Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates
- CorruptUser
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
I'm a guy and I prefer it when the women are a bit more aggressive. Within reason of course...
-
- Posts: 1000
- Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:15 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
DaBigCheez wrote:And if material depicting X is legal and you don't want it to be, you could make X illegal.
Can you name a X that is easier to make illegal than material depicting X?
Hooray for ex post facto illegality!
Could you please explain this?
CorruptUser wrote:If step sibling porn is legal today, you film tomorrow, and it's illegal next week, is the material illegal to possess next week?
Bills usually include a grace period so that this problem does not happen.
"You are not running off with Cow-Skull Man Dracula Skeletor!"
-Socrates
-Socrates
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
The Great Hippo wrote:That being said, I would definitely agree that the pornographic industry -- and the sex industry -- needs heavy regulating. I'm not convinced everyone involved in this industry is wholly consenting, and that's a pretty harrowing prospect to face. The proximity of capitalism to fantasies involving exploitation creates enormous risks for actual exploitation -- something which I don't think any (sane, rational, mature) adult wants.
you aren't wrong that everyone is not wholly consenting and that there's large risks of exploitation, but this isn't in any way unique to the sex industry. capitalism creates enormous risks for actual exploitation -- you could stop there, unqualified. it's just in the sex industry people get shocked and moralize about it more whereas all the coerced and exploited domestic/agricultural/restaurant/etc labourers aren't quite so titillating to think about.
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.
pronouns: they or he
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.
pronouns: they or he
- CorruptUser
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
You make it sound like it's a problem unique to capitalism, and not just because people are shitty. Because the bible never mentioned any prostitutes, right?
-
- Posts: 7073
- Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
In an old fashioned time we called that manners. However the point was that when we turn a very powerful biological drive in to a billion dollar industry, it asks the question, are we creating a mindset that turns the idea of consent on its head. Half of consent consists of the expectations of the person asking. Do we prime, young males for instance, to hear consent that isn't given. Anyway, you all have fun with it. I'm gone.Ginger wrote:Hippo's right. Even I enjoy forceful sex, handcuffs and saying "No that doesn't mean no" sometimes. So I guess I retract my rhetorical question about pornography/sex workers. And by the way Morris Walters: Ask me on Sunday to do all those sexy things with you and I'll submit. Just ask a woman to do sexual things with you in a respectful and caring way. Then they'll actually appreciate your gentlemanly tact and maybe give you what you truly want.
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
people are shitty, yes, but capitalism creates conditions to amplify that shittiness in a unique way.
also idgiaf if there have been prostitutes in the past? there's nothing inherently bad about transactional sex in and of itself.
conditions where people are forced to labor without any meaningful choice in what they do or else starve/be homeless/etc are exploitative regardless of the labor involved. that doesn't only happen under capitalism, but it is amplified under it in particular ways that, living in a capitalist society, are relevant to me to critique.
also idgiaf if there have been prostitutes in the past? there's nothing inherently bad about transactional sex in and of itself.
conditions where people are forced to labor without any meaningful choice in what they do or else starve/be homeless/etc are exploitative regardless of the labor involved. that doesn't only happen under capitalism, but it is amplified under it in particular ways that, living in a capitalist society, are relevant to me to critique.
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.
pronouns: they or he
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.
pronouns: they or he
- CorruptUser
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
People were forced into prostitution long before the modern era. More frequently, in fact. Subsistence farming was not what Norman Rockwell portrayed it. It was so godawful that people WILLINGLY went into the sweatshops to avoid it. Before those, well, ancient Greeks used to let their kids die if they couldn't afford to feed the kids, and you can guess which gender of kids were left outside for the wolves to eat, part of the reason for Greece's attitude towards both homosexuality and conquest. One way to make money was to take the girl babies and raise them in a brothel...
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
Merry Christmas everyone!
