"Women's Issues" are "Side Issues?"

2004 posts / 0 new

Comments

The problem in prejudice begins with the power dogmas. How they are internalized on both sides is part of the problem, but those who have learned to deal with power from the weaker side know more about it than those who blindly exercise their 'privilege.' Until they know they are dealing with someone who sees them as an equal, they may exercise more caution than criticism. If we want to fix this stuff, we have to make the people in power want to get down to earth and welcome the criticism instead of complaining about being corrected and what they did not mean to do.

BINGO! My point was not that white people don't need to stand up against racism or that men shouldn't stand up against sexism, it is that all the isms have only divided us and there must be a unifying movement and not merely an "equality" movement, which is hard to gague and tends to further divide us into the groups, oppresser and opressed. Poor black people should be educated because they are human, not because their ancestors were denied education. It's not reparations to feed the hungry, it's their due as humans.

The revolution needs to be branded as an alternative to the isms, not a magnification of them. The hippies got it right on a lot of levels. There must, indeed, be a trade off for those who must willingly abandon privilege to find a way back to the community of humans. I sincerely think that's what we all want but, when pressured, people tend to revert to what is familiar. Patriarchy and anglo culture is that "safe place" for many Americans and is the misguided source of Tea Party politics, I believe.

They are white people who want to be human and want to be a society but blame government for the equality by force policies they feel divides people further from each other. What they miss is the divisions that pre-existed these laws and the current state of inequality that exists in spite of them. They miss the part that government CAN and must play in social transformation. They have no vision of peace, only bitterness and guilt.

That's where I differ from Kerry and the lot, for those who think we are philosophical allies, I'm not speaking from a place of defensiveness. I just want to achieve the goal. I don't think we can do that if there isn't some path to redemption for those on top and those on the bottom.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm

Nimble,i hope we learn some lessons from the French Revolution? With a modern day "Tale of Two Cities" with present USA,the 1% has expose itself,i have to do nothing. Zenzoe,the 1% keep sexism,etc.. "Alive" by education or non-education.If a tactic isn`t a thought,what is it? You can change thoughts by exposure,i don`t think so.You can ban sexism,etc.. by going after the reasons for its existence. The 99% control education, sexism,etc will be history in a generation."No more divide & conquer"! Where there is will,there is a way!

tayl44's picture
tayl44
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

The 99% did control education up until about 1980 —public education— and sexism still existed.

Quote Webster's Unabridged Dictionary:

Tactic: 1. a plan, procedure, or expedient for promoting a desired end or result.

Sexism: 1. attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles.

We're only "divided," if old stereotyping and toleration of sexist discrimination and damage exists in a cycle of denial. If I cannot complain about sexism, without the complaint being deflected and invalidated with a reference to the 1% as being the real culprit, and my complaint a part of our being "divided," then that's just another way of saying, "Shut up, Bitch, and be silent. Live with it!"

At least my experience here on this forum has not been as blatantly reactionary as depicted in this cartoon: http://www.gabbysplayhouse.com/?p=1444  Mostly the guys here get it.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Zenzoe,what make you believe the 99% control education till 1980? The plan of schools is to teach people to be in their place,if that`s not control,what is? Whose in control,the 99%? The republicans is your classic case of 1% denial of sexism.How can you think going after the root 1% is a attack on women?? Zenzoe,you`re paying too much attention to "garbage" it`s making you reactionary. To tell a women to shut up because she not talking about the root 1%,please,that`s beyond insanity.

tayl44's picture
tayl44
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Tayl, your mistake derives from Either-Or thinking. That is, you think it's an either-or choice— either you "go after the 'root,'" the 1%, or you concern yourself with "garbage," and those two, you say, are my only choices. You think I must choose one tactic only (go after the "root") or I will miss the solution.

In truth, we can walk and chew gum at the same time; we can work on the 1%, while also addressing sexism as it finds expression within the culture at large. That's another choice. (Either-or thinking is a logical fallacy, sometimes referred to as a false dilemma.)

I didn't say going after the "root" is an attack on women. I said your reaction to my complaint about the sexism within the culture is tantamount to telling me to live with it and shut up. You're telling me I can only "go after the root," that the "garbage" will fix itself after the 1% is fixed, an attitude that, in effect, wants to enable the sexism women face in the real world every day, the sexism and misogyny of ordinary men, not rich, wealthy men.

Yes, much of the ire directed toward women would be diminished if everybody could find jobs and there weren't such a gap between rich and poor. But in the meantime, before all that gets fixed, we have some work to do on each other. I don't have to wait until we have heaven on Earth to confront the problem. Wait? Now THAT would be insane.

Really, tayl, with all due respect, you need to learn to read and write. I'm sorry to say that to you, but it's my opinion. Take it or leave it.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

I suspect Tayl is not a native English speaker, but his ideas are usually sound. I may be off base here but I think he has badly articulated the idea that the big picture, of which sexism is only a part, is important. Zenzoe, of course, feels that sexism IS a big picture in and of itself.

I agree with both of them, in a way. Sexism is a reality for women in their day to day lives and they don't have to wonder which segment of the social strata is responsible for their misery when it's coming from their husband or their brother or their boss. On the other hand, the habit of marginalizing women is not a new one and until there is a change of philosophy on a larger scale than one woman's complaints can inspire, the protests of women will simply fulfill the expectation of emotional instability that their historical oppressors have created for them.

There are two fronts in this battle and they are equally important. It will be the heartfelt words of individual women to their fathers and brothers, who describe the hurtful nature of traditional, Abrahamic masculinity, that effects the larger change, ultimately. We must all learn to undo and redo our thought processes in life. We all must learn to transcend our evolutionary predecessors. If we don't we're stagnant, intellectually and spiritually.

People learn so much from their mothers, but culture's influence is powerful too. Especially, when it feeds their egos. I believe, however, that the global, incremental, loving acts of women will change the minds of men, over time. I hope so any way. They've changed mine.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm
Quote D_NATURED:

I suspect Tayl is not a native English speaker, but his ideas are usually sound. I may be off base here but I think he has badly articulated the idea that the big picture, of which sexism is only a part, is important. Zenzoe, of course, feels that sexism IS a big picture in and of itself.

Respectfully, to D_NATURED and Tayl, I think D_NATURED may have missed a few threads in this crazy quilt. Given tayl's poor typing, composition and grammar skills, it's very easy to misinterpret what he has written. In fact, as I've been able to gather over time, he does not see the sexism women face as an important issue at all; on the contrary, he thinks it IS a side issue, one not only not worth discussing, but one that proves, if we do discuss it, that the 1% only want to distract and divide us. Additionally, he trivializes the issue of on-the-ground misogyny, by telling me to have a sense of humor; misogynistic rap music, for example, does no damage, according to tayl. It's something to laugh about.

Also, I never said the "big picture" isn't important too. Both that and everyday, ordinary sexism can be addressed at the same time. That's what I said here: "In truth, we can walk and chew gum at the same time; we can work on the 1%, while also addressing sexism as it finds expression within the culture at large." To address interpersonal sexism, or the sexism produced commercially by individuals, is not to ignore the "big picture."

Tayl talks about sexism as a "tactic" of the 1%. I say that's a tactic in itself: Whenever one of society's problems gets attention from the very people who suffer from the problem, those who benefit from the problem accuse the other side of using the issue as a way to "divide and conquer." If we complain about the disappearance of the middle class, we're waging a "class war." If blacks complain about some racist event, they're pulling the "race card." And it's the same with sexism: We've supposedly been manipulated by the 1%, acquiescing to "divide and conquer." It's just a way to shut us up. A manipulation in itself.

