I think, still stands. And, The Romans are still not that deep into human history.

    @Zerple

    I found the dad, incubator, minions line a tad offensive.

    Why yes, it is offensive that some people treat women as incubators.

  102. kristinc, ~delicate snowflake~ says

    A preference for looking at young, rather than old women, is undoubtedly an evolved characteristic of our species.

    What the people making this sort of extremely dumb question always fail to ask themselves is: huccome it’s taken millennia of concerted and consistent male-led social punitiveness to keep women in line with these supposed “evolved characteristics”?

  103. kristinc, ~delicate snowflake~ says

    myself @124: pinhead. write more carefully. you meant to say, “the people making this sort of extremely dumb PROPOSITION”.

  104. says

    kristinc:

    huccome it’s taken millennia of concerted and consistent male-led social punitiveness to keep women in line with these supposed “evolved characteristics”?

    You can’t have the wimmins, especially the young ones running around doing what they want! The wimmins are for the express purpose of serving mens needs. That’s the old-fashioned way.

  105. Dan L. says

    @Dick the Damned:

    My feeling is that women are at least as complicit in this as men, & probably much more so.

    Surprised no one’s tearing you a new one over that. You kind of deserve it, honestly. I suppose the rising rate of eating disorders among young women is also the fault of women? This is what the cartoon is getting at: when you’re born into a society that is based on the subordination of women, many women internalize the notion that they’re supposed to behave as subordinates. Is it the fault of women that our culture is predicated on some pretty heinous anti-woman precepts? Of course not, it’s not the fault of anyone in particular, but it’s still something we should fight against.

    You should probably ask people here for some links about sexism, feminism, etc. You may think you know what you’re talking about but your comments indicate otherwise and you are digging yourself into a hole.

    Also, what makes you thing England is less sexist than the U.S.? You guys still have a royal family, ferfuckssake. You still have a state-financed church even though none of you believe in God. To put it frankly, your country seems to have a problem with giving up absurd, anti-freedom traditions. The U.K. seems very traditionalist and generally pretty conservative in a way that would seem to me (at a guess) to preserve all sorts of nasty sexist traditions.

  106. Beatrice, anormalement indécente says

    I hate hate hate the old-fashioned excuse. My 25-year-old best friend doesn’t want to ask a man out because men are supposed to make the first move, she says. Upon my objections she claims that she’s just old-fashioned and there’s nothing wrong with that.

  107. Tethys says

    @Sally

    Zerples comment smacks of the same privilege that I hear all the time on the question of gay marriage.

    I fail to understand how letting all adults have the same legal rights leads to taking away rights from the privileged group.

    I’ve had several heated discussions on this topic as the crazy fundies are trying to outlaw gay marriage by amending our state constitution this year.
    I have yet to hear a logical defense of the premise. It seems to devolve into “Well next they’ll want the right to marry dogs” or “The babble says it’s wrong.”

  108. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel says

    Zerple:

    To me, it seems like gender equality is a zero-sum game. Give women more stuff and you’re taking from men and vice-versa.

    LOL, wut?

    I suppose giving African Americans and women the right to vote was a big mistake, too? I mean, white dudes lost so much after those Amendments were passed.

  109. Zerple says

    Aaaw, poor you. Perhaps when men are considered to be nothing but baby bakers, walking incubators who certainly should have no say in whether or not they wish to bake a baby we’ll have more to talk about. Perhaps when men need to be worried about getting pregnant and being able to get a/o afford contraceptives, we’ll have more to talk about. Perhaps when men are considered and called sluts, harlots, bitches and whores for daring to have a sex life that isn’t bound up in married procreation, we’ll have more to talk about. And so on…

    In shorter words, you can take your tad’s worth of being offended and shove it up your rosy red rectum.

    Your reply seems like a great big non-sequitur. I didn’t call anybody a slut, or say anything about contraceptives. I think it is offensive to cast 100% of families as some sort of woman-slavery.

  110. Zerple says

    I wasn’t referring to rights, I was referring to money. Letting women/black people etc vote, letting gays marry, all that fun stuff costs nothing. I’m all for it. What I was thinking about were things more in line with economic opportunities, scholarships etc. Those are a finite and limited resource and to give them to someone, you’re required not to give them to someone else.

    I am shocked at how mindlessly hostile this forum is. I post one, granted, poorly worded comment and 24298743 people attack me under the assumption that I’m some kind of backward, racist, sexist moron.

  111. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    What I was thinking about were things more in line with economic opportunities, scholarships etc. Those are a finite and limited resource and to give them to someone, you’re required not to give them to someone else.

    Still poorly worded. This sounds like you could be arguing that white males should be first in line.

  112. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel says

    Those are a finite and limited resource and to give them to someone, you’re required not to give them to someone else.

    And men deserve them, amiright?

  113. pj says

    What I was thinking about were things more in line with economic opportunities, scholarships etc. Those are a finite and limited resource and to give them to someone, you’re required not to give them to someone else

    So we’d better first define a limited group who are eligible to those resources to make sure they don’t go to the undeserving? That’s privilege in my dictionary.

  114. Dianne says

    What I was thinking about were things more in line with economic opportunities, scholarships etc. Those are a finite and limited resource and to give them to someone, you’re required not to give them to someone else.

    So what you’re saying is that white men are so incompetent that they’ll only be able to succeed if everyone else is oppressed and not allowed to compete for scholarships, etc?

  115. says

    Zerple:

    Your reply seems like a great big non-sequitur.

    I see. You don’t understand how these things I talked about are connected to the common attitude that women are walking incubators and you still want to go on about your being offended.

    Get a clue, Cupcake. You’re in desperate need.

    What I was thinking about were things more in line with economic opportunities, scholarships etc. Those are a finite and limited resource and to give them to someone, you’re required not to give them to someone else.

    And of course, those things are best going to men, right? Men who will have incubators families to support, right? Are you even remotely aware of what a fucking struggle it has been for women to obtain an education? For women to be seen as humans with brains? Do you have any idea of how many generations of women have slammed into the glass ceiling or been denied a job because of the “oh, well, Jim has a family to support and…” crap? Because of course, women never have to support a family. :eyeroll:

    Here’s the thing, Cupcake – when it comes to economic opportunities and scholarships and so much more, there’s an easy criterion: whoever happens to be most qualified. Duh.

  116. Zerple says

    @Dianne No, not even a little bit.

    All I’m saying is that it’s unfortunate that one group has to have opportunities decreased to increase the opportunities of another. I’m not commenting on the morality of it. Adjusting a societal imbalance is a little more delicate than “LOLOL GIV WIMIN MOR STUFF”.

    I think resources should be allocated to those who can most effectively use them. I think giving people stuff, just for the sake of equality is nonsense. If the best candidate for a scholarship is a quadriplegic native american woman, let her have it. If the best candidate is a white man, let him have it. I think we shouldn’t look at gender or race or anything other than merit.

  117. Tethys says

    Zerple

    Hyperbole much? I count four horde members being offended by your comment.

    You said that equality is a zero-sum game. I asked for clarification. You did not mention money in your post.

    Scholarships should be awarded on the basis of merit, not gender.

  118. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel says

    If the best candidate is a white man, let him have it. I think we shouldn’t look at gender or race or anything other than merit.

    Aaaaaah, I’ve got it now! It’s the “affirmative action is bad” argument! ‘Cos, you know, a level playing field means that we automatically award the unqualified with scholarships/jobs/whatever. *eyeroll*

    Zerple, you should brush up on the first rule of holes. ‘Cos you’re making yourself into a bigger and bigger jackass with every post you make.

  119. Richard Austin says

    Okay, backing out a little.

    Zerple: you’re right. there are some resources that, if shared across a larger pool, mean that part of the group that was originally getting them will no longer do so.

    The error isn’t with the argument.

    The error is in assuming that this argument is important, or at least important enough to counter other arguments. It isn’t.

    If we do indeed accept things like scholarships as a zero-sum game (and I’m not entirely sure that’s valid, but that’s a separate discussion), for a woman to get one, a man must lose out. And vice versa. The difference is that, historically, women were on the losing end of the exchange.

    Raising this as an issue now simply because men might lose is dishonest and misleading. It’s focusing on men as more important, since the only time you are raising this issue is when men are threatened; when women were threatened, you didn’t raise it (and that’s mostly a generic “you”, though it may also be specific here).

  120. Zerple says

    @Tethys Honestly, I did not reply to your comment because I was sidetracked by the troll attack I just went through. I agree with your statement on scholarship, that is essentially all I was arguing. It was hyperbole, but I was trying to make a point. I guess I should just not feed the trolls.

  121. Zerple says

    @Dr. Audrey – This is my last comment to you. I am done feeding the troll. Affirmative action is not “leveling the playing field”. It is discrimination. To even argue for affirmative action is to assert that some groups are inferior to others and should thus be judged on a different basis. It’s sheer nonsense.

  122. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    All I’m saying is that it’s unfortunate that one group has to have opportunities decreased to increase the opportunities of another. I’m not commenting on the morality of it. Adjusting a societal imbalance is a little more delicate than “LOLOL GIV WIMIN MOR STUFF”.

    That is called leveling. Yes, the taking away of social advantages happens. But as long as the most deserving and talented people get those spots, that is all that is needed. But you are using the trope of female advantage even as you try to deny it.

    You are giving out a mixed message. That is why most of the people here are questioning you.

  123. chigau () says

    Zerple
    Most of the hostility here is not “mindless”.
    Your comments, on the other hand…

  124. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Bah, I don’t know how to use the tags here

    Look under Leave A Reply. Only a moron would miss that, and the hints therein.

  125. Zerple says

    @Janine – The act of leveling in itself is selecting people based on some quality they have rather than merit. By “leveling” you are ensuring that slots go to people based on gender rather than merit and effectively making sure that some of the deserving and talented people don’t get in.

  126. Muse says

    @Zerple

    If the best candidate for a scholarship is a quadriplegic native american woman, let her have it. If the best candidate is a white man, let him have it. I think we shouldn’t look at gender or race or anything other than merit.

    What you’re missing here is that not everyone starts at an equal point. Your average TAB white guy has privilege. He has started out further toward the goal line than someone non-white, non-TAB, non-woman. That hypothetical disabled Native woman has come a hell of a lot farther to get her scholarship.

  127. Zerple says

    @Nerd of Redhead – Sorry for being new here. I’m sure you calling me a moron was completely merited rather than arbitrary hostility.

  128. Randomfactor says

    I’m sure you calling me a moron was completely merited rather than arbitrary hostility.

    I agree with that conclusion.

  129. Tethys says

    Zerple

    The people who are attacking you aren’t trolls. Is this your first visit to Pharyngula?

    If you post stupid opinions (zero sum game) you should expect to be called on them. If you cannot defend them, perhaps you should attempt to learn to make better arguments.

    The horde is awesome at teaching that particular skill.

  130. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    By “leveling” you are ensuring that slots go to people based on gender rather than merit and effectively making sure that some of the deserving and talented people don’t get in.

    Do me a huge fucking favor and point out how I am supporting a system where women get the upperhand.

    Here is a fucking hint; I have not.

    This is why you have been questioned, you have not been arguing in good faith.

    And here is an other clue, Audley is a regular. You are the one who has been trollish.

  131. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel says

    Zerple:

    This is my last comment to you. I am done feeding the troll.

    Oh god, it’s been so long since I’ve been called a troll. I kind of missed it.*

    It is discrimination.

    I really wish I had a bingo card that was applicable to this discussion.

    So, people should be judged on their merits. Awesome. I think so, too. The problem is this doesn’t fucking happen and white dudes end up with the lion’s share of the resources.

    You can whine about discrimination when you actually have to face it day-in and day-out.

    *Okay, not really.

  132. says

    I think that Zerple has a point. If you give people equal opportunities, you take away someone’s special privilege. If you end slavery, you take away a slave-owner’s slaves. If you reform Wall St, you take away some of the bankers’ ill-gotten gains.

    Of course, this is a good thing, but it doesn’t do to pretend it’s all rainbows and ponies all the way. There *will* be opposition. This is where your Marxists revolutionaries have an advantage over your peace & love Hippies: one of these groups is ready to understand and face the resistance to equality movements.

  133. Sally Strange, OM says

    The act of leveling in itself is selecting people based on some quality they have rather than merit.

    No, the act of leveling is selecting people based on merit, drawing from groups that were previously prevented from applying (or working in that field or whatever) because of non-merit characteristics.

    By “leveling” you are ensuring that slots go to people based on gender rather than merit and effectively making sure that some of the deserving and talented people white men don’t get in.

    FIFY.

    Yes, some white men who would have been talented and deserving enough to make the cut BEFORE the advent of affirmative action may have to give up their spots–because there are plenty of people who are not white and not men who are MORE talented and MORE deserving. Or, at least, equally as talented and equally as deserving.

    What exactly is the problem again? That white men don’t get as many unearned opportunities as they used to?

    As I initially suspected, the things you call “rights” are really more correctly labeled “privileges.”

  134. Alukonis, metal ninja says

    Protips, Zerple:

    1) Look below comment box. Note “preview” button. Use.

    2) Coming onto a blog that has a large commentariat that’s been running for years and calling the old-hand regulars “trolls” is not winning you any brownie points

    3) “Merit” is a difficult thing to evaluate, especially if you have someone who is very talented and intelligent but only had access to shitty inner-urban public schools with textbooks from the 1980s, against someone who is mediocre but had all the benefits of private tutors thanks to their wealthy parents. This is what affirmative action aims to correct for. Is it perfect? Nope! But neither is life. We must always continue to strive for the ideal, unattainable though it may be, or stagnate.

  135. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel says

    Zerple:

    Sorry for being new here.

    Here’s a pro-tip for you, champ: lurk moar.

    Being new here is no excuse for stupidity.

  136. Sally Strange, OM says

    I’m sure you calling me a moron was completely merited rather than arbitrary hostility.

    This is a true statement.

  137. crissakentavr says

    Looks to me like only the first set is she really annoying… And then she bothered the asshole boy ‘a little bit’ which seemed rather tit for tat appropriate.

    Zerple, please shut up before you get yourself in trouble. It’s been found that the same traits which make a successful manager, for instance, are seen as negative on a woman and positive on a man. That means that the inherent nature of ‘seeing who is the best candidate’ needs to make extra-sure that isn’t happening, or counter-acts that force when it does, until that force no longer exists.

    It still exists. Hence, we need countervailing forces, your desire for fairness not withstanding.

  138. Sally Strange, OM says

    By “leveling” you are ensuring that slots go to people based on gender rather than merit and effectively making sure that some of the deserving and talented people white men don’t get in.

    Another comment on this idiotic notion expressed by Zerple: note his unvoiced assumption that the non-white non-men who benefit from affirmative action MUST automatically be unqualified, untalented, and undeserving.

  139. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Alethea H. Claw, you do have a point. There were people who argued that slave owners needed to be compensated for their loss of property. But what is funny is that when this redressing of inequality comes up, this argument tends to obscure those people who have been oppressed.

    But I do not think that Zerple is arguing in good faith.

  140. says

    I also thought, at least for law schools and the like, affirmative action can only mean that from among qualified applicants minorities be treated preferentially.

    Even Zerple should be able to see that if you had a blind admissions process, the number of white males would be overproportionately high because they happen to be the most privileged group in America, and thus have the best chances of getting so far as to being able to apply for law school…

    If we’re talking about undergrads, the processes vary so considerably that it’ll be hard to have a coherent discussion about this.

  141. says

    Audley:

    Being new here is no excuse for stupidity.

    Didn’t we just have a former dungeonee claiming to be a newbie recently? Oh, yeah, it was Monkey Genes who was using the excuse of being new to excuse being an asshole.

    Here’s a pro-tip for you, champ: lurk moar.

    Lurk and read. There are archives, years worth. You can start in ’06.

  142. Mattir says

    So Zerple’s argument is basically that if white men from upper middle class backgrounds appear more qualified (however we measure that), they should receive more of the cookies. And we mustn’t ever ever look behind the curtain and notice that until recently there were actual rules that gave white upper SES male people greater access to qualification-building than people who weren’t white, male, or upper/upper-middle class SES.

    So we’re basically hosed if we’re not white upper-middle-class men, since we can never consider how the past rules affect the current system, and how, even if the official rules are no longer on the books, they still shape attitudes and public policy.

    The thing that gets me is how the socioeconomic background part of the discriminatory injustice gets completely ignored by many white men who complain about affirmative action.

  143. Ichthyic says

    If the best candidate is a white man, let him have it. I think we shouldn’t look at gender or race or anything other than merit.

    that would be wonderful in an ideal world, where past histories and availability of resources have no impact on what you perceive as “merit”.

    obviously, you have entirely missed (likely willfully) the very point of the comic.

    those histories are NOT equal. They DO have an impact on qualifications.

    Ideally, you would want to go back and fix the inequalities at the start.

    but that just isn’t possible in most cases.

    so what is there TO do, but offer easier access to things that will help balance the initial starting conditions so that the very idea of meritocracy you favor would actually work and be fair?

    this is why scholarships, lower interest loans, grants, etc., etc., SHOULD be more readily available to those who have endured historical inequalities over several generations:

    so we CAN use a standard qualification measure to hire someone.

    otherwise, you just continue to perpetuate the imbalance that has historically been there, even if YOU think you are “playing fair”.

    this is why it was so tragic to see affirmative action take such a huge hit in the late 80s.

    do you really think dozens of generations of discrimination were wiped out by 20 years of living under the civil rights act?

    that’s just fucking stupid…

    and yet, here we are.

    how quickly people WANT TO IGNORE THE EVIDENCE AROUND THEM.