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
... yes, and? because other systems have been terrible somehow i shouldn't comment on how capitalism is also terrible? that's a pretty bogus point. the fact that other societies have failed their communities in the past doesn't mean that we aren't also currently failing our community right now and should aim to do better. so many of the ways that we exploit people and make people vulnerable could be ameliorated -- not excised completely -- if we address some of the ways that our system is set up to make people vulnerable. the fact that in the past people have also sucked doesn't make that not true.
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.
pronouns: they or he
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.
pronouns: they or he
- CorruptUser
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
You make it sound like it's a problem exclusive to capitalism or that it's somehow worse under capitalism while conveniently ignoring the shitshow that was the entirety of human history. But this argument bores me.
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
"Hey, look, this isn't the worst system imaginable" - CorruptUser's only defense of capitalism.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.
- CorruptUser
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
Thesh wrote:"Hey, look, this isn't the worst system imaginable" - CorruptUser's only defense of capitalism.
More like
"The version of capitalism we have is better than 95% of the other systems, and the remaining 5% are the Scandinavian versions of capitalism".
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
So, you look at the developed nation with the highest level of inequality and violence and say "Well, this is obviously better than any other system."
I mean, go back a few hundred years, and you would give the same exact defense of mercantilism or feudalism. They all have the same problem as capitalism: they are designed to keep people with power in power; it's just that you see yourself as having power. Since you are on top, you feel the need to defend the system and you are completely uninterested in considering alternatives.
I mean, go back a few hundred years, and you would give the same exact defense of mercantilism or feudalism. They all have the same problem as capitalism: they are designed to keep people with power in power; it's just that you see yourself as having power. Since you are on top, you feel the need to defend the system and you are completely uninterested in considering alternatives.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
It might be helpful to define what is meant bu “capitalism”. Here if one means what we have now in distinction from systems we have had in the past like medieval feudalism or the slave economy of the classical world (in other words if one means “a free market”), then such “capitalism” is clearly not more exploitative than those alternatives. But if by “capitalism” you mean a system with problems like we have now in distinction from proposed systems that aim to do away with those problems, then just as clearly it is more exploitative than those. And the problems of capitalism in that latter sense are also problems of earlier systems too.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
The only real difference between those systems and what made America less exploitative was the decentralization of the control of our economy. However, as our wealth becomes more and more centralized, I'd argue that those benefits are disappearing and that without government laws protecting workers and consumers we would end up with similar degrees of exploitation just in different forms.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.
- CorruptUser
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
I'd go with capitalism as the "mixed economy where government provides infrastructure, basic education, and a bit of social welfare programs, and a regulated free market provides most other goods and services". But if you are going to suggest free market providing infrastructure, or being local monopolies with little oversight, yeah, I'm just going to point to the telecoms as living proof of that being an idiotic idea.
As far as this leads to sexual exploitation, sure, on the land of sunshine and (consensual) blowjobs where everyone had enough to comfortably live on without having to work, yeah, I'll agree that any person saying "if you want to keep your job, drop to your knees" is going to get laughed off, and any spouse threatening to cut off the other if they don't put out is sleeping on the couch. But even in this society, you will still have things like the casting couch, because even with infinite resources there's only a finite amount of fame or potential partners and so on.
As far as this leads to sexual exploitation, sure, on the land of sunshine and (consensual) blowjobs where everyone had enough to comfortably live on without having to work, yeah, I'll agree that any person saying "if you want to keep your job, drop to your knees" is going to get laughed off, and any spouse threatening to cut off the other if they don't put out is sleeping on the couch. But even in this society, you will still have things like the casting couch, because even with infinite resources there's only a finite amount of fame or potential partners and so on.
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
So capitalism is indistinguishable from market socialism, in your view? I guess private property ownership is just not an important feature of capitalism...
Summum ius, summa iniuria.
-
- Posts: 1000
- Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:15 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
Spoiler:
Last edited by jewish_scientist on Tue Dec 26, 2017 12:03 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"You are not running off with Cow-Skull Man Dracula Skeletor!"
