Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Discussions about sexism on the internet...
Options
Comments
-
I see women in the comic as standing up to sexism and calling it out but getting drowned out by a number of asshats.
Oh, I realise how you see it and I am telling you are wrong.
It feeds into the notion that men are all dumb and illogical and so that when you lose debates on sexism, you then have the excuse of oppression to fall back on
'Men are all illogical cry babies, who won't listen'.If you don't like it report it.
Why would I report it, it is not and should not be against any Charter.
See, I have the ability to be offended and not make a disproportionate song and dance about it.
0 -
-
-
-
OutlawPete wrote: »You mean the comic that portrayed women as downtrodden, talented, apologizing, oppressed, intelligent slaves ..
.. and that men were all just all sex mad, extremely illogical, homophobic, irrational, domineering, self centered, paranoid whining cry babies ..
.. was that the comic you were were talking about?
The comic is an exaggerated method of showing how SOME men can treat women online. It is trying in a light-hearted way to show how some women feel. Given the format used, it has to pack a punch in a short period. So it relies on cliché and stereotype. But just because it uses these methods, it does not mean that it does not contain truths. Surely you can admit as much?
I don't think that any rational woman would believe that all men treat all women like that. But it does happen. Same as some women talk about and treat men ridiculously. But that is a separate argument for a separate thread. Just because some women act like that, does not mean that the girls here do not have valid points in what they say.
Also, the idea that so many men (myself included) are putting their input into this thread does prove that the original comic had some truth in it. Plus I imagine that the same thoughts and opinions have been aired over and over and over throughout the thread. Before everybody comes to conclusion that we will not all agree and everybody leaves still thinking that they were right all along
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
parker kent wrote: »It is trying in a light-hearted way to show how some women feel.
Total nonsense.
First of all, when you portray men as illogical, homophobic imbeciles who can only think with their cocks, it is NOT "light hearted". Secondly, this cartoon was held up as what has happened on this thread and many other quite recent threads and that is ludicrous. Take today's thread in AH for example.
On this thread here, we have women who make outlandish claims that men saying "get your tits out" is the same as a woman saying "All men are rapists and child molesters".
It truly is laughable and then when these women can no longer defend their views, they turn to the victim-hood mentality that they were right all along but the 'oppressive self centered, illogical man bastard' just can't see logic and so --- "sigh" --- back they must go to the patriarchal world were they can pull the comfort blanket that is being the 'downtrodden female' once again, over themselves - rather that is, than even consider the possibilty that they might be WRONG - heaven forbid!parker kent wrote: »Given the format used, it has to pack a punch in a short period.
So you have to base a cartoon on LIES to make a point because of the format??
Nah, there is poetic licence and then there is BULLSHIT!
There is far more going on in that cartoon that just exaggeration.parker kent wrote: ».. it does not mean that it does not contain truths.
It doesn't mean that they can't contain truths no, but that particular one does not - it's a self serving piece of tripe to make women in sexism debates look like victims of men who can't / won't listen.parker kent wrote: »But it does happen. Same as some women talk about and treat men ridiculously.
It is not held aloft as a one off, that cartoon was discussed as being the: "typical"!!!!!!
Sure look how women are claiming that the comic represents the AH thread.
It's a get out clause - lose a debate and instead of actually saying that men might have a point, just play the victim - the victim of the oppressive men who simply won't listen - it's a nonsense.parker kent wrote: »Just because some women act like that, does not mean that the girls here do not have valid points in what they say.
I have and do accept that sexism effects women online, your comment makes no sense - go and address that point to someone who doesn't believe it to be the case and who never reports sexism against women online, addressing it to me just means that you haven't even read the thread.parker kent wrote: »Also, the idea that so many men (myself included) are putting their input into this thread does prove that the original comic had some truth in it.
The only reason I am on this thread or in this forum is because that comic is a disgraceful, sexist, bigoted piece of feminist propaganda.
YOU may be here because you feel there is truth in it, I sir - am not.Not that one the one where he's writing the blog
Ah, sorry - think I found it now
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Pete I am not going to get into a tit-for-tat argument with you over this. You are pulling out quotes from me (often quotes that are taken from the middle of complete sentences) and using them out-of-context. Pulling a few words from the middle of a sentence in a much longer paragraph is hardly representative of my complete comment. Using a dismissive tone towards me and anybody that disagrees with you is hardly helping your argument either.