    In fact, there was a recent article in Nature which provides evidence that “suggests the brain is picking and choosing which evidence to listen to”:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-15214080

    the evidence for historical effects of long-term discrimination are still there, all around us, for both race and sex in ALL WESTERN SOCIETIES, the US included.

    but we let our insistence we don’t want to accept responsibility for what really needs to be done to fix this issue in the long term affect our policy decisions in the short term.

    thus, so many Americans convince themselves that since there is indeed a “civil rights act” nothing more needs be done.

    sad.

  144. Sally Strange, OM says

    I also thought, at least for law schools and the like, affirmative action can only mean that from among qualified applicants minorities be treated preferentially.

    Indeed. Only Republicans seem to practice the type of affirmative action that has Zerple so upset, wherein a representative of a minority group is appointed to a position, regardless of his or her actual qualifications, solely because of gender, skin color, etc. Sarah Palin and Clarence Thomas are the two most obvious examples. Funny how the people who hate affirmative action the most are the ones who truly don’t understand it. Eh, Zerple?

  145. crissakentavr says

    PS, Alukonis, some of the long-time posters here are trollish. They’re happy to get into meaningless fights and punish outsiders. That doesn’t make them worthy of banning, but it’s fair to watch out for.

  146. Ichthyic says

    The thing that gets me is how the socioeconomic background part of the discriminatory injustice gets completely ignored by many white men who complain about affirmative action.

    yup, we basically just posted the same thing.

    :)

    the same people, entirely ignorant of the history of discrimination and its effects on entire generations, are entirely ignorant of all other aspects of history most likely too.

    I’d lay odds that a lot of them also self-identify as “Libertarian”.

  147. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel says

    Caine:

    Didn’t we just have a former dungeonee claiming to be a newbie recently? Oh, yeah, it was Monkey Genes who was using the excuse of being new to excuse being an asshole.

    Yes indeedy.

    I’ll give Zerple the benefit of the doubt, though. It’s usually the n00bs that accuse me of trollin’.

  148. Ichthyic says

    They’re happy to get into meaningless fights and punish outsiders force anyone to defend their arguments.

    fixed.

  149. crissakentavr says

    PS, her midriff shirt – this one – is because she tore it to create a bandage in a previous strip.

    I saw that one, at least. Don’t read this comic every day.

  150. says

    As far as scholarships go, Zerple fails to take into the account the resources already available to the most privileged groups in societies. Directing scholarships towards minorities that do not have that level of resources available only constitutes a small step towards levelling the playing field. If you think that the asymmetrical distribution of scholarships puts minorities in a more preferential position than white males, then you’re utterly delusional about the nature of your society.

    I do know that in the scholarships examples some people make, the poor white male from Appalachia is pitted against the Prince of Bel-Air, but many schools also do take into account the individual economic background of applicants.

  151. Alukonis, metal ninja says

    @crissakentavr

    Trollish, perhaps at times, but it still doesn’t win any brownie points to accuse longtime regulars of being straight-up trolls. At least not with me, because it pretty obviously says “this is my first time in a Pharyngula comment thread ever! Now listen to my opinion on how you guys are all jerks!” At least, that’s how I interpret accusations of trolling against Caine, Dr. Audley, et al.

    YMMV I suppose.

  152. says

    Sally:

    Another comment on this idiotic notion expressed by Zerple: note his unvoiced assumption that the non-white non-men who benefit from affirmative action MUST automatically be unqualified, untalented, and undeserving.

    That, and his obvious reaching for the most possible disadvantaged woman, who of course, ended up being Indian. Yeah. I doubt Zerple knows this, but there’s a reason some of the tribes here (Mandan/Hidatsa/Arikara, Spirit Lake, Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate, Standing Rock and Turtle Mountain Chippewa) built UTTC (United Tribes Technical College) back in the ’60s.

    The prevailing and ongoing attitudes towards Indians is some of the most bigoted and there’s a helluva lot of discrimination going on, and it ain’t in the favour of the Indians.

  153. Mattir says

    Ichthyic – it’s the Hive Mind of Pharyngula™, looking out for the real interests of lower-SES-white-guys, as opposed to the bill of delusional grudges sold to them by Faux News and the Koch Brothers.

  154. crissakentavr says

    …If you don’t think the patriarchy can be different in different places, I’m a bit confused. Wouldn’t the patriarchy be far stronger in the Kingdom of Saud, where it is illegal for women to drive or wear pants, than in the US, where it is not? Of course different places have differing expressions and amounts of patriarchy. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t work to lessen it everywhere.

  155. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel says

    Also, this:

    @Dr. Audrey

    Is my ‘nym really that difficult to spell?

    It’s really not that fucking hard. In fact, it’s right above every single goddamned post that I make.

  156. crissakentavr says

    Umm… I’ve found lots of dead porcupines in my life, but I don’t care for unlabeled memes. I don’t go quoting famous people or scripture or poems, either. It can be a very good way of embellishing and deepening the discourse – but it can, like this case, be used to push away and ridicule outsiders.

    Hence, more trollish behavior.

  157. says

    Alukonis, crissakentavr has been holding a grudge for quite a while now and will happily derail any thread rather than post anything pertinent to the actual subject under discussion.

    /derail

  158. Ichthyic says

    If you don’t think the patriarchy can be different in different places, I’m a bit confused.

    I’m confused as to who you think you are addressing with this comment?

  159. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Take that dead porcupine, crissakentavr, and ram it up your ass using a vigorous circular motion.

  160. Muse says

    @crissakentavr

    I doubt anyone is going to argue with a statement that it’s different. Suggesting that it’s absent on the other hand…

  161. says

    The comic is awesome! Very clever and appreciated.

    I’m surprised though at how harsh some of the comments are directed, for example at Dick. It seems like some people are working out their frustration on him, which doesn’t contribute to the conversation, and likely makes some intelligent, grounded people with feminist perspective look like raging anti-masculine meanies. Atheism and intellectualism are about thought and consideration.

  162. chigau () says

    Audrey (whoever you may be)
    Since I am spelling-challanged, (almost) every time I respond directly to another commenter, I use the magical™ copy-paste method.
    I use this for quoting, too.
    I even copy-paste the word “blockqoute”.

  163. says

    I used to buy into some of the arguments contra affirmative actions, based on “testimonial evidence”, i.e. women saying that they found quota for leadership positions in political parties for women personally insulting, or a Native American student telling me that Native Americans don’t like to leave their reservation to study in a big American city because they are not open to cultural diversity. Took me some time to realise that members of disadvantaged groups naturally are also influenced by the patriarchy/dominant culture.

  164. Ichthyic says

    shorter and endless crissakentavr:

    more trollish behavior.

    *yawn*

    you’re getting very boring.

    nothing worse than that.

  165. Ichthyic says

    Took me some time to realise that members of disadvantaged groups naturally are also influenced by the patriarchy/dominant culture.

    I think “internalization” covers a bit of that.

  166. Alukonis, metal ninja says

    Well, gosh, Caine, then I guess we should just sit back, have a beer, and laugh at the ineffectual whining, huh?

    *passes over a cold beverage*

  167. Tethys says

    The horde was mean to someone posting sexist opinions? Oh the horror!

    hint: Whingeing about tone will not go over well here Cassandra.

  168. says

    Cassandra Wilson:

    Atheism and intellectualism are about thought and consideration.

    No. What we do here is about truth and education. When someone like Dick comes along and tells us he really, really isn’t affected by privilege at all, and then informs us of what his wife and daughter think about things and that they prefer the “old-fashioned” way, they will be questioned until they provide an answer.

    This is the shark tank, Cassandra. Substance, not tone.

  169. says

    Alukonis:

    Well, gosh, Caine, then I guess we should just sit back, have a beer, and laugh at the ineffectual whining, huh?

    *passes over a cold beverage*

    Absolutely. Aaaaah, thank you!

  170. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel says

    Cassandra:

    It seems like some people are working out their frustration on him, which doesn’t contribute to the conversation, and likely makes some intelligent, grounded people with feminist perspective look like raging anti-masculine meanies.

    Sorry, this isn’t the place to hold hands and sing kumbaya.

    If you’d like kinder, gentler comments, there are plenty of other blogs out there. Have at it.

  171. Sally Strange, OM says

    I’m surprised though at how harsh some of the comments are directed, for example at Dick.

    You must be new around here, then.

    It seems like some people are working out their frustration on him,

    Possibly true. If so, so what?

    which doesn’t contribute to the conversation,

    False.

    and likely makes some intelligent, grounded people with feminist perspective look like raging anti-masculine meanies.

    Ummm… to whom? Any particular reason why I, or anyone else, should care about the uninformed impression of some hypothetical people in your head?

    Atheism and intellectualism are about thought and consideration.

    Yep. Which is precisely why Dick was harshly chastised for his lack of thought and consideration.

  172. Aetre says

    Okay. Admitted male, been reading these threads for a while, looked into feminism a bit, too. I take no issue with the fact that privilege exists, and sucks, and awareness is good, and that the patriarchy exists, and sucks, and awareness is good, etc. I’m not going to argue that. But I’m curious as to what the feminist strategy here is, if there is one. I get that the end goal is equality in society, and I get that awareness of inequality is a necessary first step, but the in-between is a bit hazy… It looks for all the world like feminism boils down to this:

    Step 1: Be aware of male privilege/sexism.
    Step 2: …
    Step 3: Greater equality.

    In the past in the USA (or present/future for Saudi Arabia), “step two” might have been specific legal policies, such as making it legal for women to vote, or making sexual harassment illegal, etc. Alternatively, it might have been settled in court, a la Roe v. Wade. But what becomes “step two” for things like makeup, piercings, and shirts that show midriff? Is awareness alone the answer?

  173. says

    Wow, so much for building intelligent discourse, eh?

    You can have substance without vitriol, and I’ve read on this site. Hypothetical people in my head now? What a joke.

    Cutting people down as idiots, rather than address the issues serves what purpose now?

  174. says

    I have to say, I love to experiment with makeup, I always have done, and you would say that a lot of the makeup I like to wear doesn’t make me look conventionally attractive at all. Looking younger or ‘more fertile’ or whatever is really not my concern when I do it. I also have no problem going out with no makeup if I can’t be bothered. If I was forced to wear makeup everyday (like at Harrods) then it would definitely lose its appeal for me.

  175. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Sorry for being new here. I’m sure you calling me a moron was completely merited rather than arbitrary hostility.

    Both merited and hostility. I dislike abject idjits in over their head, who can’t shut the fuck up, and you are obviously an MRA idjit fuckwit, lower class variety. Not even good enough to keep my coat sniny and titanium fang sharp.

    Atheism and intellectualism are about thought and consideration.

    No, it is about being fair to all people, and not tolerating folks who must show their presuppositional idiocy at this blog. We aren’t the Intersuction (discovery blogs, new address, go find it). Go there if tone is important to you. If content is, stick around and lose the tone trolling. We don’t tolerate stupid folks who can’t prove their points with evidence.

  176. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel says

    Cassandra:

    Cutting people down as idiots, rather than address the issues serves what purpose now?

    Do us all a favor and take a few hours to read through the “elevatorgate” threads.

    1) We’ve been through this kind of sexist bullshit thousands of times. Many of us are pretty fucking sick of it.

    2) Even if the dumbass in question doesn’t get it, there have been plenty of other people who have chimed in to tell us that they do. So, yeah, we are addressing the issues and helping to educate.

    3) You concern if noted.

    4) Apparently, I wasn’t being clear– if you don’t like the tone here, don’t let the door hit you on the way out. Whining at us to be nicer isn’t going to get you anywhere.

  177. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Cutting people down as idiots, rather than address the issues serves what purpose now?

    What issues? All the issues I see is “I think stupidly, respect my inane opinion.” Why don’t you take up the “important” issues, complete with evidence to back up your opinion. Or go away, and stop complaining about your betters.

  178. Aetre says

    I see…

    Step 1: Be aware of male privilege/sexism.
    Step 2: *facepalm,* *eyeroll,* *headdesk*
    Step 3: Greater equality.

    It’s all clear now. Thanks, and peace out.

  179. says

    CW:

    Cutting people down as idiots, rather than address the issues serves what purpose now?

    What makes you think you can’t address issues and call someone an idiot? Here, we call a fuckwit a fuckwit.

    If you have read here, you’ll know what the commentariat thinks of Tone Trolls™. Short answer: not fucking much. Now, what with you claiming to be the informed reader and all, what in the fuck makes you think that your moronic tone trolling is going to be ever so different and make everyone hang their head and resolve to be vitriol free, Cupcake?

    For the nth fucking time, no one on the planet is stopping you from taking a sweet, nice, civil, polite, whatever tone here. You’ve been free to address Dick in any way you like. However, like all Tone Trolls™, you have no desire to do so. All you want to do is tell us how to be and how we should do it. Feel free to shut the fuck up any time.

    Either post something pertinent and on topic or pick up your decaying porcupine and shove it, Cassandra.

  180. Sally Strange, OM says

    Yeah, the hypothetical people in your head, Cassandra. Unless you were trying to say that YOUR impression is that we are a bunch of meanies. In which case I care even less.

    @Aetre

    Are you just trying to be lazy? Off the top of my head (and this is US-specific, since I live there):

    1. Pass the ERA

    2. Mandatory paid parental leave

    3. Mandatory sick leave

    4. Universal health care

    5. Outlaw street harassment

    Instituting these policies will result in greater gender equality. Are you really so dense that you couldn’t, you know, google a little bit and find these things out?

    Also, as far as personal actions that men can take on an individual basis:

    1. Stop laughing or sitting silently by when someone makes a rape joke.

    2. Stop laughing or sitting silently by when someone insults a man by comparing him to a woman, or to a woman’s genitalia. Or when someone insults a woman in such a manner.

    Those two things by themselves could have a HUGE impact, if enough men decide to do them.

  181. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    It’s all clear now. Thanks, and peace out.

    Bless your heart.

  182. Sally Strange, OM says

    Nevermind. Aetre was just here to troll and be an asshole. Sorry I mistook you as a person arguing in good faith, Aetre. Won’t make that mistake again.

  183. Ichthyic says

    But what becomes “step two” for things like makeup, piercings, and shirts that show midriff?

    what were you saying about intelligent discourse again?

  184. says

    Aetre:

    I see…

    You would have preferred to be told how utterly moronic your post was? I’m drowning in work right now and don’t have the time to personally educate you, which would take quite a long time, going by your post.

    I have no idea why you think the basics have been won. They haven’t been. Womens’ rights are being infringed upon every fucking day. The current political climate in the U.S. threatens to make those existent rights non-existent. Things have not massively improved in the workplace or in educational institutions. And so fuckin’ on. You want us to worry about midriff shirts and cosmetics*? FFS.

    *Yeah, they’re part of it, but you have gone out of your fucking way to miss the damn point.

  185. Aetre says

    @sallystrange, 215

    I know you think I’m an idiot, but that’s okay by me; I ask questions so that I can learn from them.

    Thanks for answering with something other than causing asterisked pain to yourself or others.

  186. Part-Time Insomniac, Zombie Porcupine Nox Arcana Fan says

    Looks like Elevatorgate’s effects will still be felt for quite some time. Well, with any luck, more people who who actually give a shit about changing things for the better will come to outnumber those who don’t.

  187. kristinc, ~delicate snowflake~ says

    Jek: I think one of the most insidious aspects of patriarchy-mandated makeup application is how it’s supposed to look “natural”. I’m supposed to go out and buy 50 different products and painstakingly learn to apply them just right so they look “natural”. If I fail to buy the products and learn to apply them I’m ugly, but if I apply the products in a way that makes it obvious that I just bought 50 products and spent time applying them then I face social opprobrium of a different kind.

    See also, the vast bleating herds of men who insist they don’t like women who wear makeup but utterly fail at telling when a woman is wearing makeup; and the age-old “joke” of how horrible it is to have a wife who walks around the house in curlers or cold cream. Women are supposed to put labor into making ourselves attractive consumables, but we’re not supposed to ever actually let on that we’re putting labor into it.

    Wearing makeup in unconventional or playful ways is frowned upon because it gives away that we’re doing it for fun. We’re not supposed to be doing it for fun.

  188. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    …causing asterisked pain to yourself or others.

    You have no fucking idea what pain is. Or what the topic is. Also, I am sure that SallyStrange”s initial reaction was asterisked pain.

  189. Sally Strange, OM says

    Fuck you, Aetre. Seriously. That was an asshole move. You probably don’t think so, but it was.

    You want to learn about feminism, all you have to do is google fucking FEMINISM 101. Yes, there is a website called “feminism 101.” It’s exactly what it sounds like.

    What you’re doing here is asking questions that are easily answerable (and quite possibly disingenuous, who knows, but I chose to give you the benefit of the doubt) but take a great deal of time to explain, then acting all wounded when people decline to take several hours out of their day to perform the work that a college professor would normally get paid to do.

    It’s a classic derailing tactic. I think it’s #7 on the list of tactics on “Derailing for Dummies,” but the website appears to be down right now so I can’t link to it. You’ll just have to look for it later.

  190. Sally Strange, OM says

    Also, I am sure that SallyStrange”s initial reaction was asterisked pain.

    I think I sprained my eyeballs, they were rolling so hard. No asterisks here.

  191. Aetre says

    @226, Inane Janine:

    I know what pain is. I have scars from my father. I know pain, I assure you. I may not know your pain, and you may not know mine. I make no assumptions about what you’ve been through; please don’t make assumptions about me.