-Socrates
-Socrates
- CorruptUser
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
Thesh wrote:So capitalism is indistinguishable from market socialism, in your view? I guess private property ownership is just not an important feature of capitalism...
Social democracy, actually. I'm a bit of a neo-keynesian, and as every economist knows, Keynes was an ardent defender of capitalism and wanted to save capitalism from destroying itself.
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
jewish_scientist wrote:Thesh wrote:I mean, go back a few hundred years, and you would give the same exact defense of mercantilism or feudalism. They all have the same problem as capitalism: they are designed to keep people with power in power; it's just that you see yourself as having power. Since you are on top, you feel the need to defend the system and you are completely uninterested in considering alternatives.
You do realize that this is the argument Marx used for advocate revolutions a.k.a. civil wars.
Do you have a point, or are you just afraid that Marx will give you cooties?
Summum ius, summa iniuria.
- CorruptUser
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
Getting back to sexual assault and sweet sweet porn...
-
- Posts: 1000
- Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:15 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
Thesh wrote:jewish_scientist wrote:Thesh wrote:I mean, go back a few hundred years, and you would give the same exact defense of mercantilism or feudalism. They all have the same problem as capitalism: they are designed to keep people with power in power; it's just that you see yourself as having power. Since you are on top, you feel the need to defend the system and you are completely uninterested in considering alternatives.
You do realize that this is the argument Marx used for advocate revolutions a.k.a. civil wars.
Do you have a point, or are you just afraid that Marx will give you cooties?
The USSR collapsed because it was economically weaker than the US. I think that qualifies as pretty damning evidence against Marxism.
"You are not running off with Cow-Skull Man Dracula Skeletor!"
-Socrates
-Socrates
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
So, yes, you are afraid of getting Marx cooties and have no interest in learning about economics.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.
- CorruptUser
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
Unless "Marx Cooties" are a new species of pubic lice that Harvey Weinstein spread...
House spent small fortune settling harassment claims, hidden until actual requests from rest of house
House spent small fortune settling harassment claims, hidden until actual requests from rest of house
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
The point is that you cannot address the sexual harassment epidemic unless you fix the conditions that enable it, and if you won't even acknowledge that our economic system creates an environment where one large group of people is wholly dependent on another, smaller group of individuals (the people who do own the means of production) for their ability to live then there is no hope of addressing it. Our political, economic, and social structures must change to give everyone equal power if we want to avoid exploitation.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.
- CorruptUser
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
1) You aren't going to fix it with a radical new system. Best proven solution is social democracy, everything else has either not been proven to work as well or been proven not to work as well
2) Eliminating income inequality and giving everyone a million dollars stuffed into unicorns won't do a thing to stop the Harvey Weinsteins of the world. If there is only one leading female role, there will be women who would do anything for that role regardless of how much money they already have. It'll stop the little dictators, like the assistant manager forcing the teenage girl with no family to do a "late shift", but not the big ones like Weinstein or Moore.
3) Also won't stop prostitution. Girls get trafficked in when locals can't meet the demand, unless you are talking about some magical fantasy land where the pimps can't get paid. Sorry, even Star Trek had latinum.
4) Arguing about economics is BORING.
2) Eliminating income inequality and giving everyone a million dollars stuffed into unicorns won't do a thing to stop the Harvey Weinsteins of the world. If there is only one leading female role, there will be women who would do anything for that role regardless of how much money they already have. It'll stop the little dictators, like the assistant manager forcing the teenage girl with no family to do a "late shift", but not the big ones like Weinstein or Moore.
3) Also won't stop prostitution. Girls get trafficked in when locals can't meet the demand, unless you are talking about some magical fantasy land where the pimps can't get paid. Sorry, even Star Trek had latinum.
4) Arguing about economics is BORING.