I appreciate your coming to tayl's defense, however, D_NATURED. That's in your nature, it seems to me, to have compassion for people. My criticism of Tayl's writing probably seems really mean. And I'm sorry to have lost my compassion for his communications; but I hope he knows I haven't lost compassion for him. I just think he's lost it for women and our reality, and, whether he states his position well or badly, for me it still spells misogyny.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

I probably shouldn't bring this up without having the facts on hand, but I wanted to mention a certain historical occurance which has stuck in my mind for a while. I think it was the Cherokee or Iroquois, but I'm not at all sure. The men had decision making power over some things and the women others. It was the women's decision to make a treaty with the whites, with disasterous results. Would the men have made a better decision? Doubful. I think many pre-technological societies had/have not only a division of labor but an equitable if not equal division of authority of types of decisions.

I don't at all subscribe to the pedestal notion that some people put native americans on, but I think the men would not have been able to comprehend the "diplomatic" notions behind the treaty. There may have been situations which could be seen as roughly analogous where native americans fighting each other, and it would be naive to think that all of these types of conflicts were resolved with lacrosse matches or what not. But I think the native americans were unprepared for the influx of Europeans, and the women saw a great advantage in striking a deal which would bring them iron cooking pots, axes, etc.

Anyway, I'm working up to a point so bear with me. I went to an event with a speaker from Sierra Leone, a nurse-midwife who runs a clinic there. The group putting on the event has largely managed to ostracize itself from the rest of the Oakland community with its extreme rhetorical stance. However, in actual application of thought and practice it exhibits the utmost refinement. One aspect which came up which may not rise to the level of "contradiction" (a term many throw around much too liberally) is that while the men "went into the bush" the women would do woman stuff oriented towards getting through the day while many of them are pregnant. This is "traditional" although the Party also takes a typically Marxist line towards culture from a modernist stance.

Anyway, the reason I bring both things up is that if we anti-imperialist progressives are successful in facilitating a neo-Taoist recognition or respect for the Web of Life(TM) {<<WTF with these HTML tags?} which is post-systematically aware then we can smoke the peace pipe while knowing that men can be manly by hunting wild boar and stuff. Hunter-gatherer societies did not emphasize competition between men and actually because the role of hunter was part of the ecosystem it included reverence for jaguars and stuff which could seriously f*** you up. But if that happened the other dudes would like heal you with salves and herbs and stuff.

But this sh** has to be done right. I mean, imagine someone showing up at your door all like smiling and sh** and being like "Hi, I'm from the UN and we're here to recognize your special role in the sub-quantum field. Sign here please." Know what I'm sayin'?

nimblecivet's picture
nimblecivet
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

I'm holding a gun to your head and making you read this article: http://thiscantbehappening.net/node/1133

...

It’s quite revealing that while profound historical discussions during the summit focused on reforming the Drug War, lifting the outmoded Cold War embargo of Cuba and violent abuses of trade unionists, that the really big story to come out of Cartagena is that US Secret Service agents and military security officers purchased sex.

And who is thumping the scandal? None other than Rep. Peter King, chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security and the greatest War On Terror whore in America.

...

The weak link in all this apparently was an inebriated Secret Service agent who didn’t speak enough Spanish to understand the perfectly legal business contract he was engaging in. The 24-year-old woman offering her services to this gentleman is very beautiful, and she emphasized to The New York Times that she was not a prostitute or a whore; she was an “escort.” The marketing line for such expensive escorts is that a client is paying for class and, most important, discretion.

There would have been no scandal if the man had paid his bill. Failure to fulfill a legal contract amounts to theft of services. Thus the wronged woman went to the police, and the police, in turn, did their duty and took up the woman’s case against the US agent. Sex had nothing to do with the scandal; it was a contractual arrangement gone awry. The man might as well have been refusing to pay for a haircut.

...

I’m now, of course, thoroughly ashamed of myself and mention the experience here only to shed a little light on the notion of Americans buying sex in foreign lands. My shame is intricately tied to the war and the fact I was paying a pittance for these girls' services; they were there only because they were poor and because we were wrecking their country. It wasn’t the prostitution that was shameful or dishonorable; it was the wrecking, the exploitation and the larger, collective shame for the war itself and the massive amounts of killing and destruction it entailed against the Vietnamese people.

This kind of misplaced dishonor is part of the “core values” cited in the Secret Service scandal. Something is wrong when individual sexual peccadilloes become a more serious matter for public shame than collective actions like a disastrous and violent 40-year Drug War, a misguided 50-year embargo of a tiny island nation and encouraging profit-making business while ignoring violence against working people. Add in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the new doctrine of special operations assassination teams and lethal drones and the “scandal” of a few agents paying for consensual sex becomes laughable. Our wars are the real scandal.

...

My pulling of quotes does not do the article justice, you should read it its not long. Notice the peace sign on the woman's bra.

Also, we should be careful that "women's issues" do not become some list of things that are the only things women are supposed to care about and that we "also" pay attention to. The feminist notion of equality is legitimate but also other forms of feminism which critique things as a whole are legitimate. Without the latter, feminism becomes solely institutionalization of recognizing women's particular needs, ie in healthcare, childcare, etc. While those are the bedrock issues of feminism, also it is important to note that the overall social and economic system and culture is affected by the full participation of women in its disourse.

nimblecivet's picture
nimblecivet
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying, NC, but you seem to be coming at it over a non-linear path, which I enjoy, even if I don't get it all. I do agree with, "Anyway, the reason I bring both things up is that if we anti-imperialist progressives are successful in facilitating a neo-Taoist recognition or respect for the Web of Life(TM) which is post-systematically aware then we can smoke the peace pipe while knowing that men can be manly by hunting wild boar and stuff." I would say, in agreement, there's nothing wrong with the manly stuff manly men want to do, in general (I take "hunting wild boar" as a metaphor), while we're on our way toward a more humane world.

I did want to add that all the worrying that goes on on the part of progressives over divisions between us seems rather silly to me. The woman's suffrage movement took place between very "big picture" events, the Civil War and World War I, and within the movement the various factions engaged in much dissension and conflict. Progress makes messes sometimes. It's all part of the process. Of course, within that movement, you probably had folks exclaiming they were being manipulated by somebody or other, so shut up. It's always, "shut up and sit still, you uppity thing you!"

Also, "all politics is personal," so please don't anybody ask me to ignore personal issues in favor of abstract issues. The 1% may be the cause of every known evil on the planet, but they're not in my face, out loud, here where I live.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/03/23/849499/--All-politics-is-personal-

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Okay, you can put the gun down, now. I read the article. ;-)

In general, I agree with your second paragraph there, NC. But did I say we shouldn't care about any other issues? I don't think so.

While I appreciate the point the article makes, I think we might want to distinguish between the media's exploitation of scandals to reach wider audiences —the profit motive (sex sells)— from any stories of sexism and misogyny in culture that might be in need of discussion. It's not my fault that the news media picked up on this story; it's not the fault of feminism, either. I, for one, would much prefer that the media would investigate, expose and provide full coverage of the drug war's failures, of our imperialism, and those issues your article brought up, rather than fiddle with the story of Secret Service boys' fiddling with "escorts." Absolutely. This is not to say, however, that the politics and social issues surrounding prostitution, here and everywhere our imperial reach goes, do not deserve a look. To my mind, it's all interrelated.

Okay, the funny part is the picture of the Secret Service guys. Don't they know they look like walking clichés?