    @ Caine:

    You may not think you have time to educate me, but you just have. Thank you.

    I’m sorry to have pissed everyone off with my own admitted ignorance, but I’m glad to have gotten answers.

  192. Alukonis, metal ninja says

    @Aetre

    Step 1: Be aware of sexism
    Step 2: Stop being sexist
    Step 3: Greater equality

    Lather, rinse, repeat as necessary. Also works for racism, ableism, classism, sizeism, homophobia, transphobia, etc. ad nauseum.

    Hopefully this is a simple enough breakdown for you.

    PS Starting off your post with “admitted male” does not inspire me, and presumably others here, to take your post in good faith. Just a word of advice from me to you.

  193. Tethys says

    Aetre

    Look it up dude-bro.

    On a somewhat related note, I really want an adult sized big-wheel.

  194. Sally Strange, OM says

    I’m sorry to have pissed everyone off with my own admitted ignorance

    You continue to fail to understand why people are actually pissed off. Which is further cause for pissed-off-ness.

  195. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Fuckface, you were the idiot who brought up a nonexistent pain.

    You were also the one who fucking asked for a lesson, one you can find yourself if you were up to using a search engine.

    Now you whine like a kicked dog. Just fucking shut up already.

  196. says

    @ Delictae snowflake #225

    You pretty much summed up what bothers me about being expected to wear it. And how some guys (and women too sometimes) act like they’re doing you a big favour and giving you a big compliment by saying how you don’t ‘need’ that much. No one NEEDS to wear makeup. Like I’m supposed to be so relieved that “Oh, good, he’ll still want to bone me even if I just look ‘natural’ (which as you’ve said, isn’t natural at all), wow, lucky me.”

    To me, the natural look defeats everything I actually like about makeup. If I want to look natural, I’ll just use my own bare face. I like being creative and artistic about it. Sometimes I do things that are toned down, but whenever I wear makeup, I want it to be obvious.

    The thing that I get confused about is if I’m capable of enjoying makeup in any capacity, am I just a big colluder who’s trying to make excuses not to change? Is the idea that in a world free of patriarchy (hypothetically), makeup and fashion, unconventional or not, wouldn’t appeal to me at all, or maybe wouldn’t exist as a choice in the first place? Does that even make sense?

    Do I just sound mental?

  197. kristinc, ~delicate snowflake~ says

    Alukonis: or even

    Step 1: Be aware of sexism
    Step 2: Stop complacently excusing sexism
    Step 3: Greater equality

  198. says

    Jek:

    The thing that I get confused about is if I’m capable of enjoying makeup in any capacity, am I just a big colluder who’s trying to make excuses not to change? Is the idea that in a world free of patriarchy (hypothetically), makeup and fashion, unconventional or not, wouldn’t appeal to me at all, or maybe wouldn’t exist as a choice in the first place? Does that even make sense?

    In a world free of patriarchy, people would feel free to decorate themselves or not, in any way they wished.

    Where patriarchy and sexism come into it is in expectations. For many women, they are expected to meet a certain standard of appearance, which includes ‘discreet’ make-up. Same with standards of dress (which I know many men are expected to meet as well, except no one tells men they should wear a dress or a skirt and high heels).

    If you enjoy wearing make-up, wear it! You should only wear it because it pleases you, not to meet expectations set up by others.

  199. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Jek, no, you do not sound mental. Ideally, one should be able to ware or not wear make up as one pleases and not set off different people’s ideas of gender expression. (I speak as someone who loves well manicured nails. Surprising, isn’t it?) But we are so far from ideal.

    The problem is not you.

  200. kristinc, ~delicate snowflake~ says

    if I’m capable of enjoying makeup in any capacity, am I just a big colluder who’s trying to make excuses not to change?

    I’m pretty sure the vast extent of human history shows that all genders are capable of appreciating bright, sparkly, shiny things. The artificiality of patriarchy-compliant beauty standards isn’t just that women are expected to like that stuff (although it places a disproportionate burden on women) but that men are expected not to care about any of it.

    IOW, the problem isn’t that you and I like makeup. It’s that nobody cares whether we like it, it’s expected of us anyway because we’re women.

  201. a_ray_in_dilbert_space says

    Funny thing about the term “vitriol”. Literally, it just means sulfuric acid–which can be very useful.

    The figurative stuff is also useful, for disolving bullshit and industrial strength stupid.

  202. Tethys says

    Jek

    I think in a world without patriarchy, make-up and fashion would be for all people who care about make-up and fashion.

    The biggest thing to overcome is the idea that a males worth is based on how much money he makes, while a females worth is based on how fuckable she is.

    This is a shallow standard.

  203. says

    @ Caine

    Thats what I’ve been thinking, but then I read stuff sometimes that seems to suggest that a person doing anything traditionally feminine is supporting patriarchy, no matter how progressive the rest of their thoughts and actions are.

    Oh well, I feel a lot more comfortable now anyway, thanks for replying.

  204. says

    Yay for eloquent people who can shred my doubts in a few short comments! I tend to confuse myself a lot, but your thougfht have helped a lot.

  205. says

    a_ray:

    Funny thing about the term “vitriol”. Literally, it just means sulfuric acid–which can be very useful.

    The figurative stuff is also useful, for disolving bullshit and industrial strength stupid.

    For years, my standard response to “you’re mean” and other accusations has been a simple “nuh uh, I’m just vitriolic“. Unfortunately, most people don’t seem to grok it.

  206. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Literally, it just means sulfuric acid–which can be very useful.

    At one time, the ranking of the economy of a country could be determined on how much sulfuric acid it produced.

  207. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Jek, perhaps this is getting too close too airing dirty laundry but femmes in the lesbian community often get dismissed because their expression of femininity is taken to be their complying with patriarchic modes. What is funny is that many femmes I have known were also the fiercest dykes I have known.

  208. says

    Jek:

    Thats what I’ve been thinking, but then I read stuff sometimes that seems to suggest that a person doing anything traditionally feminine is supporting patriarchy, no matter how progressive the rest of their thoughts and actions are.

    It’s important to remember a couple of things. 1)There are many schools of feminist thought out there. They often disagree with one another. 2) A great many women buy lock, stock and barrel into patriarchal and sexist thinking. This is not unusual in any way, however, it can hit really hard when you hear that sort of shit coming from another woman.

    As long as you keep educating yourself, do what you can to raise consciousness (and other activism) and do the feminine stuff to please yourself and not others, I’d say you’re not only doing fine, you’re doing great.

  209. cicely, Inadvertent Phytocidal Maniac says

    Yes; the Prime Directive is that all women must look fuckable, all the time.

    Wait, you mean you can’t do that anymore after you’ve reached the menopause?

    Well, we can still lay there and take it, but really, who’d want to give it to us, if we’re no longer young and perky? If we want any action, we gotta trick ‘em into letting us have it.
    -

    Greg Laden had a post about this a while ago on SB, IIRC he points out that a lot of things that are killing us now or would do so without medicine wouldn’t have happened to our foraging ancestors.

    There’s a reasonable chance that, back then, my FAILknees wouldn’t have even had the chance to be an issue; if disease, accident, predation or childbirth hadn’t killed me, there’s every reason to think that the uterine difficulties (leading to my boffo Hysterectomy With All The Trimmings) might have; and if that hadn’t got me, the abscessed molar would have (as it damned near did in this Modern World).

    Having working knees past 50 is a bonus, in that view.
    -

    Aaaw, poor you. Perhaps when men are considered to be nothing but baby bakers, walking incubators who certainly should have no say in whether or not they wish to bake a baby we’ll have more to talk about.

    Naw; they haven’t got the equipment.
    They’re convenient fleshy disposable syringes full of Baby Juice.
    -

    To me, it seems like gender equality is a zero-sum game. Give women more stuff and you’re taking from men and vice-versa.

    A bit like saying that it’s a zero-sum game in, say, immigration; give the Irish more stuff and you’re taking from the English.
    -

    The things Zerple calls “rights” are probably what most of us would call “privileges.”

    That would be my guess. Unless Zerple is trolling.
    -

  210. says

    Janine:

    What is funny is that many femmes I have known were also the fiercest dykes I have known.

    I’ve had the same experience and that’s from someone who’s been called a femme one time too many.

  211. says

    Caine and Janine, I find it really interesting how its turned from “Heres what you HAVE to do to be an acceptable woman” to “Here’s what you CANNOT do if you want to be a good feminist.” Its seems like a lot of attitudes are still ultimately based around what patriarchy thinks, whether its for or against.

    I just want people to be able to do whatever appeals to them without being abused for it, really.

  212. Mattir says

    a-ray – I always thought that vitriol referred to copper sulfate in solution. Which is also quite caustic, as I know from using it as a mordant in my wooly colorations activities.

    Here are some step-2 things I’ve started to do, mostly since coming to Pharyngula:

    Not making gendered insults, whether male or female

    Confronting people who make gendered insults in meatspace, even those people are family members (seriously, one of the great moments of the last month was hearing DaughterSpawn confront her dad, stating that calling Starbuck from Battlestar Galactica a bitch was a gendered insult and that she did not tolerate such language from other staff at Boy Scout camp and that she saw no reason to tolerate it from her father).

    Playing with “traditionally girly” things like makeup because freedom should be part of feminism, and talking about how frightening such things can be

    Supporting friends who want to explore gendered activities, whether those activities fit their gender or not

    Making sure that my financial donations support gender equality, with particular focus on reproductive choice and education for women and girls in Africa

    Reading, learning, and thinking about issues of privilege – noticing and talking about things when I see a problem

    Legislative and judicial solutions are important, but they have to be supported by change in the attitudes of regular people. All of these things change what my kids think is normal, what the people around me think are normal, and thus get us to Step 3.

  213. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Jek, we all know that a good feminist can never be an acceptable woman.

    I cannot keep a straight face here.

    ‘snicker’

  214. chigau () says

    Where does this femme-hate leave non-cis females in their quest for a comfortable “presentation”?
    If that was even a sensible question.

  215. says

    To the newcomers: the standard policy here is to give you three strikes before the vitriol is unleashed (forgive the mixed metaphor). Unfortunately, we are all rather more sensitive than usual following the Summer of MRA Douchebaggery™, so if you’re going to come here and spout stuff the likes of which we have refuted a thousand times before or ask things that could be discovered with some education about feminism, you’re going to get frustrated, intolerant, angry responses pretty much right away.

    If you’re an honest person who truly believes that women are people too, stick around and listen. Ask where you can go to learn more. People will be glad to help you out.

    If you’re just interested in foisting your opinions on us, or asking disingenuous questions in an effort to tell us we’re doing it wrong, just turn around and go. We don’t want you here.

  216. says

    Jek:

    “Here’s what you CANNOT do if you want to be a good feminist.”

    Outside of some groups, I really don’t think it’s that way quite so much anymore. Back in the ’70s…yeah. In the ’70s I lived in a women only commune for some time. Gotta say, it was nice. Not terribly practical in the long run, but nice.

  217. Mattir says

    Jek – I get told all the time that I can’t be a knitter and a feminist. Amazingly, I get this from both knitting non-feminists and non-knitting feminists. It’s a bit tiresome.

    My teenage son knits. He tells other teenage boys that his genitals are not connected to his knitting needles.

  218. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Where does this femme-hate leave non-cis females in their quest for a comfortable “presentation”?

    Thanks to decades of struggles, there are transgendered women who do not present as femme. For a long time, they had to present as traditionally heterosexual women even if they were not. It was the only way to get past the gatekeepers.

  219. says

    Janine, I agree, I see the way Zerple is using it as more of a smoke screen. Wherein the oppressor whines about being oppressed: a familiar trope. They fight back because they don’t want to lose their unfair privileges. Expecting them to just say “oh, oops, my bad” is highly unrealistic – see Wall St bankers.

    I have a tendency in these arguments to take a true thing said by an opponent and explicate it from my point of view. (Or a half-true thing.) A kind of verbal ju-jitsu, turning it back on them. Maybe it will work to get their attention. Probably rarely, but somehow I can’t help but try. I’m not great at these arguments, so practice practice practice.

    And a big yeah! for Marxist hippies. IMO, the weakness of each side is complemented by the strength of the other.

  220. says

    Lol Janine, lol.

    Caine, I didn’t even know women only communes were ever a thing. Wow. Its important to note that I am a very baby feminist, in that its only been the last year or so that I’ve been researching it. Lots to learn.

    Mattir, can’t KNIT? Do you just laugh straight in their faces? I would. Your son sounds awesome.

  221. chigau () says

    All kinds of sailors used to knit.
    Where do you think long-johns and scarves came from when the guys were two years from home?

  222. Sally Strange, OM says

    Caine and Janine, I find it really interesting how its turned from “Heres what you HAVE to do to be an acceptable woman” to “Here’s what you CANNOT do if you want to be a good feminist.” Its seems like a lot of attitudes are still ultimately based around what patriarchy thinks, whether its for or against.

    Hi there Jek. Mind if I jump in? Of course you don’t. Don’t mind me if I ramble, okay? I see this is a natural human reaction. When you’re trying to change something that’s so all-encompassing and pervasive as the stories we tell to ourselves about what constitutes family, what it means to love someone, and so on, it’s something that touches deeply intimate places in us. Plus, it’s hard to envision something different from assumptions about identity that are so pervasive. So, the quick reach for the “Well here’s what I’m NOT” reference for your identity. We want to change the culture, and what is the culture but the stories we tell about ourselves? What are gender roles but stories? And our stories are our identities, our memories and experience. So we’re asking for cultural change, which means it’s asking people to change who they think they are. Loss of privilege, hey, who wants it. It always sucks. In that sense, rights are a zero sum game. Generally if someone gets their rights, someone somewhere else is finding it harder to get their unearned privilege.

    Rambling, you see?

    I just want people to be able to do whatever appeals to them without being abused for it, really.

    So much meaning in so few words.

  223. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Caine, I didn’t even know women only communes were ever a thing. Wow. Its important to note that I am a very baby feminist, in that its only been the last year or so that I’ve been researching it. Lots to learn.

    In the seventies, there was the confluence of the back to nature movement and the extreme hostility to the feminist and lesbian movements. (And most mainstream feminists did not like the lesbians.) There were quite a few feminist and lesbian communes started. Some are still going.

    For example, the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival got started as part of these movements forty years ago. it is still going strong. Sadly, it is also a flashpoint of conflict between some lesbians and transgendered people.

  224. says

    Chigau:

    All kinds of sailors used to knit.

    Sailors were often the best damn sewers, too. You need to know what you’re doing to sew sails and repair them. Same goes with fishing nets.

  225. says

    Expecting all feminists to be perfect Vulcan rationalists is also a bit daft. For many of us, there was considerable strength of will required to simply reject the social mores we grew up with. For others, it was even more painful. So yeah, we have mostly been angry about it at some time, and a hearty “FUCK YOU AND YOUR COMPULSORY THING_X” is very understandable.

    Unfortunately we all have different values of THING_X. Makeup, shaving, high heels, supposedly “girly” arts and crafts, the colour pink etc. And then we project our experiences onto others – how could you collude in your/my oppression!

    Mostly we grow out of it. But I still hate pink.

  226. cicely, Inadvertent Phytocidal Maniac says

    I think it is offensive to cast 100% of families as some sort of woman-slavery.

    Link to the post where that was alleged.
    -

    Indeed. Only Republicans seem to practice the type of affirmative action that has Zerple so upset, wherein a representative of a minority group is appointed to a position, regardless of his or her actual qualifications, solely because of gender, skin color, etc. Sarah Palin and Clarence Thomas are the two most obvious examples.

    Tokenism. That, and PR spinning.
    -

    The thing that I get confused about is if I’m capable of enjoying makeup in any capacity, am I just a big colluder who’s trying to make excuses not to change? Is the idea that in a world free of patriarchy (hypothetically), makeup and fashion, unconventional or not, wouldn’t appeal to me at all, or maybe wouldn’t exist as a choice in the first place? Does that even make sense?

    It’s the lack of societally-enforced coercion that would make all the difference.
    -

    @Mattir please tell SonSpawn that snorting ice cream is not fun… and that he rocks.

    And that snorting a carbonated beverage is also not fun….which doesn’t in any way lessen his rockingness. :D
    -

  227. Sally Strange, OM says

    Mostly we grow out of it. But I still hate pink.

    Last week, when I was visiting my parents, I helped my dad baby-sit my niece.

    “She’s going to hate pink when she grows up,” he said.

    *sigh*

  228. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Mostly we grow out of it. But I still hate pink.

    Purely subjective but pink seems to be even more prominent for goods sold to girls now then when I grew up in the seventies.

  229. says

    Alethea:

    But I still hate pink.

    So do I, but that’s self-caused. I *loved loved loved* pink when I was 10, and not just pink, but electric, freaky Barbie* pink. I was surrounded by it. That lasted about a year. Haven’t cared for the colour since.

    *Never had any use whatsoever for Barbie, however.

    Unfortunately, the pink business is more than just liking or disliking a colour, like when you see the way things are marketed towards young girls.

  230. says

    @ Jek

    There is a real grey area when it comes to things which have traditionally been tools of the patriarchy and women’s choices. We see it manifest in all kinds of tricky subjects:

    *do we censure burkas as they are a means of suppression, or do we say women should be allowed to wear burkas if they want?

    *do we condemn porn for its blatant commodification of women as sex objects, or do we champion the fact that women should have the power to sell their bodies if they so choose?

    *do we fight arranged marriages even if the girls are over eighteen and say they want to follow their traditions?