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
CorruptUser wrote:1) You aren't going to fix it with a radical new system. Best proven solution is social democracy, everything else has either not been proven to work as well or been proven not to work as well
Just because you have absolutely no interest in thinking about the solutions doesn't mean that there aren't solutions. You are ignorant about economics, willfully so, and only because you are afraid of change. Literally, your arguments could be used to justify slavery because hey, anything we haven't tried cannot be proven to work. You have simply put absolutely no thought, no consideration, and have shown absolutely no interest in addressing any problems that exist in capitalism purely because you see this system as working for you.
CorruptUser wrote:2) Eliminating income inequality and giving everyone a million dollars stuffed into unicorns won't do a thing to stop the Harvey Weinsteins of the world. If there is only one leading female role, there will be women who would do anything for that role regardless of how much money they already have.
You do not understand the problem, nor are you interested in understanding the problem. The fact that you think that there must necessarily be a single producer who has massive say in people's careers is a testament to the fact that you just do not know anything about alternative systems and have not put consideration into them.
CorruptUser wrote:3) Arguing about economics is BORING.
You aren't even making economic arguments - you find it boring because you just don't have an interest in the topic. If you really do not like economics, then you should stop coming in whenever capitalism is criticized and spouting your uninspired, ignorant bullshit about how we should just accept our shitty economic system because unless another system has been implemented and proven to work it should not be considered. You have literally nothing to say because you are absolutely unwilling to consider the issues, yet you still feel the need to come in and tell everyone they are wrong and that we can't fix problems.
Well, let me tell you something: YOU ARE THE FUCKING PROBLEM. So if you really hate it that much, do the entire world a favor and stop getting involved in politics. The world will be a much better place if everyone like you just shut the fuck up and stayed home on election day. Maybe listen to what other people have to say for once in your life, and stop being such a selfish prick.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.
- CorruptUser
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
I don't hate economics -it was my minor, almost got a masters in it-, I get bored arguing with people who have no background in economics, in much the same way doctors get bored of arguing with patients who think that the university of Google is a better alma mater than Columbia.
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
Just because you have a minor in economics, doesn't mean you know what you are talking about. You have literally done nothing but make assertions that our problems cannot be fixed, and you have provided absolutely no reasoning to back this up.
I'm guessing you've some understanding of one school of market theory and monetary theory (probably outdated), but have not studied socialist economic systems at all - thus your education is completely irrelevant. It's quite obvious that you haven't put any consideration into alternatives to capitalism or even the problems with capitalism itself, nor do you have interest in doing so. You simply lack the knowledge to actually rebut any argument made, and so you turn to your credentials as if they mean something.
I'm guessing you've some understanding of one school of market theory and monetary theory (probably outdated), but have not studied socialist economic systems at all - thus your education is completely irrelevant. It's quite obvious that you haven't put any consideration into alternatives to capitalism or even the problems with capitalism itself, nor do you have interest in doing so. You simply lack the knowledge to actually rebut any argument made, and so you turn to your credentials as if they mean something.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
Thesh wrote:Just because you have a minor in economics, doesn't mean you know what you are talking about. You have literally done nothing but make assertions that our problems cannot be fixed, and you have provided absolutely no reasoning to back this up.
I'm guessing you've some understanding of one school of market theory and monetary theory (probably outdated), but have not studied socialist economic systems at all - thus your education is completely irrelevant. It's quite obvious that you haven't put any consideration into alternatives to capitalism or even the problems with capitalism itself, nor do you have interest in doing so. You simply lack the knowledge to actually rebut any argument made, and so you turn to your credentials as if they mean something.
Do you have an example where they changed the system which, reduced sexual harassment?
-
- Posts: 7073
- Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
Unless it has been done, almost any endevour is pure speculation. I mean, how would you know if it has never been tried? And if we, as a people understood sexual discrimination, we could create better policies. Currently we try one thing or the other, because some college educated elite says so. And their batting average isn't spectacular. Now that I think on it I don't think it's better than dismal. Anyway just my one vacant thought.
