Double standards

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

I follow a journalist on snapchat who declares herself a feminist.
She speaks a lot about men objectifying women and how it's not okay, it's never ok. This weekend she was at an event, where there was a lot of hot men and she commented on how hot they were, while then going on to talk about how having the ring girls in the ring was unnessessary, and sexist, an objectified women.

A lot of her followers seemed to call her out on the double standards, and she went on to state that it's different for men and woman as we aren't equal. That a man groping a woman is bigger, stronger, and groping from his pleasure, objectifying that woman. But that women groping men - while not a nice thing to do - is done for a laugh and because they're drunk and they're not leaving men in fear for their safety.

She makes the point women can't be sexist in the same way a black person cannot be racist, as they're in the superiority group.

As for my thoughts on the situation - while I see the point she makes, I can't agree with her on the sexism or racist points. I think in one way, if a girl is groped, sometimes it's acceptable for her to defend herself, whereas if a man gets groped, he can't do anything unless he wants the whole place to turn on him.

I'd be interested in hearing AHs opinions. Can women be sexist? Can a minority group be racist?

TerrorFirmer

The answer is quite simply a straight forward yes, no matter how much deluded idiots try to dress it up to suit their agenda.

Mister Vain

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Can women be sexist?

Yes.

Can a minority group be racist?

Yes.

Fleawuss

I'm going for a pint. Another one.

wakka12

I can see where she's coming from but it really invalidates her stance as a feminist. Wouldnt respect a word that comes out of her mouth tbh

sassyj

Loads of people call themselves feminists, but in reality have no f**king clue what it actually means.

andekwarhola

It's just an intellectual contortion to justify her own 'sexism' without endangering her career.

The_Valeyard

Anyone can be racist, sexist or just a c*nt. Regardless of minority status, background, ethics, religion, or any other excuse that could be made up.

ScumLord

LexieOnRale wrote: »

As for my thoughts on the situation - while I see the point she makes, I can't agree with her on the sexism or racist points. I think in one way, if a girl is groped, sometimes it's acceptable for her to defend herself, whereas if a man gets groped, he can't do anything unless he wants the whole place to turn on him.

To be fair, there's a massive difference between a women being objectified by a group of men, and a man being objectified by a group of women. The man might be embarrassed, angry but there's never any sense of danger. Men are very large, dangerous animals. We might be tame these days and I'd say the majority of men would never be any danger to a woman, but we're still often twice their size, regardless of intention we must look scary from a woman's perspective. If I meet a dude 2ft taller than me I'd be intimidated no matter how nice he was.

The feminist movement is a bit of a joke at this point though, it's making noise just to be heard. Which could be said about any special interest group trying to operate in today's media circus.

Pyr0

LexieOnRale wrote: »

I'd be interested in hearing AHs opinions. Can women be sexist? Can a minority group be racist?

Yes to both.

Mr. Incognito

http://www.marieclaire.com/culture/news/a19790/maisie-williams-feminism/

Sums it up well

GLaDOS

Thank god AH finally has a chance to complain about feminism

py2006

'Modern' feminism is all about double standards, hypocrisy, entitlement, sexism and for the real hardcore supremacy and misandry.

mickrock

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Can women be sexist?

Yes, they're really sexist in this very hot weather when they wear very little and nothing is left to the imagination!

Summer wind

Yes women can be sexist and yes black people can be racist. We are all human.

the_syco

ScumLord wrote: »

To be fair, there's a massive difference between a women being objectified by a group of men, and a man being objectified by a group of women. The man might be embarrassed, angry but there's never any sense of danger.

If the group of women said that they'd all being raped by the man, he'd be fcuked for life.

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

http://www.marieclaire.com/culture/news/a19790/maisie-williams-feminism/

Sums it up well

As feminism is the bettering of rights for females, calling everyone not feminist as sexist is nearly calling the kettle black.

Riddle101

She's deluded and sexist, and gives feminism a bad name.

harry Bailey esq

https://youtu.be/64-WBJ5Ykw4

the groutch

LexieOnRale wrote: »

I follow a journalist on snapchat who declares herself a feminist............

Niamh Horan, right?