    *do we push for legalisation of consensual polygamy even though doing so sanctions the practice in Mormon and fundamentalist cults as long as the girls are of an age to consent with parental permission?

    Not all feminists are going to come out on the same side of these issues. If you find yourself in disagreement with another feminist, just take it in, try to see the question from their point of view. You don’t have to agree, but it’s a good idea to keep reevaluating our own biases and prejudices especially when it comes to overwhelming cultural paradigms like sexism and racism (and all the other -isms). [/ramble]

  231. says

    @Sally Strange

    Apologies–actually had to work for a while!

    “Slurs” was the wrong word; “slogans” may be the word I wanted? “Bingo phrases”?

    Anyway, the drizzle in the last panel has the following standard mansplanations/ways to keep the uppity wimmens down:

    Feminazi
    Manhater
    Hysterical
    Can’t keep a man
    I know what you need
    Can’t you take a joke
    Priggish
    Spinster
    Crazy cat lady
    Blah blah blah
    Reverse sexism
    What about the men?

    I think it’s pretty clear that Ishida has read a lot of the feminist blogs and seen a lot of the standard comebacks from MRAs.

  232. says

    Janine:

    Purely subjective but pink seems to be even more prominent for goods sold to girls now then when I grew up in the seventies.

    It seems that way to me too. I remember there being a move away from pink altogether, with more emphasis on primary colours marketed to kids in general. It may have had to do with the girls can be anything they want to be being happily and noisily spread all over the place at the time.

  233. Mr. Fire says

    He tells other teenage boys that his genitals are not connected to his knitting needles.

    I’m imagining him then proceeding to tell them that, on the other hand, theirs will be if they continue bugging him about it.

    :)

  234. says

    I also think that pink is more dominant now than it used to be in the 70s. And of course my hate is about the gender-coding, not the colour per se. I don’t much like to wear yellow or orange either, but I don’t have a visceral reaction against them.

  235. says

    Jek:

    Caine, I didn’t even know women only communes were ever a thing.

    Communes of all types were common in the ’70s. Women only communes, communities and co-ops still exist.

  236. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel says

    Janine:

    Purely subjective but pink seems to be even more prominent for goods sold to girls now then when I grew up in the seventies.

    This is totally my experience, too. I’m only 30* and I don’t remember the pink shit being as prevalent as it is now.

    Toy stores make me want to vom.

    *Well, I will be on Friday, anyway.

  237. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Ibis3, I am afraid I failed to say so but that was meant as a compliment.

  238. says

    Alethea:

    I also think that pink is more dominant now than it used to be in the 70s. And of course my hate is about the gender-coding, not the colour per se.

    Its when looking at seemingly little things, like the use of pink, we can see just how backwards we’re going these days.

  239. ikesolem says

    @Sally Strange:

    Success in the corporatocracy is largely gender-independent these days – the necessary attributes are loyalty to your superiors, ruthlessness towards your inferiors, which is generally speaking characterizable as a Machiavellian behavior pattern.

    I’m not sure if this is patriarchal or matriarchal (Elizabeth & Catherine or Churchill & Hitler or Reagan & Thatcher, which is it?) but it is clearly anti-democratic, pro-authoritarian – perhaps aristocratic is the word you’re looking for?

    Let’s take an example of how this works in academics today, which is noted for the prevalence of corporate-academic “partnerships” – take this recent article in the NY Times:

    “An Innovator Shapes an Empire”, NYT, Oct 10 2011

    Dr. Desmond-Hellmann, 54, has been chancellor for a little more than two years. She came to U.C.S.F. after a stunningly successful career in the pharmaceutical industry. University officials invited her to apply for the job. She is the first woman to lead the university, and the first chancellor from outside the ivory towers of academia.

    Why is it problematic to have a businesswomen – from an industry noted for its obsession with secrecy and intellectual property rights – running a major public university? It’s because science is based on the open flow of information and results, not on secret IPR deals with corporations. The fact that this head honcho is a woman is irrelevant to the issue.

    Suppose, for example, a researcher finds that a lucrative corporate-academic IPR deal is based on fatally flawed research? In today’s world, that information would be suppressed, since the corporate agenda comes first in the “partnership.” Does it really matter if a woman or a man is the one doing the suppressing?

    Jennifer Washburn wrote an important book about this phenomenon, called “University Inc. – the Corporate Corruption of Higher Education” some years ago.

    Nowadays, every university has a few campus administrators whose entire job involves monitoring sexism and racism – but corporatism is embraced with open arms. However, espousing anti-corporate partnerships in today’s academic environment – that’s like being anti-Lysenko in Stalin’s Soviet Union.

    Comprende?

  240. Sally Strange, OM says

    I do wear pink, it looks good on me. I have this gorgeous coral pink halter top dress with a long swirly skirt that make me look like a tropical drink, according to some.

    I am such a femme. I love it. But I’m not as much of a femme as some, and I got tagged as being butch in high school, purely I think because I refused to run screaming away from whatever ball was flying my way in gym class. I enjoyed playing soccer or softball or volleyball, despite not really being much good at it, I was enthusiastic. That, plus the word of Kris Krandall saying I was a dyke was enough to establish me as a butch dyke for five years. Despite the fact that I wore tight low-cut velour tops and long flowing wraparound skirts. Kids, eh. It was just so jarringly bizarre, it was one of the things that woke me up to injustice and turned me on to feminism. This was in the mid 90s.

  241. misogynist says

    I don’t get it.

    Suddenly everyone thinks that our society is misogynistic and that women are suffering in the western world and men who don’t understand this are pigs.

    And when RD said that you are just complaining and pointed out a real problem, everyone started yelling something about taking care of your front/back yard garbage.

    That is stupid. There are more than a couple of arguments for that. Let me explain.

    Nobody cares about dying children in Kenya. Oh you do? Then why do you have this watch? Two pairs of shoes or even a PC/mac? You know your PC could probably feed ten African children for more than a couple of years yes? Oh I see, you have these things because you want to work and therefore contribute on a permanent basis to the hungry children’s needs? So, you spent your vacation in India or Bangladesh helping? No you don’t. You give the money you don’t use to them? No. Do you have a bed instead of sleeping in a sleeping bag? Nop. Do you have a refrigerator? Yes you do.

    You do nothing for these children. Instead you are just waiting for their problems to be solved without you. But while you are doing nothing about that, you are complaining about women in the western world because you must take care of your yard. So, apparently, your own problems are more importand than dying children.

    So, since your own problems are more importand, why don’t you let people think that their own problems are also more importand than yours?

    Why should I have to hear feminists complaining about how I think or act? Should I do the same for you when it comes to third world children?

    From now on, when I hear a feminist complaining that I am a misogynist, I will start telling him that he is a misanthrope. That he/she doesn’t care at all about dying children in Ethiopia and that he/she is not sensitive and that he/she is not a decent human being.

    That is ladies and gentlemen what I call hypocrisy. At least admit that you don’t care about other people’s problems and that you only care about what bothers you.

  242. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    This talk of toys, damn. It was twenty years ago when some of us were protesting the selling of war toys for boys. There was in the aftermath of the “glorious victory” that was Desert Storm. At the same time, we were protesting the “Math is hard” Barbie.

    Toys always been sexist. The question is of degrees.

  243. Tethys says

    I dislike the trope that pink is for girls. I personally look awful in most shades of pink.

    My horribly misogynistic father looks fantastic in pink, and wears pink shirts frequently as did my wonderful grandpa.

  244. says

    Sailors were often the best damn sewers, too. You need to know what you’re doing to sew sails and repair them. Same goes with fishing nets.

    The Peabody-Essex museum in Salem, MA, has some exhibits of this.

    (And it’s just a superb museum all around.)

  245. kristinc, ~delicate snowflake~ says

    but then I read stuff sometimes that seems to suggest that a person doing anything traditionally feminine is supporting patriarchy, no matter how progressive the rest of their thoughts and actions are.

    This is such a tricky question because unfortunately, there’s a kernel of truth in it. Back when I buzzed all my hair off I had days when I was uncomfortable with how unfeminine I looked. The obvious solution on those days was to apply makeup — particularly the eye makeup — with a heavy hand, to skew my look “exotically feminine”. Most of the time I went ahead and took that route, but I had to face the fact that my worries about looking feminine and my feeling that eye makeup and lip gloss made me more presentable were a product of the culture I was raised in. It did not do me any good to tell myself that I thought I looked better with eye makeup and lip gloss just because that was my completely idiosyncratic feeling that I just happened to share with untold millions of other women and the entire beauty-industrial and media complexes surrounding me.

    In a way, I was supporting patriarchy. Every time I went out in public looking unfeminine, you see, was a tiny little fuck-you to cultural beauty standards. Whereas on the other hand, every time I put on makeup to feel more secure about myself I bought into and supported those same standards.

    The problem is that none of us live in a theoretical vacuum and each of us is deeply affected by our cultural upbringing. I do think it does us good as humans to question what we believe about traditional feminine practices, and I think it benefits feminism to do that questioning visibly and/or audibly (and I think that’s often what feminists are trying to get at when we’re interpreted as saying “only bad or stupid women wear lipstick”). But reasonable people understand that each of us lives in our own situation and we all have to make a million little choices about exactly how we cope with the patriarchy. It’s not like we can get away from it. It’s always there. Each of us compromises in different ways.

  246. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel says

    Nobody cares about dying children in Kenya. Oh you do?

    Wow, this one’s thick.

    If I care about women’s rights here in the US, why does it necessarily follow that I don’t care about the problems in Africa?

    Beyond that: that was some impressive word salad.

  247. chigau () says

    The only form of pink I now like is blinding neon pink.
    I wear it very occasionally.
    and I use it frequently to flag-down the helicopter.

  248. Tethys says

    misogynist

    Your asshole opinions are worth shit. Fuck right off and don’t forget your porcupine on your way out.

  249. Sally Strange, OM says

    If I care about women’s rights here in the US, why does it necessarily follow that I don’t care about the problems in Africa?

    Because Richard Dawkins, THAT’S why! I mean, duh!

  250. says

    So I guess what I’m wondering is, can we merely just erase the ‘compulsory’ aspect of traditional femininity without getting rid of it all together, or do we have to eradicate the whole lot, educate everyone, then bring it back piece by piece as optional?

  251. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel says

    Sally:

    Because Richard Dawkins, THAT’S why! I mean, duh!

    Of course! Why didn’t I think of that?

    He is the messiah of our atheist faith, after all. Or something like that.

  252. Ichthyic says

    That is ladies and gentlemen what I call hypocrisy.

    no, that is what those of us who think rationally call a HUGE FUCKING LIST OF ASSUMPTIONS.

    I bet you’re the same kind of person who says Al Gore is not helping with the issue of global warming because he flies to meetings instead of riding a bicycle across the country?

    I’m sure there is a proper category for exactly the logical fallacy you’re using.

    but if I looked it up for you, I would be a hypocrite.

  253. Ichthyic says

    Comprende?

    yes, completely.

    this thread is about discrimination, but you want to use a red herring to derail it into your preferred topic.

    pretty clear to me.

  254. Ichthyic says

    misogynist says

    really?

    REALLY?

    I see I should instead have thought simply:

    troll.

    instead of even bothering to think you had a real point.

  255. Mr. Fire says

    Success in the corporatocracy is largely gender-independent these days

    Yep. I mean, just look at those 50:50 ratios in upper management.

  256. Sally Strange, OM says

    I friggin’ loved wraparound skirts. I hereby declare them back in

    I’m wearing a sarong right now, does that count?

  257. says

    I don’t get it.

    Stating the obvious.

    Suddenly everyone thinks that our society is misogynistic and that women are suffering in the western world and men who don’t understand this are pigs.

    Suddenly? Uh huh.

    And when RD said that you are just complaining and pointed out a real problem, everyone started yelling something about taking care of your front/back yard garbage.

    No, lackwit. RD was ignoring a major problem. Pointing to a different problem doesn’t make the other ones go away.

    That is stupid. There are more than a couple of arguments for that. Let me explain.

    It’s fairly clear you’re stupid. I’m not holding out hope for your explanations.

    Nobody cares about dying children in Kenya. Oh you do? Then why do you have this watch? Two pairs of shoes or even a PC/mac? You know your PC could probably feed ten African children for more than a couple of years yes? Oh I see, you have these things because you want to work and therefore contribute on a permanent basis to the hungry children’s needs? So, you spent your vacation in India or Bangladesh helping? No you don’t. You give the money you don’t use to them? No. Do you have a bed instead of sleeping in a sleeping bag? Nop. Do you have a refrigerator? Yes you do.

    It’s confirmed, you’re an idiot. All people work for things they need and want, Cupcake. That’s part and parcel of being human. Some of us are less invested in material stuff than others. My not having a bed or a shelter isn’t going to help other people. And I don’t own a watch, Sugarbrain. I don’t take vacations, either. So you can shove your generalizations up your ass. Oh wait, your head’s already up there.

    You do nothing for these children. Instead you are just waiting for their problems to be solved without you.

    Just how would you know that, Cupcake? You have a sooper sekrit list of every single bit of activism we’re involved in? Also, why the focus on children? Wouldn’t happen to be because that’s what you think women ought to be focused on, now would it?

    But while you are doing nothing about that, you are complaining about women in the western world because you must take care of your yard. So, apparently, your own problems are more importand than dying children.

    Again, how do you know what people are and aren’t involved in? Why don’t you tell us what you’re doing for womens’ rights, Cupcake? How involved are you in fighting for womens’ education, the right to contraceptives and healthcare and the right to work in any field? Are you involved in making women safe from harassment, sexual assault, rape and domestic violence? Are you involved in GLBTI rights?

    So, since your own problems are more importand, why don’t you let people think that their own problems are also more importand than yours?

    I don’t recall any single one of the commentariat here ever saying that other problems weren’t as important. Lots of them tend to be tied together. Fighting for womens’ rights tends to improve the lives of children 100 percent, frinst. Funny how that works.

    Why should I have to hear feminists complaining about how I think or act? Should I do the same for you when it comes to third world children?

    Well, if you’re going to show up here and act like a fuckwit, you’ll get called on it, fuckwit. That’s pretty simple, doncha think?

    From now on, when I hear a feminist complaining that I am a misogynist, I will start telling him that he is a misanthrope. That he/she doesn’t care at all about dying children in Ethiopia and that he/she is not sensitive and that he/she is not a decent human being.

    Go right ahead. It won’t make you less stupid and it certainly won’t help your “explanations” and it certainly won’t make you a better person.

    That is ladies and gentlemen what I call hypocrisy. At least admit that you don’t care about other people’s problems and that you only care about what bothers you.

    You seem to miss the basic point that all people have things which take priority with them. Being a woman, womens’ rights are important to me. Being bisexual, GLBTI rights are important to me. However, that does not mean I have nothing else which is important to me or other concerns which I am involved in. Unfortunately, I don’t have the luxury of unlimited time and money to cover every single interest. All of them get a slice of what I can give.

    Now, what you’re calling hypocrisy is the discussion of sexism on sexism posts/threads. That’s not hypocrisy, fuckwit, that’s being on topic.

  258. Sally Strange, OM says

    Yep. I mean, just look at those 50:50 ratios in upper management.

    That’s right, my brother. Now that we have vanquished sexism, we can turn our attentions to the only true struggle: class struggle! Also, no more talk of racism. Shut up about transphobia, it’s all about Wall Street!

  259. says

    SC:

    I friggin’ loved wraparound skirts. I hereby declare them back in.

    I’ve never gotten over my love of long dresses. I have a bunch of ‘em. I don’t care if they’re in or out.

  260. Mr. Fire says

    The Peabody-Essex museum in Salem, MA, has some exhibits of this.

    For a minute I was thinking of the New England Pirate Museum down the road, with that awesome mural of pirates scaling the outside :)

  261. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Now I am seeing SC as a female Matt Smith.

    “I am wearing wraparound skirts now. Wraparound skirts are cool.”

    I will shut up now about this derail.

  262. Father Ogvorbis: It's Good for You. It Builds Character says

    Suddenly everyone thinks that our society is misogynistic and that women are suffering in the western world and men who don’t understand this are pigs.

    Suddenly? Suddenly? Suddenly? Where, in the name of pluperfect hell, do you get ‘suddenly’?

    Simone de Beauvoir died in 1986 — my freshman year in college — at the age of 78. The Second Sex was published in 1949, long before I, and many of the regulars here, was born.

    Way back in 1848, Elizabeth Cady Stanton convened the First Women’s Rights Convention in Seneca Falls, New York. The Declaration of Sentiments contained the radical ideas that

    The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

    He has never permitted her to exercise her inalienable right to the elective franchise.

    He has compelled her to submit to laws, in the formation of which she had no voice.

    He has withheld from her rights which are given to the most ignorant and degraded men – both natives and foreigners.

    Having deprived her of this first right of a citizen, the elective franchise, thereby leaving her without representation in the halls of legislation, he has oppressed her on all sides.

    He has made her, if married, in the eye of the law, civilly dead.

    He has taken from her all right in property, even to the wages she earns.

    He has made her, morally, an irresponsible being, as she can commit many crimes, with impunity, provided they be done in the presence of her husband. In the covenant of marriage, she is compelled to promise obedience to her husband, he becoming, to all intents and purposes, her master – the law giving him power to deprive her of her liberty, and to administer chastisement.

    He has so framed the laws of divorce, as to what shall be the proper causes of divorce; in case of separation, to whom the guardianship of the children shall be given, as to be wholly regardless of the happiness of women – the law, in all cases, going upon the false supposition of the supremacy of man, and giving all power into his hands.