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Good link with a good take on "personal".

Quote nimblecivet:

The group putting on the event has largely managed to ostracize itself from the rest of the Oakland community with its extreme rhetorical stance.

That's unfair and I take it back. Its not a meaningful criticism.

I do think meat is going to have to be part of a sustainable diet ironically. I don't think the population is sustainable without mass agriculture but mass agriculture cannot provide the full array of a healthy diet. Animal "farming" however is especially unsustainable and the ecological viability of the biosphere depends on keeping large portions of it wild. That doesn't mean that hunting can't occur there to provide meat. On the other hand if you've seen "Apocolypse Now" you'll remember the part where the villagers (this is something that is an actual traditional practice) surround a pig while ringing bells and chimes etc. This noise distracts the pig and gives the man who slaughters the pig the opportunity to land a killing blow so the pig does not suffer. I think SE Asian cultures have long blended the masculine and feminine energies within their culture and that's one example. Everyone in the village participates and shares the meat. Of course, that's not hunting though, that's killing a pig that probably has been fed scraps etc.

nimblecivet's picture
nimblecivet
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Had you seen this one, NC, on environmental vegetarianism? I posted the link on another thread yesterday, or the day before. If you live in cold country, I suppose hunting or eating farm animals might be unavoidable, but otherwise, I don't see the necessity of meat. But that's just me.

I'm on a Netflix binge this afternoon, speaking of distractions— the entire 2-disk series of The Hour, which, coincidentally, revolves around BBC network news in the mid-1950's. It starts out right away with some relevant dialogue by one of the main characters, a reporter who wraps up one night's news program with this little speech to his colleagues: "And thanking you, gentlemen and Alice, for another fascinating evening. May you go home once again, happy in the knowledge that we have delivered important news of the day with the same brisk banality as a debutante coming out at Mayfair...one, two, three..." Then later, to his female colleague, "We are calcifying in television news. Hell, martial law may have been imposed in Poland, but we've got footage of Prince Rainier on honeymoon with his showgirl. And hallelujah, they're dining with the Queen."

Anyway, the plot has thickened since then, and I must return...

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Zenzoe,i see you using Twilight Zone logic and i see progress,life is too short so i`m moving forward. I see nobody coming up with a better idea than going after the root of sexism,etc..? I see nobody having a problem with the 99% control of education,that racism,etc.. would be history in a generation?The next question would be,if the 1% control of education can accept anti-bully classes,why not anti-racism/ sexism/etc... classes?? D_NATURED,thanks for trying to understand my posts,you can understand them better if you view my posts as "where the beef short hand of getting right to points/issues.I don`t have time or energy to explain things in a intellectual way.Those that want intellectual explanations,don`t read my posts.

tayl44's picture
tayl44
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Tayl44, edited,:

Zenzoe, I see you using Twilight Zone logic; and I prefer to progress. Life is too short, so I`m moving forward.

I see nobody coming up with a better idea than going after the root of sexism, etc. I see nobody having a problem with the 99% control of education, that racism, etc., would be history in a generation. The next question would be, if the 1% control of education can accept anti-bully classes, why not anti-racism/ sexism/etc. classes??

D_NATURED, thanks for trying to understand my posts. You can understand them better if you view my posts as "where’s the beef” shorthand of getting right to the point. I don`t have time or energy to explain things in a intellectual way. Those that want intellectual explanations, don`t read my posts.

Please forgive me, tayl, but it took me maybe three minutes to put your comment at #315 in coherent, relatively literate form. Granted, it was rude and snobby of me to do that to your text, but I did it for the sake of communication. You assumed I wanted you to write in an “intellectual way,” which is not the case. Instead, I hoped you would just write your own ideas in a literate way, so that others could understand you.

Of course, it’s your right to violate the basic rules of written communication, if you wish to. However, it is not your right to misinterpret my position on our subject. For example, I’d like to know which part of the following sentence of mine didn’t you understand? “...we can work on the 1%, while also addressing sexism as it finds expression within the culture at large.” What part of that sentence claims that the problem of the ruling elite should not be addressed?

All I have been saying all along is that sexism and racism are important issues that should not be treated as “side issues,” in favor of addressing the systemic problem of the ruling elite, or in favor of other supposedly bigger subjects. And all along you have disagreed, insisting that we needed to focus on the “1%,” as the “root” of all problems, instead of “looking backwards” at the supposed lesser issues of interpersonal and commercial sexism.

But now you seem to reverse yourself, suggesting a solution that would very definitely treat sexism and racism as important issues, by saying, “...why not anti-racism/ sexism/etc. classes?” So yes, why not? This is exactly the sort of thing I would support.

Anyway, I highly recommend you get ahold of the BBC series I mentioned earlier, The Hour, if you haven’t already seen it. I think you will find it supports your ideas about the ruling elite. That is, it does a great job of illustrating the 1%’s sinister methods of pressuring the media and undermining democracy. It also counteracts the stigmatized notion of conspiracy; at couple of points in the script, for example, we hear this: “A conspiracy is nothing but a secret agreement of a number of men for the pursuance of policies which they dare not admit in public.

The series also gives a true look at the progress of women at the time, in 1956. For example, the main female character gets promoted to producer of a new-concept news program, but, as it turns out, she discovers that her boss put her there because he expected she would be easier “to steer,” i.e., manage away from sensitive subjects that would embarrass the government and ruling elite. Little did they know, she had a mind and will of her own. ;-)

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Zenzoe":I appreciate your coming to tayl's defense, however, D_NATURED. That's in your nature, it seems to me, to have compassion for people. My criticism of Tayl's writing probably seems really mean. And I'm sorry to have lost my compassion for his communications; but I hope he knows I haven't lost compassion for him. I just think he's lost it for women and our reality, and, whether he states his position well or badly, for me it still spells misogyny.

I totally see your point, Zenzoe, and I didn't mean for my last post to come off as too apologetic for Tayl. And your criticism isn't mean. If someone is not clear in their writing down an original idea, at any intellectual level, it might as well be gibberish.

Looking back at my last post, I also see that I didn't really grasp the breadth of the divide. When Tayl was dismissive of women's rights as a subset to his own pet oppressor, the 1%, you rightfully took offense, and so I thus retract my Kumbaya shit. Here's why you were right:

You are right because all humans are equal and issues that effect women specifically are still human issues. They are deserving every bit of the social attention that conspiracy theories about a fiscal elite would enjoy, even though the latter would also have a great effect on our society, like rape and domestic violence have been proven to have. Women's rights issues are not just one of the symptoms of an oppressive financial elite, though, that's a cop out. The oppression of women exists outside the walls of the counting houses and has existed longer than banking. And bringing down the powerful will not make powerless men any kinder to women. There is a pre-existing religious and cultural bias against women that the 1% profit from but didn't create.

The path to women's rights must include changing the 1% but they go where the money goes. When the people no longer desire to see others' daughters and sisters betrayed as a weaker and more subjugate sepecies, defined by sex and procreation to the exclusion of their individual virtues, the change will have happened. We're still waiting.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm

Zenzoe,whatever makes you happy,like i say,you or anybody don`t have to read it.Thanks but no thanks to the BBC series and conspiracy theories,i follow "solutions". Moving beyond the twilight zone stuff,you think sexism/racism classes will be accepted in the schools? D_NATURE,i see you made a correction,i will make one too,"people see what they want to see" and you`re blind to my points.I stand by all my posts!

tayl44's picture
tayl44
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Thanks so very much for the validation, D_NATURED. I'm so rarely told I'm right that it almost comes as a shock. ;-)

Anyway, I'm grateful for your putting your thoughts together on behalf of women's rights, as you often do, and for stating so well what doesn't always come easy for me to say. Sometimes it feels like I'm hollering into a fierce gale, and so your words comfort and encourage me... possibly to the horror of some? (Ha!)