Joe prim

I don't understand the troll's OP's original question, but I am a lonely guy who is available for groping. (American papers please copy)

Widdershins

Just because a man is probably physically bigger doesn't mean he is necessarily immune to feeling intimidated and just because someone is smaller than you doesn't mean they can't/won't harm you.
Basic manners should preclude us from leching over people regardless of their gender.

tritium

Of course theyd say the same standards dont apply to them. Isnt that sort of hypocrisy the standard defence when youre called on something like that? Its just a gentle variation of the "im not racist but...." line. Dont balme her for trying it when sheep in the wider media will just give her a free pass on that ****e.

osarusan

I can understand the argument that there is an institutional element to some instances of racism/sexism, but at the same time, if one person is treating another person differently purely because of their race/sex, what else can it be called?

Sure, not every instance is institutional racism/sexism, but it is racism/sexism nevertheless.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

the groutch wrote: »

Niamh Horan, right?

No, Rosemary McCabe

Maximus Alexander

I can see both sides of this to be honest. On the one hand, I do think it's possible for women to be sexist and I can imagine situations in today's society where them doing so in groups could cause actual harm to men. I don't mean physically, but mentally, emotionally or economically for example.

On the other hand, with respect to the example given, I've never met a man who had a problem with being objectified by women. I certainly don't. So I don't see any actual harm being done and it's all a bit of silly navel-gazing. Whereas I personally know women who have been left intimidated or worse for being objectified by men.

py2006

LexieOnRale wrote: »

No, Rosemary McCabe

Don't forget Louise O'Neil (Examiner) and Una Mulally (Times).

Serious headcases.

hatrickpatrick

and she went on to state that it's different for men and woman as we aren't equal

Ah yes, the "privilege" argument. Or to put it another way, "because the world sucks at the moment, it's ok for us to make it suck even more instead of trying to help fix it".

Amanda.ie

I have yet to meet a feminist who wasn't full of double standards. The lady the OP is talking about is an attention seeker at best.

Herb Powell

LexieOnRale wrote: »

I follow a journalist on snapchat who declares herself a feminist.
She speaks a lot about men objectifying women and how it's not okay, it's never ok. This weekend she was at an event, where there was a lot of hot men and she commented on how hot they were, while then going on to talk about how having the ring girls in the ring was unnessessary, and sexist, an objectified women.

A lot of her followers seemed to call her out on the double standards

Well hang on now, there is a bit of a difference between commenting on people being good-looking and the actual objectification here, the ring girls. Don't know exactly what event you're talking about, but I assume they were girls whose purpose was just being there and looking pretty
, not realistically doing much else.

I don't see a double standard/hypcrisy here, unless I'm misunderstanding the situation?

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Herb Powell wrote: »

Well hang on now, there is a bit of a difference between commenting on people being good-looking and the actual objectification here, the ring girls. Don't know exactly what event you're talking about, but I assume they were girls whose purpose was just being there and looking pretty
, not realistically doing much else.

I don't see a double standard/hypcrisy here, unless I'm misunderstanding the situation?

It brought on the discussion. Her followers commented on her talking about the lads being big rides and then when she got a bit outraged about the ring girls, who I suppose the men thought were big rides.

Then followed it up with women can't be sexist because they don't pose the same threat.

Your Face

All I know is - I loves the wimminz with da big booty. Holla!

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

In the interest of fairness, and not to misquote or put words in the journalists mouth, here's the context of the conversation. Also, it's not a dig at her, or her beliefs, I'm just genuinely curious to understand if this is genuinely how feminism works, or if it's a belief that's commonly held.

http://tinypic.com/r/vry7hy/9

ScumLord

ScumLord wrote: »

To be fair, there's a massive difference between a women being objectified by a group of men, and a man being objectified by a group of women.

Really? I've met plenty of girls who were physically stronger and fitter than I am. A group of women objectifying me in a negative way and becoming aggressive can be intimidating.

onthemitch

LexieOnRale wrote: »

It brought on the discussion. Her followers commented on her talking about the lads being big rides and then when she got a bit outraged about the ring girls, who I suppose the men thought were big rides.

Then followed it up with women can't be sexist because they don't pose the same threat.

Nope – wrong. I never said that women can't be sexist. I said that pointing out that somebody is good-looking (while they are partaking in an MMA fight) is not sexist. Hiring ring girls specifically BECAUSE they are good-looking, especially in the absence of "ring boys" IS sexist.

And I never said that women can't be sexist, or that black people can't be racist – I said that sexism doesn't affect men in the same way that it affects women (ie that we are all-too frequently objectified and sexually harassed or assaulted, events that are rare for men). Much like racism doesn't affect white people in the same way it affects black people.

I'm glad you've now put up that screenshot so that you can see, really clearly, that you both misunderstood and misrepresented me.