- The Great Hippo
- Swans ARE SHARP
- Posts: 7258
- Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
- Location: behind you
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
You're right; it's easy for me to forget that sex isn't necessarily a special or sacred type of transaction given my (mild, but constant and unchallenged) protestant background.natraj wrote:you aren't wrong that everyone is not wholly consenting and that there's large risks of exploitation, but this isn't in any way unique to the sex industry. capitalism creates enormous risks for actual exploitation -- you could stop there, unqualified. it's just in the sex industry people get shocked and moralize about it more whereas all the coerced and exploited domestic/agricultural/restaurant/etc labourers aren't quite so titillating to think about.
Yeah, I know what that's like. Arguments with you tend to be boring as hell.CorruptUser wrote:But this argument bores me.
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
sardia wrote:Do you have an example where they changed the system which, reduced sexual harassment?
There have been changes that have reduced sexual harassment, and you can see the type of power structures in which it is more prominent; so you can see where the problems are, and from that you can see how to address the problems. However, it's not the economics alone, but also the social structures and cultural issues that arise, so good studies of this specific topic are going to be lacking and it will be difficult to quantify what is social, cultural, or economic when doing studies between systems in different countries.
The problem with Hollywood is the same as any other centralized industry - people like Harvey Weinstein, purely through wealth and the influence that brings, have massive influence over what films get made and who gets put in those films. If you want to fix that problem, you need to decentralize the industry and make it so no one person or small group of individuals controls the purse-strings. However, you can't fix the problem just by fixing one industry - the power of any worker is dependent on the power of all workers, and without addressing the greater wealth and income inequality issues, there would still be a lot of problems with exploitation.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.
- The Great Hippo
- Swans ARE SHARP
- Posts: 7258
- Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
- Location: behind you
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
This is, to me, the most relevant bit; you can talk about alternative systems as much as you like, but capitalism -- with its ability to consolidate excessive power and *keep* it -- is here to stay, at least for now. The only way you can address these excesses is by either 1) Taking away Weinstein's absurd power, 2) Empowering people so they don't need Weinstein's power, or 3) Both.Thesh wrote:If you want to fix that problem, you need to decentralize the industry and make it so no one person or small group of individuals controls the purse-strings.
I prefer #2, because as much as I'd like to see someone like Weinstein rendered powerless, I think that's more of a revenge fantasy than anything; what's important isn't that people like Weinstein become powerless, but the people they would target for abuse become power*ful*. You accomplish that a lot of different ways -- giving victims of abuse legal recourse to address that abuse is just one, but ultimately, what this looks like is the quote above: Decentralization of power.
EDIT: I also don't like focusing on 'disempowering' people like Weinstein because I feel like that gives everyone an easy out. "Oh, I'm not as bad as Weinstein" -- the problem isn't Weinstein, the problem is the context that allows Weinstein to do what he did with such impunity. Punishing or disempowering those people after their actions appear won't do anything but satisfy our blood-thirsty ethics. If you want to actually address this problem, you need to empower the people they're preying on.
Not that we shouldn't drive Weinstein out of Hollywood -- I'm just concerned that people might think driving people like Weinstein out of Hollywood solves the problem. It doesn't.
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
morriswalters wrote:In an old fashioned time we called that manners. However the point was that when we turn a very powerful biological drive in to a billion dollar industry, it asks the question, are we creating a mindset that turns the idea of consent on its head. Half of consent consists of the expectations of the person asking. Do we prime, young males for instance, to hear consent that isn't given. Anyway, you all have fun with it. I'm gone.Ginger wrote:Hippo's right. Even I enjoy forceful sex, handcuffs and saying "No that doesn't mean no" sometimes. So I guess I retract my rhetorical question about pornography/sex workers. And by the way Morris Walters: Ask me on Sunday to do all those sexy things with you and I'll submit. Just ask a woman to do sexual things with you in a respectful and caring way. Then they'll actually appreciate your gentlemanly tact and maybe give you what you truly want. ;)
Young men take my non-consent as proof for that I want their penises inside of me sometimes. How funny. I guess you're right? A billion dollar industry based on making some sick fetish out of rape can screw with anybody's ideas of proper consent. Young men or young women.