I think Tayl —or Jesse— and I are not as far apart as it may seem. And the more we discuss, the fewer misunderstandings will exist, until agreement can be reached. This, to my mind, is how progress and solidarity works. We don't arrive at consensus by demanding silence or conformity. We have to work out the kinks, yes?

Oops, when I wrote the above, I hadn't seen Tayl's last comment at #318. He must have posted it when I was composing mine. Guess he's unhappy with me, and that's okay. Patience.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote tayl44:

Zenzoe,whatever makes you happy,like i say,you or anybody don`t have to read it.Thanks but no thanks to the BBC series and conspiracy theories,i follow "solutions". Moving beyond the twilight zone stuff,you think sexism/racism classes will be accepted in the schools? D_NATURE,i see you made a correction,i will make one too,"people see what they want to see" and you`re blind to my points.I stand by all my posts!

I'm not blind to your points, I just realized they are slightly off base. The reason to stand up against the tyranny of the one percent is because they marginalize humans as nothing but beasts of burden. They don't care about our health and welfare, just about how much they can make from our toil. They actively seek to have our rights as humans made an afterthought to their main goal of profit and power. If, conversely, our main goal is to support human rights and to stand up to unreasonable, tyrannical power, by simply insisting on equality and physical autonomy for women we can address a human rights issue that effects fully half the world population in one fell swoop.

I don't know of another issue with such far reaching consequences, both historically and in a modern sense, as women's rights. The way they are treated around the world is not acceptable and their oppression does not come solely from the one percent but the tactics used to control them are no different. Their voices are drowned out and, when they do speak, they are accused of whining or met with violence. Freed slaves could vote before women could in this country. Why has their voice been so historically unimportant that they were less than slaves?

We should be fighting for human rights against whomever denies them to others, whether they be rich or poor is irrelevant. Women are a very large group of people who get an inordinate amount of crap thrown at them. If we're really looking at the big picture, Tayl, there's a gorilla in the room and it's wearing an apron.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm

Zenzoe,i know where you`re coming from and your arguement.you`re still #2 in my book,even with the twilight zone stuff.(points to make points) D_NATURED,the gorilla in the room is, to not realize the root of sexism,racism,etc... I`m tied of saying no/protesting problems that keep coming back! To be off base on going after the root cause,may God forgive me.

tayl44's picture
tayl44
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

All I'm saying, Tayl, is that after further thought, I realized that the largest group of consistently oppressed persons are women. They are victimized more than any other group and should rightfully be the front line in the international struggle for human rights. Racism, as bad as it is, is minor compared to what women have struggled with.

When we talk about the root of the problem being the one percent, we discount our own offenses that we, as men in the 99%, are also guilty of. We can't just blame the top for this one, Tayl, as your fathers and mine are as much to blame as the system of finance that we have.

When we dismiss the issue of sexism as a check in the mail to the larger issue of oppression by the rich, we are ignoring the forest fire while we fight against lightning. There will always be someone who has more than the average person. That does not excuse the way we treat our female counterparts in the mean time.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm

Tayl, when you criticize my opinion as being from the "twilight zone," I don't say, "You're being distracted from the real twilight zone, the global elite." I don't say that, because it's an issue you have with me and my opinion, directly. It has nothing to do with the 1%. I've said something you don't agree with, and you want to push back with a metaphor that represents your disdain for my attitude.

By the same token, when I criticize misogynistic rap music, which is an issue I have with on-the-ground sexism that negatively affects women and girls, don't tell me I should go to "the root." Misogynistic rap music, as an example of commonplace sexism in culture, in itself is the root and the weed of the subjugation of a young generation of girls, and that weed is planted in a ground of fear and loathing of the feminine. Without pushback against sexism, especially on the part of grown-up men, that ground of fear and loathing will be further seeded, until an entire culture of male supremacy makes life literally impossible for women.

Don't take my word for it, though. Here's what Cornel West, who is no enemy of rap, had to say:

Quote Cornel West:

Never Forget is not a direct critique of hip-hop, but West says rappers have to be responsible for what they say and portray.

"We know that misogyny is shot through the culture," West says. "It's in country. It's in rhythm and blues. It's in the White House, and it's on Wall Street. So you can't just single out the hip-hop artists and have them bearing the burden for the whole culture. On the other hand, Snoop Dogg is just as accountable as anybody else."

West encourages rappers to be more thoughtful in their rhymes.

"We need to respectfully challenge them on the issues of misogyny and homophobia," he says. "You can hear that on the album, too. Quit bashing gay brothers and lesbian sisters. Quit this domestic violence." http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/news/2007-08-27-cornel-west-album_N.htm

Cornel West provides leadership there—grown-up, enlightened leadership. In a sense, your concern about the 1% is a concern about leadership. You essentially wish for a change of leadership, without taking any responsibility for leadership yourself. You complain that the 1% drives and controls school cirricula, for example, but it doesn't occur to you that leadership needs to take place on the local level these days, that, because we've essentially been abandoned by the 1%, there's a new and growing responsibility for parents and concerned citizens to assume new roles of leadership on the ground. For example, rather than taking the position that misogynistic rappers, whether white or black, are just being funny; rather than letting them off the hook by granting them an entitlement of youth to dominate and denigrate women and girls, how about assuming a position of responsible, cool, adult leadership—that is, get out there and lead them toward responsible manhood.

How did they come to believe that ignorance is cool? Only where positive, responsible leadership abandoned them could that happen.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Zenzoe and D_NATURED,where in my posts do i support and dismiss sexism? Zenzoe,i use the twilight zone when you reverse logic,but unlike the opposition,you try to be positive.Can we agree,good education can eliminate sexism,racism,etc.. ?? With 1% control of education,how can we be efective in including something that will help in eliminating their power? Why would they accept bullying and not sexism? A question that needs a answer!

tayl44's picture
tayl44
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote tayl44:

Zenzoe and D_NATURED,where in my posts do i support and dismiss sexism? Zenzoe,i use the twilight zone when you reverse logic,but unlike the opposition,you try to be positive.Can we agree,good education can eliminate sexism,racism,etc.. ?? With 1% control of education,how can we be efective in including something that will help in eliminating their power? Why would they accept bullying and not sexism? A question that needs a answer!

Good education can do a lot. That doesn't mean a lack of education is the whole problem or that the one percent controls us completely by controlling the education system.

You're not going to re-write the bible or Koran by disempowering the one percent. You're not going to make men naturally less aggressive or women more aggressive by disempowering the one percent. There are many layers and challenges, personal and societal, to this issue that have nothing to do with money, is all I'm saying.

You didn't dismiss sexism, Tayl, except as a lesser part of a greater whole. It is actually the greatest part of the whole, which is why I changed direction. The totallity of human rights violations weigh on the feminine more than the masculine. And, I think it's been that way for a loooooong time.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm
Quote tayl44:

Zenzoe and D_NATURED,where in my posts do i support and dismiss sexism?

That, apparently in response to my comment at #323, where I quoted Cornel West, showing his agreement with the point I've been trying to make to Tayl for the last three pages here (and West's disagreement with Tayl on misogynistic rap), Tayl now tries to backtrack and pretend he hasn't been supporting and dismissing the sexism of misogynistic rap ever since the subject came up?!

For the record:

Quote The Book According to Tayl:

Zenzoe,the video is a "mating song" in today's world.Young people use words that was offensive to us,in the reverse,like "he is my dog",mean he is my best friend.I could imagine the ladies could come up with a video even more "dumbass".I think it`s progress? That`s what make it funny.

We had the so-call sex revolution,this generation is having a revolution againt the whole mating process,the definition of love is changing...

When we older hear rap and etc..,we shouldn`t take that stuff to heart...

Anything about Men angry with women on anything is divide & conquer evil and not telling it like it is. http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2012/03/womens-issues-are-side-issues?...

But the main point i`m trying to make(i think you already agree) is that sexism,racism and etc.. is a tactic of the 1% in keeping power by "divide & conquer".How do we counter this tactic?By exposing the evil of the tactic and strength of the truth.Remember "tough love"? People can be negative and still care for a person. We want a better world,we need to go to the root of sexism,etc..power respect power.

And "YES" the 1% do own sexism,racism,etc.who control education,the 1% or 99% ?? Nobody i know is born with racism,you want get rid of a problem,you go to the "root" and that is the 1%. You can cure what you despise by "laughing at it"! For those who cannot laugh,the hope is "one day they will"!

http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2012/03/womens-issues-are-side-issues?...

http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2012/03/womens-issues-are-side-issues?...

There was more, but I got tired of looking.

C'mon, Tayl, why aren't you now saying Cornel West is using "twilight zone logic?" His quote basically says what I've been saying. So, why can't you just own up to your having dismissed misogynistic, sexist rap as something to laugh off, in favor of going after the "real" problem, the 1%? What happened to sexism as a "tactic," and "divide and conquer?"

You don't see Cornel West taking the position that we should just laugh off the misogyny of rap, or that rapppers are just rebelling in a new way. He doesn't do that, because he knows better. He knows it's just plain sexist crap, and to laugh it off would be to support and enable it.

Well, I'm glad if you begin to see that education can be helpful, and glad if you no longer want to trivialize the sexism within rap music, but I wish you would be honest about what you've been saying.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Just a quick thought...

Humans are highly motivated by fear. Look at Republican rhetoric and you'll see it's true. Perhaps, the reason women have been so much less respected in human culture is that they're too predictably nice. Almost every one, male and female, has the image of the feminine as a comforting and caring force, soft compassionate and gentile. Men, on the other hand, get to be the protector, which is none of those things. Men have had to be "respectful" of each other because, historically, we are unpredictable and violent. So much of chivalry was about avoiding offense. Why? Cause, if you say the wrong thing to the wrong guy you might get a punch in the mouth or worse. Women, however, are known to be yeilding and compromising, except when children are the victims.

So, women need to intermittently, and without warning, pop a few guys in the mouth, just so they know what they're dealing with. Namely, woman 2.0, the new breed of bad-asses with a double X chromosome and a hair trigger. Then, perhaps when enough men have suffered fat lips and are as wary of women as they are of men, there will be a change in male attitudes that will result in a greater societal change.

Maybe, ladies, violence IS the answer. What think?

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm
Quote D_NATURED:

Just a quick thought...

Humans are highly motivated by fear. Look at Republican rhetoric and you'll see it's true. Perhaps, the reason women have been so much less respected in human culture is that they're too predictably nice. Almost every one, male and female, has the image of the feminine as a comforting and caring force, soft compassionate and gentile. Men, on the other hand, get to be the protector, which is none of those things. Men have had to be "respectful" of each other because, historically, we are unpredictable and violent. So much of chivalry was about avoiding offense. Why? Cause, if you say the wrong thing to the wrong guy you might get a punch in the mouth or worse. Women, however, are known to be yeilding and compromising, except when children are the victims.

So, women need to intermittently, and without warning, pop a few guys in the mouth, just so they know what they're dealing with. Namely, woman 2.0, the new breed of bad-asses with a double X chromosome and a hair trigger. Then, perhaps when enough men have suffered fat lips and are as wary of women as they are of men, there will be a change in male attitudes that will result in a greater societal change.

Maybe, ladies, violence IS the answer. What think?

Methinks the fellow doth have a point. I've thought the same thing myself. Sometimes, when I happen onto some 20/20 or 48 Hours story about some woman who tolerated an abusive husband or boyfriend for years and years, I'm shouting at the TV, saying, "What's the matter with you, Woman?! Sheesh! Why put up with that, even from the first time he tried it?!" So, yeah, women are way too nice, way too easily manipulated, way too forgiving, way too needy and unwilling to stick up for themselves.

I don't know the answer for it, but it's a complicated picture, some of it cultural, some of it hormonal, some of it biological, some of it personality, and more. I do think good sex can act like a drug on the mind, as can falling in love, where one's good judgment falls by the wayside. You get stupid, no? I suppose the only antidote would be education, including self-defense classes, which might include information about what is love and respect and what is not.

I don't know why I've never been attacked or abused by a man, but I think it may be because I too have a hair-trigger response to disrespect, and no abuser has ever had a chance to get close enough to do damage. It's like, "Hello? You still want to see me, after what you did last week?!." Click. Oye. The nerve of some people...

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

D_NATURED,how do focus on root cause of sexism,dismiss sexism?? You mention in #327,women should out man, men.I already made a point to Zenzoe about women suicide bombers being control or abuse by men.You say education is important,but you have no ideas that will prove better.Zenzoe,you should be tied of looking,i stand by my posts,there is nothing there that show i support sexism.A women selling her body to man,does that make him a sexists? Mr.West don`t reverse logic, talking about sexism,he don`t need to.Yet,some bad rap still sell,why? The basic question is being ignore,why is sexism/racism/etc. not being educated "out of culture" ??? Who benefits??? Do anybody care???

tayl44's picture
tayl44
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Arragh!

If you don't read and hear what's being said, tayl, communications fail. Communication requires listening and study. I don't have a sense that you hear me or comprehend what I write. You don't get it. You will never get it.

But maybe I'm wrong. Tell me, what do you think my position is? Could you explain my position, other than saying it's "twilight zone," or referring to yourself? Cornell West said what I've been saying very well. Now you say he's logical, but I am not. How does my position differ from his? Can you explain that?

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote tayl44:

D_NATURED,how do focus on root cause of sexism,dismiss sexism?? You mention in #327,women should out man, men.I already made a point to Zenzoe about women suicide bombers being control or abuse by men.

That was tongue in cheek. The answer is not for women to be manly but for MEN to be manly and stop feeling so threatened by women and women's rights, as if women's rights diminish men's rights.

You say education is important,but you have no ideas that will prove better.

With all due respect, saying education will fix everything but the whole system is controlled/corrupted by the one percent is not a plan. The truth is, Tayl, neither of us know the magic bullet to end sexism. I don't think there is one. Human evolution, intellectual, spiritual or otherwise, is not by human design. People change slowly (by human standards) and there isn't much we can do on the macro level. The greater change starts with our own attitudes. I'm trying to start now.

Zenzoe,you should be tied of looking,i stand by my posts,there is nothing there that show i support sexism.A women selling her body to man,does that make him a sexists? Mr.West don`t reverse logic, talking about sexism,he don`t need to.Yet,some bad rap still sell,why? The basic question is being ignore,why is sexism/racism/etc. not being educated "out of culture" ??? Who benefits??? Do anybody care???