If anyone in this entire thread believes you posted this "to understand if this is how feminism works", well, I'll renounce my feminist hat and accept a life of kitchen-based servitude.

Taboola

LexieOnRale wrote: »

In the interest of fairness, and not to misquote or put words in the journalists mouth, here's the context of the conversation. Also, it's not a dig at her, or her beliefs, I'm just genuinely curious to understand if this is genuinely how feminism works, or if it's a belief that's commonly held.

http://tinypic.com/r/vry7hy/9

Yeh I think you've picked her up totally wrong here.

Billy86

LexieOnRale wrote: »

She makes the point women can't be sexist in the same way a black person cannot be racist, as they're in the superiority group.

Two laughable fallacies, and that's really all there is to it.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

onthemitch wrote: »

Nope – wrong. I never said that women can't be sexist. I said that pointing out that somebody is good-looking (while they are partaking in an MMA fight) is not sexist. Hiring ring girls specifically BECAUSE they are good-looking, especially in the absence of "ring boys" IS sexist.

And I never said that women can't be sexist, or that black people can't be racist – I said that sexism doesn't affect men in the same way that it affects women (ie that we are all-too frequently objectified and sexually harassed or assaulted, events that are rare for men). Much like racism doesn't affect white people in the same way it affects black people.

I'm glad you've now put up that screenshot so that you can see, really clearly, that you both misunderstood and misrepresented me.

If anyone in this entire thread believes you posted this "to understand if this is how feminism works", well, I'll renounce my feminist hat and accept a life of kitchen-based servitude.

Mm okay, but what's so hard to believe I'm genuinely interested in finding out from people who aren't you if they believe sexism affects men as much, or if black people being racist is just as bad as white people? It's an interesting discussion.

onthemitch

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Mm okay, but what's so hard to believe I'm genuinely interested in finding out from people who aren't you if they believe sexism affects men as much, or if black people being racist is just as bad as white people? It's an interesting discussion.

REALLY interesting, but just to clarify: my point wasn't that black people being racist was just fine and dandy. My point was that racism simply does not affect white people in the same way it affects black people. Similarly, sexism does not affect men in the same way it affects women.

There was nothing in there about granting permission to the minority groups (black people, women) to be sexist and/or racist. You simply made that part up.

noaddedsugar

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Mm okay, but what's so hard to believe I'm genuinely interested in finding out from people who aren't you if they believe sexism affects men as much, or if black people being racist is just as bad as white people? It's an interesting discussion.

She said it was hard to believe that you were trying to understand how feminism works. I find it hard to believe also. If that is what you were wondering you phrased your question oddly.

You know this board is ardently anti feminist, why on earth did you think AH would be the place that could answer how feminism works?

onthemitch

onthemitch wrote: »

Nope – wrong. I never said that women can't be sexist. I said that pointing out that somebody is good-looking (while they are partaking in an MMA fight) is not sexist. Hiring ring girls specifically BECAUSE they are good-looking, especially in the absence of "ring boys" IS sexist.

Is is that there were jobs available for sexy ring girls that is sexist, or that there were women wanting to become ring-girls that is sexist? Seems to me that if women never took these jobs, then they wouldn't exist.

More likely it's only sexist because some women are jealous of other women, and are using men to justify that jealousy.

And I never said that women can't be sexist, or that black people can't be racist – I said that sexism doesn't affect men in the same way that it affects women (ie that we are all-too frequently objectified and sexually harassed or assaulted, events that are rare for men).

And If I, as a man, am sexually harassed or assaulted by homosexual men? Or trans-gender? Or just women with higher testosterone than usual? Or simply a group of overweight strong women on a hen night? :rolleyes:

You're seeking to limit sexism against men basing it around physical assault. What about the sexism that suggests that women are always better parents than men? Quite a common misconception.

Much like racism doesn't affect white people in the same way it affects black people.

Rubbish. Try living in Asia (or a host of other areas) where there is active racism against white people and then you might understand what racism actualy entails.

I'm glad you've now put up that screenshot so that you can see, really clearly, that you both misunderstood and misrepresented me.

From this further explanation, I don't think they have.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

onthemitch wrote: »

REALLY interesting, but just to clarify: my point wasn't that black people being racist was just fine and dandy. My point was that racism simply does not affect white people in the same way it affects black people. Similarly, sexism does not affect in the same way it affects women.

There was nothing in there about granting permission to the minority groups (black people, women) to be sexist and/or racist. You simply made that part up.