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.
Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.
- Sableagle
- Ormurinn's Alt
- Posts: 1982
- Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
- Location: The wrong side of the mirror
- Contact:
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
Any "stud" who's "banged" dozens of women but never once made tender love with one who really wanted him has no idea what he's missing.
Anyway, as we're boring each other I thought I'd let someone else do my research for me. Spoilered for length.
Anyway, as we're boring each other I thought I'd let someone else do my research for me. Spoilered for length.
Spoiler:
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.
- ObsessoMom
- Nespresso Bomb
- Posts: 815
- Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
This article in the San Diego Union-Tribune contrasts our mayor's 2013 sexual harassment scandal with the scandals of today. Sort of a "lessons learned and not learned" retrospective. Some here might find it interesting.
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
I think Sable Eagle is the only one bored about discussing sexual harassment. And feminists suck at debating sex workers. They treat them like fragile mind broken dolls. They treat transgender women sex workers like creepy men in dresses that prey on vulnerable people AKA their fucking clients. It's a serious problem in feminism and borders on being sexual harassment itself. Because they'll try to manipulate you, push your buttons and provoke a sexy reaction just so they can gasp, slap your face and get all offended so they can chase you out of any community where they live. Making you an outcast anywhere feminists show up.
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.
Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
I want to make a semi-snarky semi-sincere "#NotAllFeminists" comment but I'm not sure how to phrase it in a way that won't be simultaneously misinterpreted in two opposite directions.
(Sincere in that, while there are such trans-exclusionary feminists and they're a real problem and I'm sorry you've had to deal with them, it really isn't everyone operating under the banner of feminism who's like that; snarky in that, well, that sounds an awful lot like what a lot of guys say, hashtagged "#NotAllMen", when feminists raise issues of misogynous male behavior, so a "#NotAllFeminists" in response to issues with TERF behavior is kinda ironic).
(Sincere in that, while there are such trans-exclusionary feminists and they're a real problem and I'm sorry you've had to deal with them, it really isn't everyone operating under the banner of feminism who's like that; snarky in that, well, that sounds an awful lot like what a lot of guys say, hashtagged "#NotAllMen", when feminists raise issues of misogynous male behavior, so a "#NotAllFeminists" in response to issues with TERF behavior is kinda ironic).
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)
- CorruptUser
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC
Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic
Ginger wrote:And feminists suck at debating sex workers. They treat them like fragile mind broken dolls. They treat transgender women sex workers like creepy men in dresses that prey on vulnerable people AKA their fucking clients. It's a serious problem in feminism and borders on being sexual harassment itself. Because they'll try to manipulate you, push your buttons and provoke a sexy reaction just so they can gasp, slap your face and get all offended so they can chase you out of any community where they live. Making you an outcast anywhere feminists show up.
As there is no professional exam or certification required to declare yourself a feminist, there are about as many definitions of feminism as, well, the number of people who agree with the phrase "women should be treated better than they are". More, probably. We can organize them into relatively vague groups; the Trans Exclusive Radical Feminists are generally a problem, as are the Sex Worker Exclusive Radical Feminists (though of course who you consider to be a problem depends on whether their goals align with your own), mainly because those are the nutjobs that managed to get some seriously awful shit codified into law. Many other feminists are pro-prostitution in the sense that you should have near-absolute control over your own body, including what parts of it you can and can not rent out. Many others are pro-trans rights. But of course, these groups don't seem to be nearly as loud.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests