smmudge
i know the smudge is true
What is the pay off for you in minimising in this way?
So he can act like a sexist dickhead and convince himself he's not being sexist?
What is the pay off for you in minimising in this way?
Of course I listen to women, I just don't believe them.
You don't have to 'buy' them. They are not for sale. You do have to accept them though, because they are true and real. What is the pay off for you in minimising in this way?
Do you think they're mistaken? Or dishonest? Why do you think that? Why are they like that?
You aren't helping yourself out much here.
Are they true and real though? That's the payoff, having an accurate picture of the world.
While sexism obv exists that doesn't mean every example of a man being rude to a woman is an example of it. I find it odd that some of you have this idea that it's wrong to question a woman's story. Being equal means no kid gloves and you have to justify what you're saying to other people without having to rely on this "just believe" philosophy.
I don't think anyone is saying 'just believe' though. You have been given countless examples, so have others on this thread. You have also been linked to other sources of evidence...it's all there if you cared to look and see. You just seem to be saiyng 'but, but, but...'
I also think that what women want is 'equity' which isn't the same as equality. Achieved or achieving equality can be as shallow and everyday as being charged the same for you cup of coffee as a bloke whilst still not being paid the same as them for doing the same job.
They might be....women can be wrong and dishonest can't they? Do you always believe what a woman says because she's a woman?
They can be. By what do you think it's them not you?
I’ve eyerolled so hard I’ve strained something
Then I don't really understand why you have an issue with my position. I take each story/individual on their own merits, don't you?
Not only on their individual merits, no. Because requiring proof in every individual case can have the cumulative effect of obscuring a wider social problem.
Imagine a 1,000,000 interactions, where each of them had a 49.999999% chance of being an example of patriarchy.
You'd say that each one, when considered in isolation, probably wasn't; you'd aggregate those to 1,000,000 incidents that probably weren't - a whole load of nothing.
Whereas, by looking at the whole, I'd see a probable half million incidents of misogyny (albeit I wouldn't be able to point to any one individually with any degree of certainty).
I see no issue with using anecdote and archetypes to unpack social issues; whereas I would require better proof if I was going to challenge or accuse someone directly. What's happening in this thread is more akin to the former.
Where are you getting the 49.99999% figure from? what's the actual figure? How could you ever know?
Any figure would be pretty unreliable. Self reported and dependent upon the women assuming the intentions of the men, it'd be a totally subjective figure.
Using anecdote and archetype to unpack social issues is a very broad brush and inaccurate way to look at it, it's a bit lazy tbh. Anyhow, if you're going to do that then what would be the problem if other people use their anecdotes and archetypes to present a different perspective by saying "that happens to me too". It's not even a denial that these things take place, it's just saying maybe the patriarchy is a flawed idea, maybe it's a bit more complicated than that. Maybe women are victims as well as oppressors in a thousand different ways, maybe men are too.
Anyone who looks for examples to justify victimhood is going to find them esp if they rely on anecdote. There's plenty of actual evidence to backup reports of sexism towards women, there's no need to include trivial interactions too.
You're still missing the point.
Even if it's 10%, that's 100,000; as opposed to none proven!
Why are you assuming bad faith? That women are looking to justify victimhood?
Clearly, women don't find these things trivial.
I think I'm done with this, though; I'm happy to agree to disagree - to accept that you disbelieve that we live in a patriarchy, and many women's accounts of it.
Not least of all because this was a thread for women to post their experiences, not men to argue that they're wrong/lying.
Sexism exists and it's shit but the idea that society is arranged around the whims of men in order to subjugate women simply isn't true.
Loads of women find these things trivial.
Of course people are seeking to justify victimhood. the entire point of patriarchy is that women are victims of oppression.
Sexism exists and it's shit but the idea that society is arranged around the whims of men in order to subjugate women simply isn't true. Everyone one of us plays our part in shaping society, complain about shitty behaviour but don't pin it on men writ large.
It's ok to tell women that they're wrong, they're more than capable of standing up for themselves.
Loads of women find these things trivial.
Of course people are seeking to justify victimhood. the entire point of patriarchy is that women are victims of oppression.
Sexism exists and it's shit but the idea that society is arranged around the whims of men in order to subjugate women simply isn't true. Everyone one of us plays our part in shaping society, complain about shitty behaviour but don't pin it on men writ large.
It's ok to tell women that they're wrong, they're more than capable of standing up for themselves.
Loads of women find these things trivial.
Of course people are seeking to justify victimhood. the entire point of patriarchy is that women are victims of oppression.
Sexism exists and it's shit but the idea that society is arranged around the whims of men in order to subjugate women simply isn't true. Everyone one of us plays our part in shaping society, complain about shitty behaviour but don't pin it on men writ large.
It's ok to tell women that they're wrong, they're more than capable of standing up for themselves.
Some men don't want to listen to women. Like we have no right to express how we see the world if men don't agree.
Not all men, not all women - of course.
This post makes me very angry. And extremely frustrated. This is the epitome of what we're up against in this struggle to be understood.
If even a third of men think like this then there's no fucking point. I suspect it's a great many more.
Hold on to your hat, 2 thirds of women think this way.
Because every day it exists. What you call normal is part of the oppression.
I'll give you an example.
I work as the only woman on a middle management team of 6 people. Repeatedly I've given good advice abd made points and asked for certain things to be put in place.....ignored.
Then it might be days or weeks or even months later and a male member of the group will mahe the EXACT same suggestions and suddenly its a great idea and lets run with that.
You obviously have no fucking clue how that feels. And yes its the fucking patriarchy in action. Its the boys club. And it happens all the time....to women. So yes...it is a norm for many of us. And its shit to sit and hear your exact idea beung given by a male colleague and its suddenly a fantastic idea.
Yeah. That's it. Our elbows aren't sharp enough. That would have solved thousands of years of patriarchy. If only we'd asked you etc.God I hate it when that happens. When I'm overlooked at work i usually put it down to other people being more sharp elbowed than me but maybe it's because they're discriminating against me because of some aspect of my identity, I am mixed race so I guess it must be that. Couldn't possibly be any other reason.