We've already had this discussion, so I've heard your opinion on this. You've stated while it's not okay for a woman to grope a man, it's not as bad because she's doing it for the laugh on a hen party or because she's drunk.

I asked you earlier, if a man gropes an unattractive or very fat woman as a laugh, is that ok? Is that him being sexist? Or just being an asshole?

I would personally be of the belief all racism is bad. White people aren't less offended than black people.

You cannot tell a group of people how to take things. If a woman goes up to grope a man, then it is sexist. We don't have the right to tell that man how he should take that. If he wants to laugh it off, that's his business, but if he feels he's been singled out because of his gender, then that's fine too and he wouldn't be wrong.

Sweetemotion

onthemitch wrote: »

REALLY interesting, but just to clarify: my point wasn't that black people being racist was just fine and dandy. My point was that racism simply does not affect white people in the same way it affects black people. Similarly, sexism does not affect men in the same way it affects women.

There was nothing in there about granting permission to the minority groups (black people, women) to be sexist and/or racist. You simply made that part up.

In what way does racism, affect black people to white people differently?

And in what way does sexism affect women from men?

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

noaddedsugar wrote: »

She said it was hard to believe that you were trying to understand how feminism works. I find it hard to believe also. If that is what you were wondering you phrased your question oddly.

You know this board is ardently anti feminist, why on earth did you think AH would be the place that could answer how feminism works?

Because it's the forum I frequent and read the most and didn't think it would be against the charter? If you feel like the topic is more suited elsewhere, report the post.

El_Duderino 09

sassyj wrote:

Loads of people call themselves feminists, but in reality have no f**king clue what it actually means.

There are some people who are born into a traditional underclass and wax lyrical about inequality. But you know that if they were born into the other class they would love being racist, sexist or a bully.

People, they're the worst.

noaddedsugar

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Because it's the forum I frequent and read the most and didn't think it would be against the charter? If you feel like the topic is more suited elsewhere, report the post.

Of course it isn't against the charter. I found it odd that someone who I know frequents and posts here a lot would think that AH would be the place for explanations of feminism given that you know the vast majority of posters here are anti feminist. Or you weren't actually looking for an explanation of feminism at all.

yes there

Ah the old femininist brigade, all they really crave is a strong hot guy to slap them on the ass and give them a cheeky wink. I wonder what the response woukd be if David beckham and the likes done that to 100 random women.

El_Duderino 09

ScumLord wrote:

The feminist movement is a bit of a joke at this point though, it's making noise just to be heard. Which could be said about any special interest group trying to operate in today's media circus.

Not at all fair. It's as stupid as pointing to a silly law and saying 'laws are a joke at this point'.

Some feminists talk nonsense but as a man, I'm very glad that feminism is a serious movement. You dont hear about the millions of normal feminists like me in the same way you don't hear about the planes that landed safely at their destination. You hear all about the one in a million planes that crashes though. I don't worry about flying and I don't worry about the few crazy feminists.

Sweetemotion

noaddedsugar wrote: »

Of course it isn't against the charter. I found it odd that someone who I know frequents and posts here a lot would think that AH would be the place for explanations of feminism given that you know the vast majority of posters here are anti feminist. Or you weren't actually looking for an explanation of feminism at all.

What right, has a man got in Ireland, that a woman doesn't have?

py2006

Deleted User wrote: »

Is is that there were jobs available for sexy ring girls that is sexist, or that there were women wanting to become ring-girls that is sexist? Seems to me that if women never took these jobs, then they wouldn't exist.

More likely it's only sexist because some women are jealous of other women, and are using men to justify that jealousy.

Amen.

Sweetemotion

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Not at all fair. It's as stupid as pointing to a silly law and saying 'laws are a joke at this point'.

Some feminists talk nonsense but as a man, I'm very glad that feminism is a serious movement. You dont hear about the millions of normal feminists like me in the same way you don't hear about the planes that landed safely at their destination. You hear all about the one in a million planes that crashes though. I don't worry about flying and I don't worry about the few crazy feminists.

Steve Shives?

yes there

El_Duderino 09 wrote:

Some feminists talk nonsense but as a man, I'm very glad that feminism is a serious movement. You dont hear about the millions of normal feminists like me in the same way you don't hear about the planes that landed safely at their destination. You hear all about the one in a million planes that crashes though. I don't worry about flying and I don't worry about the few crazy feminists.

You are a guy and you are a feminist? My god. What on earth possessed you to become a feminist?