My point was simple, a comic was used to highlight a legitimate problem. I said it contains truths, not that every single word and image was true. That is an important distinction. But you decided to completely misrepresent what I actually said. Comics are by their nature light hearted. The comic was light hearted because it uses funny drawings and exaggerated problems. But comics are often used to portray serious points (read something like Maus for example). I was hardly saying that abuse of men is light hearted. But just because they are exaggerated does not mean that there is not a reality behind the joke.
I do not for one second believe that the comic (or most of the women here) are saying that men are "illogical, homophobic imbeciles who can only think with their cocks". That is just you being a sensationalist and putting words and meanings into other peoples mouths. The exaggerated manifestation of a dumb-ass man portrayed in the comics may be like that, but that is not the same as saying that all real-life men are like that. The same way that any comic is an exaggerated version of real life. It displays an element of reality through outlandish methods.
Sure some said here that it was typical. But so what? That was probably just some people venting some frustration. I agree that some women can get unnecessarily insulting towards men, but as I said in my first post (which you conveniently decided to edit out in your quotes from me), this is not the thread for that discussion. Open up a thread on sexism by women if you feel like it. But this is about sexism towards women on the Internet.
It was light-hearted because it was just a way for the cartoonist/author to vent. Although I am sure you will again respond to this use of the phrase light hearted by claiming incorrectly that the women here are perpetuating a "disgraceful, sexist, bigoted piece of feminist propaganda".
But basically, it was written by a woman who happened to be annoyed and expressed herself creatively. People are allowed to vent and I am sure that threads like this can often be a way for women to vent about men. Same as similar threads exist about women in other areas on the site. Personally, I hate most types of "men are bastards/women are bítches" threads. What most people really mean is that they have been hurt or annoyed by somebody who happened to be of the opposite sex. But there is no real harm in them. I would only become worried if the women decided in the middle of the thread to take a hedge clipper to the testicles of all men in the world. Which I presume is unlikely to happen
Also it is ironic that you claim the women here cannot defend their views in the same post that you decide to counter my post by misrepresenting my post and the posts of dozens of women.0 -
-
-
-
I never would - that would be stooping to the same level as guys who say women are gold-diggers, all the insulting stuff about Irish women etc... because they've encountered some, even many.
It's only a tiny few guys who push that stuff anyway - no way would I think they're representative of all guys.
sorry, but it has to be said
Or stooping to the same level as girls who say guys think all girls are gold diggers, all the insulting stuff about Irish guys etc.... because they've they encountered some, even many.
It's only a tiny few girls who push that stuff anyways - no way would I think they're representative of all girls.
This is where I come back to my objection to specific 'womens rights' or 'mens rights' groups. By their very nature they, whether they mean to or not, facilitate and legitimise the non issues along with the real issues.
So why not just forget about feminism, racism, ageism, xenophobism(that's totally a word I think). Just focus on human rights and human advocacy . Who will complain about that? Who will pick holes in that? Who will pick sides in that?
The pigs and cows......fair enough. When they put forward an argument I will hear them out.
Wait......wait.......sh1t!!!!!!
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
catthinkin wrote: »you speak for all men then do you ? :rolleyes:
I hope you see the irony in that comment
metrovelvet wrote: »Are you telling all the people who have this experience that 'no they dont have this experience?"
No and if you read my posts you would know that.parker kent wrote: »Pete I am not going to get into a tit-for-tat argument with you over this.
You replied to MY post and I replied to yours - if you want to call that "tit for tat" - suit yourself, I am just trying to debate the topic.parker kent wrote: »You are pulling out quotes from me (often quotes that are taken from the middle of complete sentences) and using them out-of-context.
You are being pedantic - I did nothing of the sort, although it is a common tactic in these debates - when users points are shown to hold little weight, they start suggesting that because whole paragraphs are not quoted, they have been misquoted.parker kent wrote: »Pulling a few words from the middle of a sentence in a much longer paragraph is hardly representative of my complete comment.
I find it truly bizarre, that someone who did not include ANY of my post in their reply (but yet went on to rubbish it) still has the audacity to complain because some of his was left out
parker kent wrote: »Also it is ironic that you claim the women here cannot defend their views in the same post that you decide to counter my post by misrepresenting my post and the posts of dozens of women.
I did NOT misrepresent your post, nor did I take a just few words from the middle of sentences ..
I quoted were FOUR FULL sentences and one was half as sentence, as that was your main point!!!parker kent wrote: »My point was simple, a comic was used to highlight a legitimate problem. I said it contains truths, not that every single word and image was true. That is an important distinction. But you decided to completely misrepresent what I actually said.
No true at all
Yes, your point was simple, here was your point again .. and this time I shall include the WHOLE paragraph (not that it makes one iota of difference) but, just so you won't have the excuse of claiming to be taken out of context again.parker kent wrote: »The comic is an exaggerated method of showing how SOME men can treat women online. It is trying in a light-hearted way to show how some women feel. Given the format used, it has to pack a punch in a short period. So it relies on cliché and stereotype. But just because it uses these methods, it does not mean that it does not contain truths. Surely you can admit as much?
The underlined part is what I used as THAT is your MAIN point and as you said yourself - your point was a "simple one" - that because the comic contains "truths" - it is somehow acceptable!
Now how exactly is viewing that line on it's own, taking you out of context precisely?!?!
Taking someone out of context means that you take a line from a paragraph and give it new meaning, something which I CLEARLY did not do!
Although, you are not the first user to try that one.
I shall repeat MY point again, perhaps this time - you can actually include it when, or - IF you reply:
The fact that it can be argued that it contains 'some' truth, is not good enough - there is some truth in almost all extremest bigoted rubbish. It is self serving sexist junk satire and it's purpose is to give those women who lose sexist debates and feel sorry for themselves, a get out clause.
When they have nothing of substance to add to the debate other than to sling insults and claim they are being ganged up on, that 'get out clause' - is the option of sitting back and sighing to each other and blaming "illogical" men who just WON'T listen to them and all because they are too busy thinking with their dicks and being self centered.
If you defend crap like that and suggest that it is acceptable and not sexist, just because it contains an element of truth, you are totally missing the point. If a user where to post a sexist comic based on the OPPOSITE side of the debate, would you be so quick to defend it I wonder.
Let's see shall we ..
Would the following comic be fine and justifiably if posted in the Gentleman's Club for instance, where men were discussing sexism online and how it affects them?
Would you defend that comic?
Would that be fine, just because there is SOME truth in it?? Would that be okay, because once there was an argument where one woman made some nonsensical statement like the above, about periods and so it has a grain of truth to it? Would it also be okay because, the format of cartoons means that they really need to pack a punch and so this is the angle that needs to be taken?? Does "some truth" really excuse the clear sexism and polarization of the debate into one extremely misogynist comic as is the case with the above??parker kent wrote: »I do not for one second believe that the comic (or most of the women here) are saying that men are "illogical, homophobic imbeciles who can only think with their cocks".
That is what the comic is suggesting, how can you not see that???
Women have said that the comic is "typical" of the sexist debates on
Boards. The comic portrays men as "illogical, homophobic imbeciles who can only think with their cocks" and so if they are saying it is representative of those debates, then that is how they see those men.
If the men were NOT portrayed like that, then they would not find the comic to be reflective of those debates, so how the men are portrayed is central to it's relevance.
To suggest otherwise is absurd.parker kent wrote: »That is just you being a sensationalist and putting words and meanings into other peoples mouths. The exaggerated manifestation of a dumb-ass man portrayed in the comics may be like that, but that is not the same as saying that all real-life men are like that. The same way that any comic is an exaggerated version of real life. It displays an element of reality through outlandish methods.
Tripe, sorry - but it is.
If there was a cartoon showing a woman to be a hysterical dumb blonde, screaming rape in a night-club, when a man just bumps into her - would that be fine and not at all sexist - all because it is contains an "exaggerated manifestation"??
You do realise that comics that have "exaggerated manifestations" can and are often extremely sexist, misogynistic, misandrist and racist? You say that they do not mean that "real men" are like that - do you think the comic is satirizing robots or something?
It is supposed to satirize men in those debates, that is the point of the comic and THAT is what makes is nonsense, sexist misandric nonsense at that.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-JxA9Rvs8I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQMbXvn2RNI
Advertisement