    After depriving her of all rights as a married woman, if single and the owner of property, he has taxed her to support a government which recognizes her only when her property can be made profitable to it.

    He has monopolized nearly all the profitable employments, and from those she is permitted to follow, she receives but a scanty remuneration.

    He closes against her all the avenues to wealth and distinction, which he considers most honorable to himself. As a teacher of theology, medicine, or law, she is not known.

    He has denied her the facilities for obtaining a thorough education – all colleges being closed against her.

    He allows her in Church as well as State, but a subordinate position, claiming Apostolic authority for her exclusion from the ministry, and with some exceptions, from any public participation in the affairs of the Church.

    He has created a false public sentiment, by giving to the world a different code of morals for men and women, by which moral delinquencies which exclude women from society, are not only tolerated but deemed of little account in man.

    He has usurped the prerogative of Jehovah himself, claiming it as his right to assign for her a sphere of action, when that belongs to her conscience and her God.

    He has endeavored, in every way that he could to destroy her confidence in her own powers, to lessen her self-respect, and to make her willing to lead a dependent and abject life.

    Read through that list from the Declaration of Sentiments. How many of them are still problematical? How many of these (I count at least seven) ares still reasonably accurate descriptions of either current society or the society which the religious right would like to impose on all in the United States. Over 150 years later there has been some improvement. Because, in 1848, about 100 women were willing to stand up and be counted as human beings. One hundred and fifty years is ‘suddenly’?

    And, if I recall correctly, one of the many reasons the Catholic Church had such a problem with the French Revolution was that there were a few very timid steps towards women’s liberation in the 1790s. Over 200 years ago French took a few steps towards equality. Over 200 years is ‘suddenly’?

    These problems — inequality in the eyes of the law, in the exercise of economic and political power, in the differing rules governing morality, in standards of dress, and of address — have been around for all of recorded history. In the last 160 some odd years, women have been making the radical assertion that they are human beings. There is no ‘suddenly’ about it.

    Your ‘nym is apropos.

  263. says

    I’m wearing a sarong right now, does that count?

    Oh, it beyond counts. They’re the best.

    ***

    I’ve never gotten over my love of long dresses. I have a bunch of ‘em. I don’t care if they’re in or out.

    The problem for me is that I don’t sew, will wear things out, and haven’t been able to arrange for anyone to make clothes of my design. If they come back in, they’ll be more available. Or if Anya from Project Runway could maybe make my wardrobe, that would be great, too….

  264. Tethys says

    Jek

    I don’t think its possible or desirable to erase history.

    I think raising awareness is the best course. In the past I have been hesitant to identify as feminist because of the femme/butch thing. ie No real feminist shaves her legs.

    I want the option to wear make-up and wear dresses and cook and sew and also the option to not wear make-up and use power tools without fear of what others may think.

    I want boys to able to play with dolls and ask for an EZ bake oven for their birthday and express their feelings without stupid morons worrying whether that will turn them gay.

    I want a world where everyone is accepted for who they are, and people aren’t forced into gender roles.

  265. Father Ogvorbis: It's Good for You. It Builds Character says

    Sorry. Full text of the Declaration of Sentiments is here. It is worth a read.

  266. Mr. Fire says

    Now that we have vanquished sexism, we can turn our attentions to the only true struggle: class struggle!

    I’m trying to think of a way to re-write ikesolem’s well-poisoning ramble in a “Dear Muslima” format, but I think I’m too tired.

  267. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Father Ogvorbis, for shits and giggles, let’s bring up Sojourner Truth, an abolitionist who was also a vocal women’s right activist.

    Suddenly misogyny, my fucking ass.

  268. Tethys says

    SC

    I love Anya. I am seriously considering copying her hair, but fear what prospective employers may think.

    And then I start a huge argument in my head over gender and beauty norms. sigh

  269. Father Ogvorbis: It's Good for You. It Builds Character says

    Father Ogvorbis, for shits and giggles, let’s bring up Sojourner Truth, an abolitionist who was also a vocal women’s right activist.

    Good catch. I was doing this off the top of my pointy little head, so I suspect I missed lots. Sorry.

  270. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Father Ogvorbis, that was not meant as a criticism. We are all working off the tops of our heads. It is just that I am tired of these fuckfaces barging in and making stupid arguments that we should be single issue focused and that feminism is just too self centered.

    Assclams.

  271. Mattir says

    So if I’m such a navel gazing materialistic feminist, can I have back all the money I’ve given to NGOs promoting education for women and girls in Africa? After all, Kenya is in Africa, and I’ve been informed that I don’t care about children in Kenya.

    Good try with the Bitches Aint Shit™ derail, moron. Have a porcupine.

  272. says

    That man…says that women need to be helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, and to have the best place everywhere. Nobody ever helps me into carriages, or over mud puddles, or gives me any best place, and aren’t I a woman?…I have plowed, and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me – and aren’t I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man (when I could get it), and bear the lash as well – and aren’t I a woman? I have borne thirteen children and seen them most all sold off into slavery, and when I cried out with a mother’s grief, none but Jesus heard – and aren’t I a woman?

    Sojourner Truth (Isabella Van Wagener), Speech at Woman’s Rights Convention, Akron, Ohio, 1851.

  273. says

    SC

    I love Anya.

    I know. She’s super talented.

    I am seriously considering copying her hair, but fear what prospective employers may think.

    And then I start a huge argument in my head over gender and beauty norms. sigh

    Argh – so frustrating. Maybe you could call it the “post-pageant honor-our-Marines buzz.”

    :)

  274. Tethys says

    I’m glad Father Og has popped over here to write sensible logical posts to misogynist.

    I’m too tired to offer much more than expletives and dead porcupines to people who are that stupid.

  275. Father Ogvorbis: It's Good for You. It Builds Character says

    Father Ogvorbis, that was not meant as a criticism.

    Wasn’t taking it as one. I remember de Beauvoir because of a quote of hers showing up in Doonesbury decades ago. I remember Stanton because of Women’s Rights NHP. My education is in modern European history and my vocation is in modern labour, industrial and transportation history. I mentally kick myself every time I forget a painfully obvious something or someone because of my mental blinders.

    Which, oddly, describes much (but not all) sexist behaviour — an inability to see past the mental blinders imposed by education, socialization, indoctrination, and familiarization.

  276. fauxreal says

    nice cartoon panels.

    Madame X achieved her class-defining white skin by the cosmetic practice called “enameling.” This involved coating a woman’s face with a lead-based substance – women went insane b/c of their use of this product. just a little factoid.

    personally, I don’t care if someone, male or female, wants to wear make up or body decorate – but don’t want any of them to drive themselves insane because of. all cultures do it for different occasions. not interested in wearing plates in my lips but do put wires through my ears. sometimes I wear make up, sometimes (often) I don’t. my choice.

    the proscription against make up was related directly to women who worked for a living, vs. those who were taken care of by a male. it’s a no win so do what you want and who gives a fuck if society likes it. I want an electric blue wig too, but doubt I’ll bother to find one. would be fun to have, tho.

    those same women who were against make up were all for corseting their bodies to displace their internal organs and alter the shape of their rib cages by putting something like 80 lbs of pressure over an 8 inch area. there was nothing scandalous about this at all because it “trained the body.” that’s what good girls did – starting long before puberty.

    it’s more important, it seems to me, to encourage women to enjoy themselves, to love who they are and to not tell them what they must do to be someone else’s version of a feminist or anything else. let women experiment with what they like. why not?

  277. says

    …Sojourner Truth (Isabella Van Wagener), Speech at Woman’s Rights Convention, Akron, Ohio, 1851.

    Quoted, by the way, in Sikivu Hutchinson’s Moral Combat, which is egregiously disorganized but absolutely worth reading.

  278. Tethys says

    Ah, Caine has posted one of my favorite Sojourner speeches.

    Anya is incredibly talented. I have loved most everything she has produced so far.

  279. misogynist says

    I am not answering other posts, just this because I am bored.

    [quote]No, lackwit. RD was ignoring a major problem. Pointing to a different problem doesn’t make the other ones go away.[/quote]

    That is what my argument was all about. There is a hierarchy in problems. People will choose to spend more time in most importand problems and less time with less importand problems. You didn’t understand my argument, ergo, you are stupid.

    [quote]It’s confirmed, you’re an idiot. All people work for things they need and want, Cupcake. That’s part and parcel of being human. Some of us are less invested in material stuff than others. My not having a bed or a shelter isn’t going to help other people. And I don’t own a watch, Sugarbrain. I don’t take vacations, either. So you can shove your generalizations up your ass. Oh wait, your head’s already up there.[/quote]

    It is also confirmed to me from your writings that you are stupid. Indeed all people work for things they need and want, that is something I did write. The fact that some of you are “less invested” in material stuff means that you ignore children dying of hunger because it is “material”? Congratulations. You not having a bed or a shelter will help dying children, if you sell your home or bed 10 children will live for 6 months you ignorant shit. And you are calling me stupid? You don’t own a watch but you own a PC. And you spent your time in front of your PC answering to a post while you could be working a second job and donating the money to the poor. But you don’t. Now did you understand my argument?

    [quote]Just how would you know that, Cupcake? You have a sooper sekrit list of every single bit of activism we’re involved in? Also, why the focus on children? Wouldn’t happen to be because that’s what you think women ought to be focused on, now would it?[/quote]
    Focus on children dying on hunger instead of the problems that women are facing in the western world. Are you serious? Dying of hunger is the same as getting $5000 per year than a male coworker?

    [quote]Again, how do you know what people are and aren’t involved in? Why don’t you tell us what you’re doing for womens’ rights, Cupcake? How involved are you in fighting for womens’ education, the right to contraceptives and healthcare and the right to work in any field? Are you involved in making women safe from harassment, sexual assault, rape and domestic violence? Are you involved in GLBTI rights?[/quote]
    I don’t pretend to care, I don’t care about dying children and I don’t care about women’s right in the the western world. I just don’t pretend to care like you do. I care about what affects me.

    [quote]I don’t recall any single one of the commentariat here ever saying that other problems weren’t as important. Lots of them tend to be tied together. Fighting for womens’ rights tends to improve the lives of children 100 percent, frinst. Funny how that works.[/quote]
    Of course, a raise in your salary will make 2000 children in Africa not die of hunger. Silly me.

    [quote]You seem to miss the basic point that all people have things which take priority with them. Being a woman, womens’ rights are important to me. Being bisexual, GLBTI rights are important to me. However, that does not mean I have nothing else which is important to me or other concerns which I am involved in. Unfortunately, I don’t have the luxury of unlimited time and money to cover every single interest. All of them get a slice of what I can give.[/quote]

    No stupid, I don’t. That is what I am saying, that each person has different priorities, therefore I don’t care about how women are treated in the western world, just like you don’t give a fuck about dying children in Africa. And if I follow exactly what you are saying, since I am a man, I should’t have to care about women’s right yes? And yes, you don’t have unlimited money or time but you choose to spend it on women’s right. Good for you, but don’t go around and say that I am a pig because I spend my time in something different.

    I don’t care if you say I am a troll. It is clear to me that you people didn’t even read what I wrote. You don’t see reality because it doesn’t make you look good in your own eyes. Yes, you are invested “not in material things” is what you want to believe because it makes you feel superior than other people. The truth is that yes, you don’t give a fuck about dying children in Africa (yes, I am using this again and again) but you give a fuck and get furious about women getting less money than men. It is clear what is most importand but you choose to spent your time doing what is better for YOU, not for others, also, you choose to deal with easier things. Hey, what is easier? Yelling about women’s rights or giving extra money to unicef?

    So, fuck off, you and your self righteous prose.

  280. Father Ogvorbis: It's Good for You. It Builds Character says

    I’m glad Father Og has popped over here to write sensible logical posts to misogynist.

    Sorry. Er, um. Porcupine. Porcupine!

    Better?

  281. says

    fauxreal:

    This involved coating a woman’s face with a lead-based substance

    That was common for a while, but then there was a move to other things which were considered less toxic, such as mercury:

    Bloom of Youth

    Pure, soft water, 1 pint; pulverized castile soap, 2 ounces; emulsion of bitter almonds, 3 ounces; rosewater, 4 ounces; orange-flower water, 4 ounces; tincture of benzoin, 1 drachm; borax, 1/2 drachm. Add 5 grains bi-chloride of mercury to every 8 ounces of the mixture. Apply to the face with a cotton or linen cloth.

    Mrs. Owens’ Cook Book and Useful Household Hints, 1887.

    Of course, it’s obvious from the list of ingredients that this beauty formula was only something for the well-to-do lady, not the everyday woman.

  282. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    No stupid, I don’t. That is what I am saying, that each person has different priorities, therefore I don’t care about how women are treated in the western world, just like you don’t give a fuck about dying children in Africa.

    Wrong, you stupid shitstain on the panties of life. You are making the assumption that all of us do not care. You are not arguing against real people, you are arguing against scraps in your brain.

    Fuck you, assclam, for daring to tell any of us what we do and do not care about.

    Yes, I do think you are a vile example of humanity.

  283. says

    misidiot:

    That is what my argument was all about.

    No, Cupcake, that’s not what your “argument” was about. Your “argument” was simply you spewining froth over your upset at sexism being discussed in sexism threads. The nerve! Really!

    You’ve outed yourself as a fuckwit, a fuckwit with very poor thinking ability. You had no point outside of attempting to be poisonous, just as you have no point now.

    If you had so much as a smidge of integrity, honesty or any intellectual ability, you’d address the points made to you earlier. Not that I expect you have the necessary ability to do so.

    Bye now, don’t forget your porcupine on the way out, Sugarbrain.

  284. says

    spewining? Oy. I’ll blame Ogvorbis as Rev. BDC isn’t around. That should have been spewing, however, perhaps I can pass it off as a combination of spewing and whining. Yeah, that’s the ticket!

  285. Tethys says

    Father Og

    Your original post was perfect, though probably wasted on someone who is so obviously trolling.

    It was a poor argument when RD made it. It’s an even poorer argument coming from misogynist. At least RD was clear and concise in his writing.

    It pretty much amounts to “Other people have it much worse than you so stop whining.”

    Yes starving children in Kenya is sad and worthy of our support, but it really isn’t what we are talking about is it?. Its just a derail…meh

  286. Sally Strange, OM says

    So, fuck off, you and your self righteous prose.

    Priceless. I love it. Top notch trolling, I say! A step or two above the normal trollish insult.

  287. Ichthyic says

    I am not answering other posts, just this because I am bored.

    MUCH SHORTER:

    “Here’s more stinky cheese bait!”

  288. says

    @Janine Thanks, I took it as a compliment. :)

    I like long flowy skirts and I like more “masculine” attire (suits and so forth). Depends on my mood. I never learned to wear makeup, so I never have.

    @SC I used to work in a fabric store and a good number of the sales associates there would sew for other people for money. If you’re not interested in complicated type stuff like wedding dresses, you can likely get someone to sew for you for not too much extra expense.

  289. says

    Tethys, um, I responded to misidiot’s first post too, although I don’t know why I bothered. Now, if this were a thread about starving children in Kenya or anywhere else, I’d expect that’s what we’d be discussing.

    Apparently, according to misidiot, it’s a terrible, terrible thing to discuss sexism in a thread about…sexism!

  290. Sally Strange, OM says

    Apparently, according to misidiot, it’s a terrible, terrible thing to discuss sexism in a thread about…sexism!

    Well, given that he self-identifies as a woman-hater, I think the above correction is probably more accurate.

  291. chigau () says

    misogynist
    It works like this:
    <blockquote>paste whatever you are trying to quote</blockquote>
    that way you don’t look like an idiot for your quoting method.
    You look like an idiot for your content.
    Cleaner.

  292. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    SallyStrange, I clicked it. But you know that we feed even obvious trolls. Sometimes, they explode in interesting ways.

  293. Father Ogvorbis: It's Good for You. It Builds Character says

    I’m glad Father Og has popped over here to write sensible logical posts to misogynist.

    Which misogynist ignored. Big surprise.

    The truth is that yes, you don’t give a fuck about dying children in Africa (yes, I am using this again and again) but you give a fuck and get furious about women getting less money than men. It is clear what is most importand but you choose to spent your time doing what is better for YOU, not for others, also, you choose to deal with easier things. Hey, what is easier? Yelling about women’s rights or giving extra money to unicef?

    Have you ever heard the term ‘false dichotomy’?

    Here in NEPA, over the last few years, the gas industry has gone from non-existent to one of the biggest employers thanks to new technology which allows the extraction of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale through the fracturing of the shale. The increased motor traffic is destroying roads. Some of the drilling companies have, through miscalculation, misjudgement, accident, or incompetence, created some major water contamination problems. Citizen groups have appeared asking for extraction taxes on the gas companies to pay for infrastructure and environmental damage and/or for increased regulation of the industry to prevent these problems. The reaction from a certain set of lawmakers has been predictable –”Oh, noes, any attempt to regulate the industry, or ask them to pay for what they are breaking, will cause them all to leave the state and then no more jobs.” A black (regulation and taxation) and white (no jobs) false dichotomy. And completely misrepresenting reality.

    Your contention that dealing with problems at home (such as endemic and systemic mysogyny) makes one incapable of concern, and support for solutions, of other problems further from home is a false dichotomy. You force a black and white dichotomy — either all one or all the other — and refuse to even entertain the possibility that some of us are fighting mysogyny through writing while supporting Unicef and Doctors Without Borders monetarily.

    True dichotomies are rare. Very few situations in society, charity and equal rights are composed of mutually exclusive possibilities. Instead, there are shades of gray. Accusing those with whom you disagree of not giving a fuck about starving children is inflammatory and useful only if you want a shouting match. Since you like dichotomies, I have to assume that the only possible reason you wrote that is for the reason I have elucidated. Therefore:

    Go shove a flaming decayed porcupine, dipped in crushed habanero peppers, up you ass with a counter-clockwise rotational motion you self-righeous asshole!

  294. Sally Strange, OM says

    Yes indeedy. This one is working up to a very nice explosion.

    “Just one more leetle bite, sir? An after-dinner mint? It’s wahfair thin!”

  295. says

    Sally:

    I think the above correction is probably more accurate.

    Agreed. It seems that misidiot is just terribly wound up about the ever so recent problem with womens’ rights.

  296. Tethys says

    Sorry Caine, I see you also made an attempt to engage with the latest troll. (Good call Sally!)

    I was enjoying the excellent discussion about the various flavors of feminism and then another ass had to jump in with idiocy and bring it to a screeching halt. *glare*

    I always try to remember that lots of lurkers are reading too, and post with that in mind. But I’m not feeling all that witty right now, so expletives and porcupines are all I have for trolls.

  297. says

    Ogvorbis:

    and refuse to even entertain the possibility that some of us are fighting mysogyny through writing while supporting Unicef and Doctors Without Borders monetarily.

    Some of us even find much better charities than Unicef. Médecins Sans Frontières gets a chunk of my money four times a year.

  298. says

    I don’t pretend to care, I don’t care about dying children and I don’t care about women’s right [sic] in the the western world. I just don’t pretend to care like you do. I care about what affects me.

    Psychopaths aren’t welcome here, unless they at least want to pretend to have a moral compass. And we certainly don’t give a shit what arguments they want to make respecting what ethical issues we ought (not) to be concerning ourselves with. Fuck off, asshole. Pick up your porcupine on the way out.

  299. Father Ogvorbis: It's Good for You. It Builds Character says

    Some of us even find much better charities than Unicef. Médecins Sans Frontières gets a chunk of my money four times a year.

    Sorry. I did not intend to imply that the two I listed were either recommended or that anyone else on the thread contributed to them. For the record, my charities: MSF, Unicef, Audubon, Sierra Club, Special Olympics, and the NPCA. Not an endorsement or recommendation. Sorry to imply that.

  300. says

    @SC I used to work in a fabric store and a good number of the sales associates there would sew for other people for money. If you’re not interested in complicated type stuff like wedding dresses, you can likely get someone to sew for you for not too much extra expense.

    Thanks. I’m going to try – the stuff I want is really simple.

  301. The Laughing Coyote says

    Is it wrong for me to butt in briefly to add that, though it may be (likely) just coincidental, since I’ve started trying to change my way of thinking about women and male priviledge, I’ve been having more sex in general? Literally, the number of women who want to have sex with me has doubled.

    The fact that it’s making my life and relations with women easier of course isn’t the prime motivator, but I have to say it helps, or at the very least certainly doesn’t hurt.

    Hope no one’s offended.

    Zero sum game my pasty ass.

  302. Sally Strange, OM says

    We can still do that. Where were we?

    I’m really happy to see the younger generation (women 10-12 years younger than me) totally embracing radical, in-your-face activism. Seems to me that those times when the activism has been particularly in-your-face have been the times when the most got done. Some ladies from the new organizing group we started a few months ago went to the Occupy Wall Street protest and came back and urged the crowd at the local protest to avoid misogyny. I was so proud of them. *beams*

  303. says

    I don’t pretend to care, I don’t care about dying children and I don’t care about women’s right [sic] in the the western world. I just don’t pretend to care like you do. I care about what affects me.

    The problem for you, Cupcake, is that we aren’t pretending. We do care about the issues we discuss, that’s why we discuss them.

    No one in particular cares that your carcass hangs like a pall with no empathy or concern; that’s your problem. However, don’t tell the rest of us we are without empathy and concern. Most people are caring, you know. In this case, it’s just you that’s the problem.

    I will give you an example of something I don’t care about – I don’t care about you or what affects you.

  304. Tethys says

    I’ve been mulling over the use of ridicule, and its role in reinforcing gender norms.

    I grew up during the period when feminism was known as Womens Liberation. I remember going to the circus at age 8 or so, and one of the clowns was wearing enormous falsies and a sign that said “Womens Libber”. The crowd seemed to think it was funny, but even at age 8 I found him rather offensive.

    I wonder if we have made much progress in attitudes since that time?

  305. Dumbass says

    HEY GUYS! I couldn’t subject myself to drudging through this already too long thread… so tell me, is anything different this time? Or are most people pretending to try to win hearts and minds again – but in reality are getting into long stupid insult fests and tangents that bloat the thread and make it 90+% shit?

  306. says

    Tethys:

    I grew up during the period when feminism was known as Womens Liberation.

    Yeah. I grew up in the ’60s/70s and am very familiar with womens’ liberation. The movement was strong, fiery and energetic. There was also a great deal of splintering at that time, with many declared leaders stating that womens’ lib was x, while the next stated no, womens’ lib was z and so forth.

    It was exciting though, and there was a lot of consciousness raising going on everywhere. There was a whole lot of ridicule as well, which at the time, seemed only to fuel individual women’s strength and determination to be viewed as a human beings.

  307. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Strap a dead porcupine to the top of your head and shove your head up your dumbass, dumbass.

  308. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Also, if you fucking bothered, there was a discussion about the history of feminism and how we disagree. At least until other troll as insightful as you started dropping shit, dumbass. But you would rather just insult, you worthless pile of humanity.

  309. chigau () says

    Dumbass
    This has been the most heart-winning, insult-free, shit-free thread in at least 10 years.
    Go back and read every word, twice, including all the links.

  310. Dumbass says

    “chigau () says:
    11 October 2011 at 4:13 am

    Dumbass
    This has been the most heart-winning, insult-free, shit-free thread in at least 10 years.
    Go back and read every word, twice, including all the links.”

    Hey look, one person appeared to seriously answer my question (They could be lying to me, but I’ll actually scroll through in the morning when I have some time). You other fucktards on the other hand get super mega annoyed when your less than good thread habits are mentioned? Jesus Fucking Christ, can you be anymore sensitive? Try not to lose all rational thought when I point out the fact that most of these threads are filled with useless shit. Assuming you care (you do care right?), try to not contribute to the shit in the future, as most folks with jobs won’t take the time to slog through a shit filled thread (you really shouldn’t limit your influence to the unemployed you know). Anywhoo, getting angry at the fact that someone dares mention that these threads are pretty much always mostly shit, is really, *really* fucking stupid.

    Goodnight.

  311. Tethys says

    It has been a pretty good thread in comparison to some of the other sexism threads in the last few months.

  312. Sally Strange, OM says

    As far as trolling goes, I much prefer misogynist’s brand of trolling to Dumbass’ brand. At least it makes some reference to the subject at hand. Dumbass’ posts could be copy-pasted to any thread on any topic, from NASCAR to microbiology.

  313. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Why do you say good night when you clearly mean, “Fuck you!”?

    Worthless pile of humanity.

  314. Sally Strange, OM says

    I like our thread habits. And I really don’t understand why people who don’t like them repeatedly show up to subject themselves to them. Personally, I don’t like the thread habits of Jalopnik commenters. And guess what? I don’t fucking comment there. Or, if I do, it’s not to tell them how terrible their, what, online chat etiquette is, it’ll be on the subject of something I’m interested in commenting on.

    Dumbass is Pharyngula’s own self-appointed jaded critic. He’s like the restaurant critic in Ratatouille, you know? Somebody make this man some fish stew!

  315. says

    Dumbass actually makes a productive suggestion.

    Try not to lose all rational thought when I point out the fact that most of these threads are filled with useless shit. Assuming you care (you do care right?), try to not contribute to the shit in the future, as most folks with jobs won’t take the time to slog through a shit filled thread (you really shouldn’t limit your influence to the unemployed you know).

    Yes, it’s true: there’s too much useless shit in these threads. Inspired by Dumbass’s bold critique, I have taken steps to reduce the shit.

    Dumbass has been banned.

  316. Sally Strange, OM says

    Oh no. Whatever shall we do without Dumbass. The quality of threads around here is about to take a nosedive, I tell ya. We’re nothing without our potty-mouthed net nanny.

  317. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    Gasp! I will not be challenged by the rational insight of dumbass? I guess he would be missed if he had an actual insight.

  318. misogynist says

    I can see that Ogg Vorbis’ writings are much appreciated from people here.

    I really don’t feel like going into a long argument since, again, I am bored and don’t really care so much about this, so I won’t. Now that I think of it, the fact that I wrote two posts is quite impressive.

    The other impressive thing is that I went through Ogg’s posts without laughing. I was just amazed at all the false logic he/she is using. The post about dichotomy is completely out of the context of my writings. You just took what I wrote, you put a label, completely altering the meaning and you made a post out of it. If that is what you understood from my posts, then you understood nothing at all.

    Now that I think about it, I think that perhaps I am a troll. I knew that nobody would really stop and read and understand what I wrote but I did it mainly to make you angry.

    So yes, I guess I am a troll. But I was doing it for a greater cause! I wanted to have some fun and I did. Try not to eat any fatty foods while fighting for women’s rights! Go feminists go!

  319. chigau () says

    I regret my response to Dumbass. I thought it would just go away.
    I deeply regret that it approved of me.
    But it’s been sent away, so all is good.

  320. Inane Janine, OM, Conflater Of Arguments says

    If only you were one tenth as clever as you clearly think you are.

  321. Tethys says

    Its sad that some people feel the need to act like asses. At least they have the decency to identify themselves with nyms like misogynist and dumbass.

    I don’t get the fanboying over RD. Do they imagine RD will give them a cookie for trolling pharyngula? I can respect RD for his fight against creationism, but that doesn’t mean he knows shit about feminism and civil rights.

    His muslima letter was egregious.

  322. The Laughing Coyote says

    “HERP DERP I’M A JACKASS!”

    “Fuck off, Jackass.”

    “LOL JOKE’S ON YOU I WAS ONLY PRETENDING! YHBT”

    OK, not perfectly applicable to Misogynist here, but it seems that’s how 90 percent of trolls operate these days.

  323. says

    Tethys:

    I can respect RD for his fight against creationism, but that doesn’t mean he knows shit about feminism and civil rights.

    I like a lot of what Richard Dawkins does, it’s thanks to him that I understand evolution as well as I do. However, it’s also clear that he’s a person with a great deal of unexamined privilege. That hardly makes him unusual, however, it’s disheartening that he chose to ignore the problem of his privilege.

    That said, the various douchecakes act as though he’s the great grand poobah of all atheism ever and that we’re supposed to accept his word on all things. Such a silly stance. If one thing could be said to mark atheists (all through history, not just recently), it’s the tendency to question and that certainly includes questioning supposed authority figures.

  324. Sally Strange, OM says

    it seems that’s how 90 percent of trolls operate these days.

    Mais oú sont les trolls d’antan?

  325. The Laughing Coyote says

    SallyStrange:

    Mais oú sont les trolls d’antan?

    disparu, mais pas oublié.

  326. Tethys says

    If one thing could be said to mark atheists (all through history, not just recently), it’s the tendency to question and that certainly includes questioning supposed authority figures.

    Exactly! I can respect his opinion on evolutionary biology, but that is because its his area of scientific expertise. Why would anyone consider him an authority on humanism or feminism?

    People seem to get really upset by the notion that they reinforce cultural stereotypes unconsciously.

  327. says

    Tethys:

    People seem to get really upset by the notion that they reinforce cultural stereotypes unconsciously.

    Given what we’ve seen just since July, I’d say that’s one hell of an understatement.

  328. Tethys says

    It’s certainly been an eye opening experience. Maybe its showing progress that todays trolls were quite tame in comparison to Julys trolls.

    And they all seemed to be quite aware (judging by their nym choice) that what their posts were deliberately sexist or just plain trolling.

  329. mercurial says

    Apparently, the girl on the big-wheel bike isn’t quite awake enough to realize that her beloved plastic Big-Wheel is a product of such coerced and extreme division of labor as to only be realized in a modern patriarchal society. If I were that other girl being lectured to by little miss know-it-all, I would kick that plastic hunk of Chinese slave labor out from under her ass, and tell her to get back to me when she’s serious about real change.

  330. Ing says

    I seriously question the wisdom of letting the dungeon out for the move. Has any of them actually contributed anything? They’re like dumb animals, PZ, they can’t live in the wild anymore now that they’re used to captivity!

  331. Ichthyic says

    kick that plastic hunk of Chinese slave labor

    maybe you should pay to resurrect the Louis Marx $ Co. toy factory? Then Big Wheels would be made in the US again.

    what, you mean you’re not really serious about it?

    again, are you one of those idiots that thinks Al Gore can’t be serious about helping to communicate climate change issues because he uses a plane to fly to Europe for meetings, instead of say… swimming the Atlantic?

  332. says

    Ing:

    I seriously question the wisdom of letting the dungeon out for the move.

    Yeah, I’m seriously disliking that move now, especially as the ones coming back are the idjits who specialized in derailing and disrupting threads on feminism and sexism. They’re difficult enough without these particular morons.

    Ichthyic, it’s mercurial muse. Don’t expect anything.

  333. mercurial says

    Women have 50% of the vote in the United States. Under fair elections, that is all they need to facilitate change over time. It’s a mathematical certainty. So if women really want change, where is the change? I’m waiting. In the meantime, you want to talk about an oppressed minority? Let’s talk about blacks in the U.S. (less than 20% of vote)

    I think women secretly crave patriarchy because they love the benefits that only extreme division of labor brings to their lives. Like the iPhone. And diamonds. And gasoline. Or do you really think Hillary or Nancy Pelosi want to change the status quo? They’re like the adult version of that little girl on the Big-Wheel bike in PZ’s comic strip: “We must alter the male-fabricated, exploitive socio-economic system, but please leave me my iPhone, SUV, Big Wheel, and ___________.” (fill in blank)

  334. The Laughing Coyote says

    Caine: On the bright side, Noobs like me finally get to see them with our own eyes.

  335. mercurial says

    “…I seriously question the wisdom of letting the dungeon out for the move.”

    I was never put in the dungeon.

  336. Just_A_Lurker says

    I just want to say thank you to everyone who contributed to the thread. It was a joy to read this one, with the talking about make-up issue, and support from the feminists. I know you guys do this every thread (support each other and bash the trolls) but this time I read it and cried in joy instead of sorrow. I always read these threads but most of the time, even with the support and good will from Caine and others, it just hurts so much to deal with the trolls and shit. Bad memories. I guess I just feel isolated in real life, since I’m very poor single mother and I’m the only feminist and atheist I know. Its caused me to pick my battles and put up with shit, which makes me feel bad, but on the other hand, for the welfare of me and my child I really can’t afford to offend people. Especially dealing with places that help with shelter, food and such are so often religious. =(

    It just gets draining. Having to deal with them teaching my child bullshit and having to tell her about praying and the fact that yes, she’s a girl and she can do anything. Broke my heart when the other kids told her she couldn’t do something b/c she’s a girl, the other girls agreed with it too. I stepped up then but of course the other parents don’t like my child and I much now. Especially not after I let one of the little boys play with girly things. I told him boys could do anything too but his dad got pissed when he came to pick up his son. So sad, my daughter felt horrible too.

    GRRRR. Anyways, I just want to say thank you. and Fuck the trolls.

    And apologies for rambling and spelling/grammar mistakes.

  337. says

    TLC:

    On the bright side, Noobs like me finally get to see them with our own eyes.

    Well, that’s a side alright, but I don’t know about bright. ;) MM’s thing has always been to derail any thread about feminism or sexism at any cost, because you can’t have people talking about feminism or sexism and you just cannot have those uppity bitches talkin’.

    Anyhow, chew away, I wouldn’t want to deprive you of the pleasure.

  338. says

    J_A_L:

    Broke my heart when the other kids told her she couldn’t do something b/c she’s a girl, the other girls agreed with it too. I stepped up then but of course the other parents don’t like my child and I much now. Especially not after I let one of the little boys play with girly things. I told him boys could do anything too but his dad got pissed when he came to pick up his son. So sad, my daughter felt horrible too.

    It breaks my heart that you have to deal with this inexcusable shit day in and day out. I know you’re doing your best and I know you teach your daughter right, but how I wish you and her were out of there and did not have to be surrounded by such crap.

  339. Khantron, the alien who only loves says

    If only Mercurial had read the thread then he’d know about internalization.

  340. Ichthyic says

    you know, I used to ride Big Wheels as a kid. Was my favorite toy, hands down, from the ages of about 7 to 10.

    so, I kinda was interested to see what really DID happen to that.

    well, the company that invented them went belly up, and Huffy bought the rights, but then Huffy went belly up, along with 3 other major US bike manufacturers, because of this:

    Huffy Bicycles had a manufacturing and assembly facility in Celina, Ohio, at one time Celina’s largest employer. In 1996, the bicycle division received a major blow when U.S. courts ruled that surging imports of low-cost, mass-market bicycles from China did not pose a ‘material threat’ to the last three major U.S. bicycle manufacturers – Murray Inc., Roadmaster, and Huffy.[1] In 1999, after it became apparent that continued U.S. production of low-cost, mass-market bicycles was no longer viable, Huffy closed down all remaining U.S. bicycle manufacturing operations. Murray and Roadmaster soon followed suit. Crown Equipment Corporation now uses the former Huffy U.S. bicycle factory to produce forklifts.

    I wondered why all those bikes started rapidly disappearing from the markets in the 90s.

    too bad Mercury boy wasn’t around then to save the day.

    oh well…

  341. Ichthyic says

    I was never put in the dungeon.

    It’s actually right about that.

    a first.

    well, just to make things consistent then…

  342. Just_A_Lurker says

    Oh, Caine thank you. That means so much to me. Honestly, this community feels like the only place I can be safe and express myself. God, most people don’t even know half the stuff I’ve told you guys. And you’ve all been so supportive. Thank you for helping me. Not feeling so alone, helps so much. =)

  343. says

    Ichthyic:

    but then Huffy went belly up, along with 3 other major US bike manufacturers, because of this:

    I didn’t know that. What a fucking shame. I wish I had my old Stingray still.

  344. The Laughing Coyote says

    Caine: Now whenever someone on TET brings up Mercurial, I’ll know wtf they’re talking about.

    It’s Educational. Like studying a stool sample.

  345. says

    J_A_L:

    Oh, Caine thank you. That means so much to me. Honestly, this community feels like the only place I can be safe and express myself. God, most people don’t even know half the stuff I’ve told you guys. And you’ve all been so supportive. Thank you for helping me. Not feeling so alone, helps so much. =)

    I just wish there was more I could do. You do know if there’s ever anything I can do besides talk, all you have to do is say, right?

  346. Ichthyic says

    I didn’t know that.

    yeah, was a bit of a shocker to me too.

    What a fucking shame.

    yup.

    the very first bike I ever rode on…

    was my mom riding me in a baby seat on the back of a big, black, Roadmaster bike.

    she kept that bike for almost 15 years, so I even remember it from when I was 3 or 4.

    it almost makes me curious to look up the actual court cases.

    probably too depressing though.

  347. Just_A_Lurker says

    I just wish there was more I could do. You do know if there’s ever anything I can do besides talk, all you have to do is say, right?

    I know =)

    You guys are awesome. I’ve been offered help before when we were in a really bad spot while a pre-paid phone so I could look for jobs. Thankfully, that issue was resolved and got into a shelter before actually landing on the streets.

    Now, we are much better. In our own place, with a great job starting next week, well okay its not so great but my first job that gives us benefits! YAY! Still using a bed in the living room and dealing with roaches since the apartments are so old but fuck that minor shit, I’m just happy we are getting stable finally. After working and getting my loans out of default (at least 6 months payment) then I can go back to school in fall to finish my degree.

  348. says

    J_A_L:

    In our own place, with a great job starting next week, well okay its not so great but my first job that gives us benefits! YAY!

    That’s great news, congratulations!

  349. Indeterminate Me says

    It seems to me that the “commentariat” here has forgotten all about what skepticism means.

    Skepticism is not simply rejecting any challenge, question or dissent with the group-think consensus. Nor is it practiced by telling people they need to go learn the dogma from a set of acceptable websites before engaging with “their betters”.

    You all seem to have forgotten, somewhere along the way, to apply skepticism to your own convictions, your own certitude, your own binary thinking.

    One either worships at your feet, or one is a misogynist enemy troll. There is no room for real intellectual inquiry, no room for provocative questions, no room to refine opinions.

    There is a prevailing culture here that confuses arrogance with truth, insult with substance, dismissal with refutation.

    You boast about how this “communitariat” has been around for years. Yet, within a short time lurking, it becomes evident that a small handful – literally just a handful – of aggressive, inflexible dogmatists utterly dominate these discussions, leaving the majority of Pharyngula readers excluded from commentary.

    It is a stagnant, self-important little gang that has forgotten to be self-critical or reflective, that, in contrast to the essence of critical thinking, views “I don’t know”, “I was wrong”, “I am mistaken” as inexcusable, impossible to consider statements.

    There is more than a whiff of the zealous born-again here. These discussions seem far more like what one finds on true believer blogs than on an atheist skeptical site.

    It is unfortunate PZ has given his forums over to this tiny gang of libertarians, who prove that, without restraints, a minority will sieze power by force and deny all others an equal opportunity, in this case to express themselves and engage in discussion about PZ’s blog posts.

    This “commentariat” is far from skeptical. You seem to have forgotten utterly what skepticism is all about, and to exist here mostly to pat each other on the back about how clever you are in your latest put-down. And, to delude yourself that this behavior somehow leads to actual social change.

    Yes, it is a big Internet out there. But there are a lot of readers of this blog that are denied the opportunity to engage in thoughtful discussion because of a small group of supercilious bullies who have squatted here, wallow in their own feces and fancy themselves part of a “movement”.

    Preaching tolerance, diversity and listening, while practicing none of the three – that is the most noted characteristic of this sad little “commentariat”, with their privileged private club.

  350. Ichthyic says

    It seems to me that the “commentariat” here has forgotten all about what skepticism means.

    can’t these fucking trolls limit the size and stinkiness of their bait?

    seriously.

    ooh, look, a

    teal deer.

  351. Khantron, the alien who only loves says

    I’m sorry if we thought the notion that “women are people too” is fairly well established.

  352. Just_A_Lurker says

    It is a stagnant, self-important little gang that has forgotten to be self-critical or reflective, that, in contrast to the essence of critical thinking, views “I don’t know”, “I was wrong”, “I am mistaken” as inexcusable, impossible to consider statements.

    Lurk moar. I’ve been here since 2007 (though thats really not that long) and have seen plenty of dissent and discussion and statements such as these.

    You’re just a fucking idiot parroting the “Echo Chamber meme”, that’s on my bingo card right?

    If you think there’s something we haven’t been through or thought about, or actually want to have a discussion, then present the argument.

    This “commentariat” is far from skeptical. You seem to have forgotten utterly what skepticism is all about, and to exist here mostly to pat each other on the back about how clever you are in your latest put-down. And, to delude yourself that this behavior somehow leads to actual social change.
    But there are a lot of readers of this blog that are denied the opportunity to engage in thoughtful discussion because of a small group of supercilious bullies who have squatted here, wallow in their own feces and fancy themselves part of a “movement”.

    You don’t fucking know shit. Plenty of people here have been involved and fighting this shit for decades. And plenty of lurkers have de-lurked and commented on how this place & its attitude has helped them. Again, you’d know that if you’d actually fucking read…

    Basically, lurk moar & read or take your porcupine (quills up of course) as the door hits you on the ass while you flounce.

    You’re are not helping. Find someplace else that suits your dumbass.

  353. says

    IM, you’ve been singing the same grudge song for a bit now. Time to get a new shtick.

    One either worships at your feet, or one is a misogynist enemy troll. There is no room for real intellectual inquiry, no room for provocative questions, no room to refine opinions.

    There is a prevailing culture here that confuses arrogance with truth, insult with substance, dismissal with refutation.

    Thread after thread after thread after thread after thread proves you wrong. The Social Media thread I linked in #369 is a good recent example. You won’t see it because you don’t want to see it.

    Now, did you possibly have a fucking point outside of the same old whine?

  354. The Laughing Coyote says

    It is unfortunate PZ has given his forums over to this tiny gang of libertarians, who prove that, without restraints, a minority will sieze power by force and deny all others an equal opportunity, in this case to express themselves and engage in discussion about PZ’s blog posts.

    ….

    It is unfortunate PZ has given his forums over to this tiny gang of libertarians,

    LOL.

  355. says

    J_A_L, no worries. We’ve had a whole lot of terribly concerned peoples lately, all saying the same thing. I keep telling them, make your points, in any tone you want, no one cares, but nooooooooo, they can’t manage that. What they can manage is to continually whine about us and tell us why we’re all so awful and ineffectual. Interesting how they just can’t stay away.

  356. Just_A_Lurker says

    Someone’s never read one of the libertarian threads here or at sciblogs.

    Now that made me LOL. I remember when you guys were battling a libertarian Walton… hehe

    No offense, TLC (I am the only one who thinks of the R&B group TLC or the supposed learning channel when typing that out?)

  357. The Laughing Coyote says

    No offense, TLC (I am the only one who thinks of the R&B group TLC or the supposed learning channel when typing that out?)

    None taken, though I’m not sure what I’m not supposed to be taking offense to.

    And I strongly doubt you’re the only one who makes the association. :)

  358. Ichthyic says

    I remember when you guys were battling a libertarian Walton… hehe

    thank fuck SOMEONE remembers.

    ;)

  359. says

    The act of leveling in itself is selecting people based on some quality they have rather than merit.

    ahhhh, yes.
    The good old assumption that for every place, job, scholarship there is one, and only one best qualified person, that this is objectively true and meassurable and that people who make the decissions about who gets it are never ever influenced by prejudices, biases and culture.
    Because they have very good arguments why John Smith is best and not Jane Wanakahowa.

    Aetre

    But what becomes “step two” for things like makeup, piercings, and shirts that show midriff? Is awareness alone the answer?

    Awareness, acceptance, tolerance, education, support and a good meassure of troll-bashing for people who either tell us it’s objectively true that women should wear that or that they mustn’t wear that.

    Cassandrawilson

    Wow, so much for building intelligent discourse, eh?

    You can have substance without vitriol, and I’ve read on this site. Hypothetical people in my head now? What a joke.

    Cutting people down as idiots, rather than address the issues serves what purpose now?

    So, to this point, what substance have you contributed to this thread? Apart from tone trolling?

    Jek
    If you care about fashion and stuff, and a feminist perspective thereof, I recommend going to Greta Christina’s Blog, who is a self-acclaimed feminist fashionista.
    Duh, I like my hair long, and also black (I I could only find a colour that sticks to them). Oh, and I like arts and crafts and butterflies. So what. I like science, too, but I don’t have to run around in a lab coat all day to prove that.

    cicely
    IIRC, the teeth troubles are exactly one of the points he made: Ther was hardly any cavities in the stone age. For childbirth the rule was, more or less, if you made through one, you probably made it through many. The reasoning was that, although the cure were not around by then, the reasons for the disease also weren’t.
    Which doesn’t mean that modern life isn’t 5 billion times better than the stone age, only that we have too bad an image of the stone age.
    I remember a documentary about an excarvation where one of the skeletons showed that the man had suffered several severe injuries at a young age, but had still survided to an estimated 60 although he was a cripple. The grave indicated that he had taken the role of the tribe’s craftsman, repairing and making weapons and stuff.

    Mattir

    My teenage son knits. He tells other teenage boys that his genitals are not connected to his knitting needles.

    Yeah, but wouldn’t that be kind of awesome?
    *pictures get out of my head*

    Mostly we grow out of it. But I still hate pink.

    Purely subjective but pink seems to be even more prominent for goods sold to girls now then when I grew up in the seventies.

    QFFT (quoted for fucking truth)
    Sad truth is: we’re in a big, big roll-back.
    As mentioned before on the ET: my daughter informs me that there are colours girls mustn’t wear. She’s four. She never heard such a thing from me.
    BTW, I kind of like shocking-raspberry-pink, but hate the rosy-cheek-pink, personally. I hate all pink politically ;)

    I want boys to able to play with dolls and ask for an EZ bake oven for their birthday and express their feelings without stupid morons worrying whether that will turn them gay.

    I want men to be able to cry about fucking deeply felt personal things without anybody thinking any worse of them. Why the hell are they allowed to cry over a lost football match but not because their parent died or their marriage broke up?

    Of course, it’s obvious from the list of ingredients that this beauty formula was only something for the well-to-do lady, not the everyday woman.

    It’s also obvious that she wouldn’t be doing well for long.

    Oh, and I’m simply ignoring the trolls at the moment

  360. says

    Giliell:

    It’s also obvious that she wouldn’t be doing well for long.

    I have a collection of the old ‘Enquire Within’ type books. There’s a lot of useful info in them, a lot of interesting recipes (once you experiment enough to translate to ovens which have set degrees) and such, but the medical and cosmetics sections can about give you a heart attack, along with the sheer amount of work women were expected to do every day. Christ, there’s a whole chapter on laundry (gotta get those men’s shirts just so) and another on ironing.

  361. John Morales says

    [meta]

    Giliell,

    I want men to be able to cry about fucking deeply felt personal things without anybody thinking any worse of them.

    We do, and it’s understood between us (in private), but it goes unspoken*.

    Officially, we (that’s the cultural ‘we’ macho men) don’t cry; we just sweat from our eyes.

    (Because we’re manly)

    * Oooh, I’m in trouble now.

  362. The Laughing Coyote says

    I don’t like people seeing me cry, but it’s more a matter of just not letting people catch me in a ‘weak’ moment, period, than any conscious attempt at being ‘manly’.

  363. The Laughing Coyote says

    Hmmm, now that I see it typed out, I’m not sure there’s much of a difference come to think of it.

  364. a_ray_in_dilbert_space says

    Laughing Coyote,
    What do you think acting “manly is about if it’s not about never being caught in a weak moment?

  365. julian says

    We do, and it’s understood between us (in private), but it goes unspoken*.

    Since when?!

    Damn, have I been missing out…

    I want men to be able to cry about fucking deeply felt personal things without anybody thinking any worse of them.

    I want the same for women. There’s to big a stigma attached to crying. It does not mean you are weak or unable to care for yourself. And it doesn’t mean you’re hormonal.

  366. Just_A_Lurker says

    I want the same for women. There’s to big a stigma attached to crying. It does not mean you are weak or unable to care for yourself. And it doesn’t mean you’re hormonal.

    I want that for BOTH men and women so there! I got ya both beat. Huzzah =)

    (well, I thought it was funny…)

  367. loki says

    I really hope it turns out sinfest is mocking radfems. The movement is rapidly developing its own version of Poe’s law.

  368. Just_A_Lurker says

    Personal attacks? How childish.

    Hey at least they didn’t call them ad hom attacks for once…

  369. Jefrir says

    Okay, I know I’m responding to trolls, but hopefully at least some of the lurkers will gain something, even if the trolls don’t.

    Indeterminate Me
    Speaking as a mostly-lurker, the commentariat here do not put me off, at least not with their vitriol. They do sometimes overwhelm me with their awesomeness, so I feel that any contribution I made wouldn’t be as good, but that’s mostly my own issue. Knowing that the people here really care about people like me, and are willing to take down those who don’t, actually makes me feel much safer and more welcome than any sort of false friendliness.
    And I’m pretty sure the idea that women are people, too, is not one we need to need “skeptical” about.

    misogynist
    I know this may be hard for you to understand, but:
    1. Not all women are in the West
    2. Not all the starving people in Africa are (male) children.
    Sometimes, the issues overlap.

  370. loki says

    “the commentariat here do not put me off, at least not with their vitriol.”

    I feel exactly the same! It’s just their ignorance, inability to perform even the vestige of an intelligent critique, complete absence of any logical faculties and their adorable but misguided radfem groupthink.

  371. says

    Sorry, folks, I can’t resist…

    It’s just their ignorance, inability to perform even the vestige of an intelligent critique, complete absence of any logical faculties and their adorable but misguided radfem groupthink.

    Personal attacks? How childish.

  372. loki says

    Add inability to recognise critiques to the list. Attacks contain aggression or malice. I’m just trying to help you out in case you actually talk like this in public.

  373. Beatrice, anormalement indécente says

    I’m just trying to help you out in case you actually talk like this in public.

    Do you talk like this in public? I’m not so sure random people who don’t give a fuck about your opinion care much about your helpful advice, here or in meatlife.

  374. says

    Ladies (and assorted Gentlemen), we should feel honoured.
    Good loki is here with helpful advice, pointed and elaborate criticism and all on top never-ending wit to teach our silly pink ladybrainz how to behave, talk, debate and make the right argument he deems us fit to make.

  375. loki says

    And swearing? I thought you guys had such lofty ideals. Mild mannered web users by day, noble and vigilant protectors of equality by night, no?

    Batman would never have said fuck I’m sure. Or Batgirl if you prefer.

  376. loki says

    “Good loki is here with helpful advice, pointed and elaborate criticism and all on top never-ending wit to teach our silly pink ladybrainz how to behave, talk, debate and make the right argument he deems us fit to make.”

    I am? How do you think I might go about that? Will I need to write this down?

  377. backfrommars says

    The Matrix is more about matriarchy anyway. If you dare to go up against that, prepare for real psychological torture and the chance of having a religious experience.

  378. John Morales says

    [OT]

    Nah, you’re trolling, loki.

    (Satire is humorous; you don’t even approach drollness)

  379. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel says

    Oh, “satirical”! How edgy and cool and original!

    I’m with John Morales on this: *yawn*

  380. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Trolling is so artless. I’m being satiricalstupid.

    Fixed that for you.

  381. loki says

    Lol. It’s nice that you guys all assume you’re in a sufficiently rarefied comedic atmosphere that you can make judgements about these things. At least it gives you some respite from coining pejorative terms for those nasty tricksy mensies.

    Have you got any new ones by the way? I am curious.

  382. Louis says

    Oh isn’t that sweet? A “satirist” by the name of “Loki”. My sides, they are splitting. No, really. A song for Loki.

    Keep on trollin’. You do it so well.*

    Louis

    *For given values of “well”.

  383. loki says

    Who’re you calling sweet? Stop objectifying me by my gender choices. I can be rugged and manly if I want!

  384. Louis says

    Giliell #463,

    {Puts on old T.O. hand hat with extra spangles}

    Actually, way back in the before time, during the Never Never when Pharyngula didn’t exist and P.Z. was posting on Talk Origins there was such a thing as a “Loki Troll”.

    Obviously nowadays you kids with your iPhones and new fangled MyFace or whatever don’t have time for the Old Ways of Usenet (And Many Were Its Trolls). Why no one worships the Invisible Pink Unicorn any more (May Her Hooves Never Get Dirty). FSM? Pah Johnny come lately.

    {Takes off old T.O. hat with extra spangles and resumes serious face}

    ;-)

    Louis

  385. Louis says

    You could try Loki. I have little doubt you could try. I really don’t know you well enough to know if you’d succeed. Wait…wait…are you coming onto me?

    Awww, I’m flattered, but no. Sorry.

    Louis

  386. Father Ogvorbis: It's Good for You. It Builds Character says

    Ogvorbis, stop apologizing, it’s not necessary!

    Sorry.

    I was just amazed at all the false logic he/she is using. The post about dichotomy is completely out of the context of my writings. You just took what I wrote, you put a label, completely altering the meaning and you made a post out of it. If that is what you understood from my posts, then you understood nothing at all.

    Well, it has been pointed out in many previous comments (not on this thread, though (and you would know this if you actually bothered to read in other threads)) that I am incapable of actually understanding written English. However, your authoritarian position, insisting that if one is a supporter of feminism, one cannot support starving children overseas, is a good enough example of dichotomous thinking that it could be used in a logic class.

    Now that I think about it, I think that perhaps I am a troll. I knew that nobody would really stop and read and understand what I wrote but I did it mainly to make you angry.

    There are some bright people here. Very intelligent. As a general rule, if the regulars are all misunderstanding your writings then you may want to reconsider the vocuabulary and phrasing you use.

    And spell my fucking ‘nym correctly! It is right above every comment I make.

    So yes, I guess I am a troll. But I was doing it for a greater cause! I wanted to have some fun and I did. Try not to eat any fatty foods while fighting for women’s rights! Go feminists go!

    Oh, hell. You really were trying to be a assholistical troll. You succeeded.

    It is unfortunate PZ has given his forums over to this tiny gang of libertarians, who prove that, without restraints, a minority will sieze power by force and deny all others an equal opportunity, in this case to express themselves and engage in discussion about PZ’s blog posts.

    Libertarians? You really need to actually read one of the libertarian threads ’round these parts.

    And no, this place is not an authoritarian monoculture. You really need to read other threads.

    And tone trolling is one of the most annoying derail tactics used by authoritarian assholes who cannot defend hir own thoughts and ideas and thus resort to whining about tone.

    Many here, including me, tend to react rather quickly when someone shows up and either knows what women think and thus all here are wrong, or points out that, until we solve every other problem on earth, women whould wait their turn. Both are very good at sending the thread off into vitriol and mysogynistic mansplaining which prevents discussion of the actual post. Just as is happening here.

    We do, and it’s understood between us (in private), but it goes unspoken*.

    You realize we now have to hunt you down, put a Coors Light in your hand, plunk you down in front of a Cowboy’s game, and teach you to eruct loudly, right?

    Trolling is so artless. I’m being satirical :-).

    No, you’re being assholical. Swift you ain’t.

    It’s nice that you guys all assume you’re in a sufficiently rarefied comedic atmosphere that you can make judgements about these things.

    All humour is subjective. Other than the joke about the troll and the dead porcupine, no joke transcends all cultures or, even within one culture, all situations. One-size-fit’s-allism is an excellent authoritarian tactic. Thank you for outing yourself.

    At least it gives you some respite from coining pejorative terms for those nasty tricksy mensies.

    Why would feminists and humanists want to coin a perjoritive phrase for menses? It is a natural part of being a female mammal.

    ——-

    I would like to thank misogynist, Indeterminate Me, Loki, MM, and Dumbass for being so up front about mysogyny and trolling (some were one, some were the other, some were both). It makes it so much easier and less confusing when and asshole declares hir assholicity early and up front. And for four out of five, the ‘nym even suggests trollism.

    A tip for future trolls, mysogynists and assholes — make it easy on old feeble brains like mine.

  387. loki says

    “You could try Loki. I have little doubt you could try. I really don’t know you well enough to know if you’d succeed. Wait…wait…are you coming onto me?

    Awww, I’m flattered, but no. Sorry.

    Louis”

    That’s just the kind of disgusting overt sexualisation that my gender studies group is trying to highlight among the sceptical community. You don’t even know if I’m xxy but already you’re talking about my pants. This is just appalling.

  388. Louis says

    I never mentioned your pants, nor did I make any comment about what sex you were. Tsk. You get a D-, must troll better. You can’t even manage accurate parody, let alone reach satire. Naughty, naughty troll.

    Suffice to say that all this flirting from you is not going to get you what you want, Loki. If you are male, female, intersex, transgendered, any permutation of the above, animal vegetable or mineral ther answer is and will remain “no”.

    You have to be at least this funny to get on this ride. And Loki, you are not that funny.

    Louis

  389. loki says

    “At least it gives you some respite from coining pejorative terms for those nasty tricksy mensies.

    Why would feminists and humanists want to coin a perjoritive phrase for menses? It is a natural part of being a female mammal.”

    You can’t read properly. I was making a highbrow literary joke that you didn’t understand.

    All my female friends that I have would have understood. They’re too intelligent to be feminist.

  390. Father Ogvorbis: It's Good for You. It Builds Character says

    Who’re you calling sweet? Stop objectifying me by my gender choices. I can be rugged and manly if I want!

    You can also be an troll if you want. The only question remaining is, are you a Trollisuchus assholicus or a Trollisuchus mysogynisticus. There are subtle differences between the two. A few more spews will aid in species identification.

  391. Louis says

    Is Lord of the Rings highbrow now? I mean, I like it, it’s a ripping yarn and I know Tolkien was a smart guy who did some smart things, but LotR highbrow? News to me. Satre it ain’t.

    Ah well, live and learn.

    Louis

  392. Louis says

    Father Ogvorbis,

    My money’s going on Loki being a hybrid of the two, thus likely infertile.

    [Freud voice]

    Zis leads me to sink zat ze infertility of zis troll is possibly accompanied by impotence of some kind. I vunder, does zis troll have sexual feelings regarding its muzzer?

    [/Freud voice]

    I feel Loki need to learn the lesson: Troll and ye shall be trolled. Bore and ye shall be ignored.

    Louis

  393. loki says

    “You have to be at least this funny to get on this ride. And Loki, you are not that funny.”

    And there you go again. Saying that men have to get up to a certain standard of humour before you’ll let them, to use your crass phrase, “get on the ride”. It might surprise you to know that some people out there *don’t* want to sleep with you, no matter how funny, intelligent or attractive we might happen to be.

    Also, I love Sartre. What’s your favourite of his philosophical theories?

  394. loki says

    “We now have enough information to confirm the species: Trollisuchus mysogynisticus. Thank you.

    Google mensies. That was considered immature when I was in 9th grade.”

    Actually I have lots of female friends. We hang out on campus and discuss the most relevant gender issues of the day. Like which men we think are most misogynistic.

    And you’re lucky I have a 9th grade reading level. I don’t think you do.

  395. Louis says

    Tsk tsk Loki, methinks thou dost protest too much. You’re getting boring now, try a different line of trollery. You know that you trying to come over all butch was a massive come on. Don’t deny it, you know you want me. It’s okay to have these feelings, just have them by yourself okay? The answer remains “no”.

    Big kiss.

    Louis

    P.S. I’m not sure a) which aspects of Satre’s work I *like* is meaningful or relevant, b) that I can be bothered to attempt serious discussion with an obvious troll, it’s really more fun to bait and mock you until I grow bored. You’re just not that significant. And I’m really not sure that c) you’re aware of who Satre’s long term non-monogamous partner was. After all I wonder if a discussion of (to pick one idea out of millions Satre’s and de Beauvoir’s agreement on the idea that oppression is in part caused by a powerful group (for example men/non-Jews) defining a less powerful group (for example women/Jews) as the other, is something you are interested in (given obvious trollery on your part) or even capable of. I doubt both your desire and capacity. Whatever subsequent dissection and extension of that idea has occurred, Satre certainly thought along those lines. I wonder if that is an idea you can grasp, based on your trolling thus far.

    P.P.S. You have women friends? Citation very much needed methinks! Not only that, comedy aside, since when did having women friends prevent you from being sexist? I have women friends, I have a wife and I’m still sexist. I grew up in a sexist culture, took in sexism with my mother’s milk, and live in a sexist culture. It’s impossible for me, or indeed anyone, not to be sexist. The trick is not to not be sexist, the trick is to realise you are sexist and work to not be sexist. Admit when you fuck up, try not to fuck up again and move on. Or is your tiny ego and massive lack of capacity for self reflection preventing you from becoming that much of an adult? If so. awwww, I’m sowwy.

    Damn, couldn’t resist mocking the troll. I’m a bad bad person. I shall have to be spanked.

  396. Sally Strange, OM says

    Trolls always come into feminism threads and claim that we’re not properly skeptical.

    Just because we mock and ridicule misogynists.

    Apparently we should be more skeptical of the premise that women are human beings and persons, with all the rights and responsibilities attendant thereto?

    We should be open to critically considering the premise that women are not human beings and persons, with all the rights and responsibilities attendant thereto? Perhaps we are supposed to be examining the evidence pointing to the general inferiority of women’s intelligence compared to that of men? Is there new evidence that shows that women really are subhumans? That would be a surprise, since sexist scientists have been searching, pretty much since the advent of the scientific method, for exactly this evidence.

    What is it that we’re supposed to be skeptical about, trollies? I’d really like to know.

  397. Sally Strange, OM says

    I shall have to be spanked.

    And so you shall. But loki shall not be permitted to watch.

  398. Mr. Fire says

    So since last night…

    misogynist outed himself as a bald-faced sociopath, and seemed eminently incapable of understanding why nobody else was.

    Dumbass provided plenty of angry assertions, and precisely zero substance to back up anything he said. Much like loki is currently doing, except that the latter fancies himself as a wit.

    mercurial muppet still doesn’t seem to have been arrested for masturbating in public, so I guess kudos to him for his restraint, or else his local police force needs to work on their vigilance.

    Indeterminate Me posted a derivative and generic screed that could almost literally be dumped in any thread anywhere in the universe and still be equally meaningless.

    loki now proudly bears the torch of substance-free, passive-aggressive swiping. And apparently understands the concept of ‘satire’ in the same way that Sarah Palin does. Heh.

  399. Bruce Gorton says

    My ideas are more or less constantly changing due to getting my ass kicked in arguments – which is to say not the most gentle of educations but one I am grateful for.

    In one of the arguments I got into with some random person when I first started learning about what feminism is she said this “Feminism isn’t about doing what women want instead of doing what men want, it is about doing what you want.”

    In other words, feminism is not about domination but liberation.

    This comic I think highlights that nicely – particularly with the panel on alienation.

  400. Louis says

    Mr Fire #483,

    Oh our troll Loki is well on its way to becoming a wit I would say. About halfway there at the moment.

    And it appears to have stalled.

    Tchoh. Trolls these days.

    Louis

  401. Mr. Fire says

    Oh our troll Loki is well on its way to becoming a wit I would say. About halfway there at the moment.

    :)

    Good to see you around again, Louis.

  402. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, liar and scoundrel says

    Mr Fire @483:
    Have I told you that I ♥ you lately?

  403. Mattir says

    I think Radfem Groupthink would be a great name for a band.

    Thanks to the folks who de-lurk to thank the regular commenters. It makes me feel like the time spent on Pharyngula is not purely selfish entertainment.

    Just-a-Lurker, I spend a lot of my meatspace time with believers of various stripes. It can be tiring, and Pharyngula helps a lot. If you’re in the mid-Atlantic area of North America, however, you might enjoy joining one of our Hordeling meetups at some point (a yahoo group – baltimore washington pharyngula fans). Transportation and other logistics can often be worked out. And this is short notice, but there’s a fairly large group of us meeting at the New York Sheep and Wool Festival in Rhinebeck, about an hour north of NYC – again, transportation and logistics (including a place to sleep) can be worked out. And lastly, there’s a facebook/diaspora group – email me at mattir 17 at gmail dot com if you’re interested.

  404. Dianne says

    Actually I have lots of female friends.

    Good FSM! Surely everyone who doesn’t live under a rock knows that “… some of my best friends are X” is the weakest excuse for making a racist/sexist/etc remark known to humanity?

  405. Dianne says

    Re scholarships and other resources being less available to men if they’re open to women too:

    1. If you’re a straight white Christian man and you’ve been turned down for a scholarship/grant/etc it’s because you (or your proposal) weren’t (wasn’t) good enough. There is no significant “reverse discrimination” in the world and even if there were, you failed to be good enough to get past that barrier. Everyone has to deal with barriers to work. Get over it and try again. Do that often enough and you’re likely to hit. Whine and complain about how awful it is that you didn’t get it and you’ll never get one. (Before you complain about how mean I am, replace “reverse discrimination” with “just didn’t understand my brilliance” and you get approximately the talk I give myself every time I’m feeling down about a grant I didn’t get. Keep applying and you’ll get one, eventually. Give up and you won’t.)

    2. Men don’t really lose by having women compete with them for grants and so on. Consider the following scenario: Man Y loses scholarship to woman X. She goes to college then to graduate school, ends up studying prostate cancer and being a major developer of a new prostate cancer drug which extends Y’s life by 20 years after he is diagnosed. Which one of them lost?

  406. The Ys says

    /lurk

    I find it amusing that people call this an echo chamber.

    I’m a n00b when it comes to posting here, but I’ve read a number of the comment threads over the past year. The overriding rule seems to be: if you can make a point and actually defend it, have at it. If you can’t defend your point…well, that’s your problem and here’s your porcupine.

    Thank you, “commentariat” – this thread has been informative and interesting, and I very much enjoyed the discussion on whether feminist women should or shouldn’t avoid certain things.

  407. Mattir says

    Actually I have lots of female friends.

    Ah, but those probably wouldn’t be female humans – those would be called women. Friendships with your pet hamster don’t count.

  408. Matt Penfold says

    Good FSM! Surely everyone who doesn’t live under a rock knows that “… some of my best friends are X” is the weakest excuse for making a racist/sexist/etc remark known to humanity?

    I would put it a close second to “I am not a racist/sexist/whatever but….”.

  409. Thomathy, now gayer and atheister says

    Dick the Damned

    As a family, we are working on returning to Canada after a very long absence, & one of its attractions is the more old fashioned nature of society, at the inter-personal level, there. Yes, my wife & daughter think that, too.

    Hahahahah! Hahahahaha! Oh, fuck. My co-workers are staring at me! Hahahah! God damnit, that’s funny.

  410. opposablethumbs, que le pouce enragé mette les pouces says

    It’s amazing how many trolls blunder in saying (sometimes almost in as many words) “I am smart, I am witty, I am eloquent, I am a fascinating and vibrant person with many many fascinating and vibrant friends, living a fascinating and vibrant life … unlike all of you [insert groupthink/echo chamber/etc. etc. references as appropriate]” – and expect to be met with anything other than derision or expressions of boredom.

    What none of them seem to have learned is that when you are trying to create a fictitious character – this intelligent, witty persona they want us to think is addressing us – the first rule of creative writing is show, don’t tell. And yet they seem convinced that squealing “I am smart” is the same as, you know, actually saying something intelligent and interesting. ::sigh::

    In other news, I think I just lured a pal to dip into Greta Christina’s post on anger – and they loved it. This puts a smile on my face.

  411. Ing says

    I think people are not being skeptical enough here on this issue.

    I mean, how can we rule out that men aren’t just intentionally being oppressive assholes and all secretly want to rape everyone? I think there’s plenty of anecdotal evidence and evo-psychology to support the view that all men just want to get their rocks off and keep women in mating harems like many other apes. It should be no surprise that men inherently will keep any woman in their vicinity, who they perceive as their property due to evolution, in their place and accounted for should he desire to mate with her at a later date. All I hear are people believing that most men are good natured and just swayed by some nebulous “Patriarchy” not even considering the “men are evil rape monkeys” hypothesis. How can you all be so dogmatic!?

  412. Mattir says

    @Ing – my rule is that the evil rape monkeys are the ones who obey their purported biological imperatives* (and almost always yammer incessantly about how their behavior is due to such biological imperatives). This guideline works equally well for Dick the Damned, misogynist, and (my favorite Anthony Weiner apologist) Ogi Ogas.

    *Biological imperative includes, for this rule, the various religious types who believe that the “base nature” of male humans makes them particularly susceptible to raping everything that looks vaguely like a receptacle for their penises.

  413. The Ys says

    As a side note, I live in Canada, and we have quite a few British ex-pats here. They’ve commented frequently on how much more relaxed people are on this side of the Pond.

    Same-sex couples (male or female) can walk down the sidewalk hand-in-hand and kiss each other, and no one bats an eye…so how are we more old-fashioned? They do believe in family here, but not the “old-fashioned” crap Dick means. Men and women both have the right to a year’s leave to care for their newborn children, same-sex marriage is legal, and women are well represented in many formerly male-centric career paths. Women are becoming well-represented in the government as well.

    Dick might be talking about a few rednecks out in Saskatchewan or Alberta, but he certainly is not describing all of Canada. Even the Atlantic provinces are pretty relaxed in comparison with descriptions of the UK.

    I won’t get started on Quebec. The Catholic Church doesn’t want to relax its chokehold on that province.

  414. Louis says

    Ing,

    BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAAHAHAA!

    Sorry, I just love the term “Rape Monkey”. New band name: Radfem Groupthink and the Rape Monkeys. Juxtaposition FTW!

    Louis

    P.S. These “mating harems” you speak of, erm, how likely am I to sneak one passed my wife? Purely for research purpose you understand. Yeah. Research. That’s it.