You can't educate things out of people, you can only introduce new ideas and hope they are accepted. There are many existing truths that are widely known of but not accepted by people for reasons of their own. If the thing you're learning conflicts with your experiences or your pre-existing religious beliefs or your learned prejudices, the knowledge is useless.

I don't think you "support" sexism, Tayl. You're smarter than that. All I observed is that you have reduced it to just another symptom of plutocracy. I think that idea ignores a lot of historical precedent for female oppression that is not dependent upon a monetary class system. Even rich women couldn't vote in the eighteen hundreds.

The thing about the isms is that for those who don't suffer them daily, it's hard to prioritize. I'm a white man in America so racism and sexism are not things I personally have to deal with. So, being others' problems, it's easy to say they are equal. Sexism isn't my problem and racism isn't my problem, so everything that isn't my problem is equally someone else's problem. That's not true, though.

If I don't defend women and people of color from the policies of people that look like me, I AM one of them by default. I can't say the single ism I deal with, class-ism, is the main problem because it effects me too. If I were a woman, there would be a bunch of shit I'd be concerned about more than whether or not the one percent wants to control me as a poor person. I'd be wondering why my uterus is a topic of public debate and why and whether that's because I'm not well represented by the political class. I'd be asking why I don't earn as much as my male coworkers before I asked why they are being over taxed.

Men forget that women have issues that make ours seem like the whining of children, in comparison.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm
Quote Zenzoe:

Today Thom agreed with a caller, saying that, yes, the Republicans use issues such as birth control as a diversion from the “important issues.” That’s when I turned off the TV.

So, now we have a hierarchy of issues, along with all the other toxic hierarchies we subscribe to as a culture? Birth control, which is a woman’s issue —and a man’s issue, and an issue of population control— counts for less, as an issue? It’s a “side issue?” Sorry, but I read this conventional “wisdom” as saying, “women’s issues are unimportant." And them’s fightin’ words!

Misogyny is a side issue too? Sexism is a side issue? I suppose racism is a side issue too, then? And these things are unrelated to, and distinct from, the general sickness of our society and the roots of its problems and crimes against democracy and justice?

Well, I am glad the Republicans focus on these “side issues.” Certainly, if liberals, progressives and Democrats think of them as unimportant issues and fail to discuss them, when will the fundamental sickness ever end? At least somebody opened up the discussion! I say take advantage of the opportunity— investigate the relationship between racism, sexism, war, and all the other "more important" issues of the day.

http://www.globalfootprints.org/page/id/77/3/

http://www.globalissues.org/article/166/womens-rights

Typically women don't focus on things political.

Do you know about the Globalists and their plans to sterilize women ?

Do you know about the coming economic collapse ?

Are you aware that there's a Bilderberg meeting coming up ?

See when it comes to real issues most women can't be bothered so Republicans knowing this go into abortion, women's rights, the morning after pill cuz that will distract the more educated women off the Globalist Agenda trail.

It's all political psychology.

antikakistocrat's picture
antikakistocrat
Joined:
Apr. 18, 2012 2:41 pm
Quote antikakistocrat:
Quote Zenzoe:

Today Thom agreed with a caller, saying that, yes, the Republicans use issues such as birth control as a diversion from the “important issues.” That’s when I turned off the TV.

So, now we have a hierarchy of issues, along with all the other toxic hierarchies we subscribe to as a culture? Birth control, which is a woman’s issue —and a man’s issue, and an issue of population control— counts for less, as an issue? It’s a “side issue?” Sorry, but I read this conventional “wisdom” as saying, “women’s issues are unimportant." And them’s fightin’ words!

Misogyny is a side issue too? Sexism is a side issue? I suppose racism is a side issue too, then? And these things are unrelated to, and distinct from, the general sickness of our society and the roots of its problems and crimes against democracy and justice?

Well, I am glad the Republicans focus on these “side issues.” Certainly, if liberals, progressives and Democrats think of them as unimportant issues and fail to discuss them, when will the fundamental sickness ever end? At least somebody opened up the discussion! I say take advantage of the opportunity— investigate the relationship between racism, sexism, war, and all the other "more important" issues of the day.

http://www.globalfootprints.org/page/id/77/3/

http://www.globalissues.org/article/166/womens-rights

Typically women don't focus on things political.

Do you know about the Globalists and their plans to sterilize women ?

Do you know about the coming economic collapse ?

Are you aware that there's a Bilderberg meeting coming up ?

See when it comes to real issues most women can't be bothered so Republicans knowing this go into abortion, women's rights, the morning after pill cuz that will distract the more educated women off the Globalist Agenda trail.

It's all political psychology.

It may indeed all be political psychology. Having said that, "Bilderberg" is John Birch/Tea Party conspiracy code, coinciding with belief in tinfoil hats; mass behavioral control through disease inoculations; and belief in The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Power elites do exist, but "Bilderberg" is nebulous and more conspiracy theory than fact.

Ulysses's picture
Ulysses
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote antikakistocrat:

Typically women don't focus on things political.

Actually, and "typically," women know their rights and interests and know when those are being trashed. That's the reason for the outrage against the Republican war on women, not because they're too dumb to know when they're being bamboozled. Give me a break.

I am so tired of the "it's a distraction from the 'real' issues," bit.

Thanks for the info, U.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Zenzoe and D_NATURED,the more we communicate the less we do,i`m moving on.I have a bone with making progress in solving problems.

tayl44's picture
tayl44
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote tayl44:

Zenzoe and D_NATURED,the more we communicate the less we do,i`m moving on.I have a bone with making progress in solving problems.

If you figure out how to solve the problem of women being second class citizens, let me know. Until then, the only problems I can work on are the ones in my own head.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm
Quote tayl44:

Zenzoe and D_NATURED,the more we communicate the less we do,i`m moving on.I have a bone with making progress in solving problems.

I'm disappointed. I thought tayl would prove me wrong, by demonstrating that he had actually heard and understood my position. As it is, he apparently can't articulate it. Or, he'd prefer to diss me by "moving on." Isn't that where the lack of communication resides?

Progress comes when you figure out that the personal IS political.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Z, I think Tayl got his feelings hurt because you always didn't accept, and I came to reject, the notion that misogyny is something we were programmed with by the one percent. I don't reject that idea in it's totality, as our attitudes are a product of many things, including the "official" truth, as handed down by the power de jour.

Like I said to Tayl, though, I believe that the subjugation of women is more than just a mind virus. There are biological components to overcome as well, that only time will resolve. And that is something I continue to struggle with. For instance:

When I see a beautiful, shapely young woman walking down the street, it's almost painful to me. I am so sexually driven that, even though I can intellectually process my own feelings about equality and fairness, and I don't desire my sisters, wife and nieces to be viewed so superficially, the thoughts remain in my head. Given a morality free environment, where my commitment to my wife and my ethical boundaries didn't exist, I'd like to get it on with a girl like that.

I consciously know that, as a person, that woman is more than just an object for me to admire, that she possesses qualities that can't be exploited sexually, and she has dreams that don't include being objectified. Yet, to my shame, I do objectify her in my mind.

I admit this because I don't think it is entirely my fault, as in a learned response. I don't think this desire could be schooled out of me. It is my own human weakness that makes me recognize the falseness of the blame the one percent idea. We have human problems and not just power distribution problems.

Even in an egalitarian society, where there is no one percent, I think women are at risk of base human instincts and the men who desire not to reign them in, on any level.

I'm already having second thoughts about hitting the "save" button, but here goes. Let's see if I get castrated...

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm
Quote D_NATURED:

Z, I think Tayl got his feelings hurt because you always didn't accept, and I came to reject, the notion that misogyny is something we were programmed with by the one percent. I don't reject that idea in it's totality, as our attitudes are a product of many things, including the "official" truth, as handed down by the power de jour.

Like I said to Tayl, though, I believe that the subjugation of women is more than just a mind virus. There are biological components to overcome as well, that only time will resolve. And that is something I continue to struggle with. For instance:

When I see a beautiful, shapely young woman walking down the street, it's almost painful to me. I am so sexually driven that, even though I can intellectually process my own feelings about equality and fairness, and I don't desire my sisters, wife and nieces to be viewed so superficially, the thoughts remain in my head. Given a morality free environment, where my commitment to my wife and my ethical boundaries didn't exist, I'd like to get it on with a girl like that.

I consciously know that, as a person, that woman is more than just an object for me to admire, that she possesses qualities that can't be exploited sexually, and she has dreams that don't include being objectified. Yet, to my shame, I do objectify her in my mind.

I admit this because I don't think it is entirely my fault, as in a learned response. I don't think this desire could be schooled out of me. It is my own human weakness that makes me recognize the falseness of the blame the one percent idea. We have human problems and not just power distribution problems.

Even in an egalitarian society, where there is no one percent, I think women are at risk of base human instincts and the men who desire not to reign them in, on any level.

I'm already having second thoughts about hitting the "save" button, but here goes. Let's see if I get castrated...

Castrated? Why would you get castrated for making an honest statement about your own human condition? When you write, "Even in an egalitarian society, where there is no one percent, I think women are at risk of base human instincts and the men who desire not to reign them in, on any level," however, I do want to remind you that women too have these human instincts; and, believe me, women would do a great more about their sexual impulses than they do, if it weren't for the nearly non-stop social conditioning that works to inhibit them. Believe me, if, every time you lusted after a female, you were stigmatized as a slut, after awhile you'd begin to tamp it down too (for example). Also, it's a myth that women are not sexually stimulated by the visual, by seeing a sexy guy walking down the street.

As for tayl's "hurt feelings" over my rejecting the notion of "trickle-down misogyny," if you will, well, I simply disagreed that it was the ONLY factor, and I said so; but I heard what he was saying, and he knew I heard him. In contrast, I never had the feeling he had heard what I was saying, or understood my point. He kept twisting it so that he wouldn't have to agree that misogynistic rap was an insult to women and a damaging influence. As a matter of fact, I felt humiliated that he couldn't bring himself to acknowledge sexism where it lives so blatantly. I felt humiliated for my sex: When will we be heard and our suffering taken seriously? Do you want to know where sexism manifests? Where what damages women and girls gets tolerated as no big deal.

So I have this feeling that a view exists that the hurt feelings of men hurt more than those of women. Is there some sort of unwritten code, where men must always protect other men from humiliations by women? I know you, D, would normally tend to be fair to everybody, but I can't help wondering why the focus isn't on tayl's defense of sexist rap, even when he knew it offended me? Instead, it's all about his supposed hurt feelings?

Well, I still like tayl44, and I don't like to hurt people's feelings, but I also don't see any virtue in coddling ignorance.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Castrated was a bad choice of word. I don't know which is the right one. I guess my point was that, like women who are called sluts, men have their own words that can describe even their healthy sexual motivations...like pervert, sick-o and creep. I have heard women call men those names for offenses that I don't believe they were "sick" to engage in. My fear was that admitting I objectify women on any level would make me a hypocrite for attempting to end their objectification on any level.

As for Tayl, maybe I am too easy on him. I think it's because of his broken English that I assume he may not be able to fully articulate his opinions, unlike yourself, so I want to give him the benefit of the doubt. I have translated his thoughts before to mean things I agree with, even though I could have, as easily, said "huh?". I'm not accusing you of being a big bad woman who is pickin on the poor little man, but I definitely believe you are better equipped to verbally hold your own, whether Tayl should be able to or not.

So, I appologize, Zenzoe. I already told you you were right. I still mean it. You being right doesn't mean I have to help you put Tayl through the ringer, though. You're very capable of serving up whatever defense of femininity is needed. I'll even help when I can.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm

Yes, when I gave up on being tolerant of tayl's style and began to be impatient with it, I did feel like a bully, in a way, but at the same time I felt bullied by his obstinance, and patronized by his tone, once I figured out what he meant to say. Yes, I can communicate, but then, I do a lot of editing. I go back over what I've said and try to fix stuff for clarity. I don't like to abuse the English language, and, call me silly, but it bothers me when I see others do it. Well, truth be told, I can put up with it in those poor communicators who agree with me, but once they take a [badly expressed] different stance, especially one that seems to support misogyny, look out. I'm a bit of a hypocrite in that regard.

Even if a language is not one's native language, you can at least try. I didn't get the impression tayl cared. (Sorry, tayl, that's how it seems.) I had to wonder if maybe his attitude about language mirrored his attitude toward sexism—it all comes from the 1%; thus, no need to follow "their rules." I realize that's probably wrong, though.

And you certainly don't have to help me "put him through the ringer." If you thought it best to consider his feelings, that's your right. I trust that. If it were anybody else, though, I'd feel slighted. I'm not the only female who has noticed that men often feel much more tenderness toward each other's pain, compared to how they feel about a woman's pain. I don't know, but it seems like some sort of code of male behavior. They'll ignore a woman's suffering, if there's some guy in the room who's hurting too, even if he started it. No?

Of course, my sensitivity toward such things derives from a whole host of such slights. I mean, the abortion issue, for example, the way conservatives view it, putting women's suffering aside for the sake of a fetus...man, it's just so painful to know we count for so little.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
And you certainly don't have to help me "put him through the ringer." If you thought it best to consider his feelings, that's your right. I trust that. If it were anybody else, though, I'd feel slighted. I'm not the only female who has noticed that men often feel much more tenderness toward each other's pain, compared to how they feel about a woman's pain. I don't know, but it seems like some sort of code of male behavior. They'll ignore a woman's suffering, if there's some guy in the room who's hurting too, even if he started it. No?

Yes, I think this is related to my quick thought post about chivalry and women needing to be more violent. Men are more sensitive to men some times, I agree, especially in matters of ego. I guess we know how unstable our fellow testosteronies can be and, thus, hope and assume that women are more evolved, emotionally, and can take a hit without great harm. Men seem to need constant positive reinforcement. It also may be convenient to have a handy scape goat who isn't likely to split your scalp.

I think there is also some latent resentment, in some men, that women have a physically protected status so their psychological abuse, ironically, achieves a karmic balance. Their floor-mattiness is such a stress reliever after a long day of warring and hunting, after all. A good "where's my dinner, bitch" can melt away the tensions of the day. The realities of men learning, through the various processess of ego-diminishment, their low place on the male food chain leads them to find someone smaller and kinder to conquor, and women, though not easy, are it.

Shit rolls down hill on Earth and that hill is physical size, unfortunately.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm
Of course, my sensitivity toward such things derives from a whole host of such slights. I mean, the abortion issue, for example, the way conservatives view it, putting women's suffering aside for the sake of a fetus...man, it's just so painful to know we count for so little.

It hurts me too to know what is being done and has been done to women by men. I find it hard to believe so many sons, brothers and husbands have allowed the women in their lives to be treated as chattel. It amazes me that women haven't revolted yet. What's it going to take before women feel worthy of male respect enough to take it? Where's the spirit of Susan B. Anthony today?

Demand the right to your own body and I'll demand the right to mine and we can stand together as humans and not opposite sides of the ying yang symbol of sexual oppression.

Just give me that old time religion... so I can throw it away and make intellectual space for a more modern and functional paradigm. How's that sound?

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm

Zenzoe and D_NATURED,i hope you can understand this broken english,"The Only Reason I`m Moving On, Is Life Is To Short To Deal With No Concept Of Solutions".

tayl44's picture
tayl44
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote D_NATURED:

Yes, I think this is related to my quick thought post about chivalry and women needing to be more violent. Men are more sensitive to men some times, I agree, especially in matters of ego. I guess we know how unstable our fellow testosteronies can be and, thus, hope and assume that women are more evolved, emotionally, and can take a hit without great harm. Men seem to need constant positive reinforcement. It also may be convenient to have a handy scape goat who isn't likely to split your scalp.

Thanks for that. I suspected as much. And I do so appreciate your bearing witness to the phenomenon. Sometimes we gals notice stuff about guys that they don’t seem to be conscious of doing. Sometimes, you wonder if it is conscious. Other times, you want to pull your hair out over it.

It used to be that if the wife got a cold and needed tending to, the husband would get a worse cold, apparently to ease his discomfort with the role of caretaker. I’ve laughed with other women about that one. We said men are just big babies, after all. ;-) However, I have to admit it’s only a little joke between women and not based on any true statement about men. It all depends on the man: there’s Newt Gingrich, but then there’s Thom Hartmann too.

Quote D_NATURED:

I think there is also some latent resentment, in some men, that women have a physically protected status so their psychological abuse, ironically, achieves a karmic balance. Their floor-mattiness is such a stress reliever after a long day of warring and hunting, after all. A good "where's my dinner, bitch" can melt away the tensions of the day. The realities of men learning, through the various processess of ego-diminishment, their low place on the male food chain leads them to find someone smaller and kinder to conquor, and women, though not easy, are it.

Shit rolls down hill on Earth and that hill is physical size, unfortunately.

Yes, all very true. But then, women can be passive-aggressive and psychologically abusive too. I certainly wouldn’t want to claim we’re entirely innocent. It’s gotta be really upsetting to come home after a long day at work doing a job you hate just to keep “food on your family” (one of my favorite Bushisms), only to be told you’re a failure.

I raised two boys, so I know how tender and emotional males really are. Look past the techno-barbarism of their video games, and you find a sweetheart of a person. And all the expectations set before them by the culture to be tough and heartless do nothing but make their lives more difficult. The self-doubt has got to nag at them, making any little proof of their manliness a sweet thing. For example, I just read an article here (offered by Alberto over at the blog post Evolution of Capitalism...) that speaks of men and masculinity. There, a “young man confessed that he never feels more masculine than when he's asked to remove a difficult lid.” It’s so poignant, don’t you think?

Quote D_NATURED:

It hurts me too to know what is being done and has been done to women by men. I find it hard to believe so many sons, brothers and husbands have allowed the women in their lives to be treated as chattel. It amazes me that women haven't revolted yet. What's it going to take before women feel worthy of male respect enough to take it? Where's the spirit of Susan B. Anthony today?

Demand the right to your own body and I'll demand the right to mine and we can stand together as humans and not opposite sides of the ying yang symbol of sexual oppression.

Just give me that old time religion... so I can throw it away and make intellectual space for a more modern and functional paradigm. How's that sound?

Sounds good to me. It’s a whole lot better than “shake our Etch-A-Sketch.”

I think the backlash against the feminist movement of the 60’s quashed the spirit of Susan B. Anthony, for awhile. I think it’s recovering, though. Especially now that the leash on the dog of conservatism has gotten so long they’ve begun to hang themselves. Yay!

Quote tayl44:

Zenzoe and D_NATURED,i hope you can understand this broken english,"The Only Reason I`m Moving On, Is Life Is To Short To Deal With No Concept Of Solutions".

Yeah, I get it, tayl. But here’s the thing— don’t you think that dealing with one’s own relationship to the world can be the start of a solution? How can the world change, if there’s no change within you, and me, and anyone else who wants a better world? “Be the change you wish to see in the world,” is not mere rhetoric. If it doesn’t start with you, or me, how can it start at all?

I wish you would consider the requirements for change as being multi-dimensional, not just one “Concept.”

I hope we’re still friends, though, whatever you decide to do and think.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote tayl44:

Zenzoe and D_NATURED,i hope you can understand this broken english,"The Only Reason I`m Moving On, Is Life Is To Short To Deal With No Concept Of Solutions".

Are you admitting your English is broken or are you displaying hurt feelings? I'm guessing the latter, though you shouldn't. Your English is broken, that's a fact. I still, generally, have no problem getting to the gist of what you are communicating but that doesn't mean it's not a challenge for others to interpret some times. Like Zenzoe, I too like you Tayl, and I don't think your lack of English writing skills is an indictment of your intellect.

As for life being too short, it is. As for my having no concept of solutions, where this subject is concerned, I think some of the challenges are biological and can't be "solved" so easily. If you come up with something though, that is more detailed than to undo a conspiracy by the uber-rich to keep us all ignorant and hating each other, I'm listening. That "solution" seems more like a convenient dismissal of yours and my part in the current state of inequality, that's all. I agree with Zenzoe that the real solution is established one man and one woman at a time. We must find a solution within ourselves first.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm

Some people think men have a good reason to be cranky. Have you seen this one? Just a little side-chuckle.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Zenzoe:

Some people think men have a good reason to be cranky. Have you seen this one? Just a little side-chuckle.

Maybe you chuckle at the male penis obsession, but I'm horrified. I insist, this is NOT my Swedish made penis pump. I swear!

At least we don't look at other guys with huge bulges and go, "it's fake", like women do with breasts.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm

Ha ha. But did you understand what the device was for? You know it's all about fixing the damage done by circumcision, right?

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

D_NATURED, check out what Capital said here: "So while you may hope and dream of Equal status, you are not, nor will ever be equal." Nice, eh?

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Zenzoe:

Ha ha. But did you understand what the device was for? You know it's all about fixing the damage done by circumcision, right?

Yes, I understand, it just seems like there's a lot of attention payed to improving the "sensation" of intimacy. In a sense, that's like the quest to create a better hot fudge sundae. They have lubes and potions, and now devices, that are intended to heighten sensual pleasure. Where does it end, with the orgasmatron? Or better yet a device that looks like a gun and you just point it at the genitalia of your intended "lover" and squeeze the trigger. Maybe sex is too important to leave it to people to perform. Maybe we could just have surrogate porn-bots doing it perfectly in our stead.

We can, then, stand back and watch the skill with which our sexual surrogate satisfies its mechanized mate. And if it's still not initiating robotic rapture, we can order the optional titanium man-missile, integrated with the next generation vi-bro, which no fem-bot can withstand. Or, if you run a fem-bot of your own, perhaps you would be interested in the new, user installable, vagi-matic retreads for all popular models.This week only, buy one case of KY's original robo-lube and get a free t-shirt.

What ever happened to the good ol' in and out without the closet full of equipment? I'm circumcised. Wasn't my choice. I still don't think I'm damaged or that I need to make it more sensitive. My wife would beg me not to.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm

Currently Chatting

The Death of the Middle Class was by Design...

Even in the face of the so-called Recovery, poverty and inequality are getting worse in our country, and more wealth and power is flowing straight to the top. According to Paul Buchheit over at Alternet, this is the end result of winner-take-all capitalism, and this destruction of the working class has all been by design.

Powered by Drupal, an open source content management system