Originally posted by Bentley
The serious answer would be that it's very hard to reduce how misoginy works in a single sentence because it has a rich history working under different economic systems and in a wide range of social classes.Don't get me wrong, men are bitchy little things,
....and women aren't?
Originally posted by ArtificialGloryAnita Sarkeesian. You may have heard her name, she was the anti-gamer journalist who admitted she doesn't play video games she just reviews them...
Seriously? What's the name of this waste of biomatter?
She started off her UN speech literally saying the patriarchy was trying to silence her... At the UN, she had also been on MSNBC,the Daily Show, the Colbert Report and many other global programs... She is insane. Emma "Hermoine" Watson was also a speaker, she started the "he for she" campaign and then was bewildered why people think feminists aren't egalitarian.
Originally posted by Surtur
Hey I won't say men are better but I will say God didn't make it so men have to bleed for several days per month. Just sayin...
You're still off-topic. Just to note- I'm starting soon to give warnings to people that keep threads off-topic after a specific warning. Either post something useful or do not post.
Bardock opened a can of worms when he brought misogyny into this as well but that's no excuse for this to become just some sort of barrage of sexist commentary. If serious, it's just abusive and unacceptable, if in jest, it belongs in the OTF.
We could certainly go back to discussing the fact that at present time there is zero evidence this had anything to do with misogyny.
Granted the topic wasn't about misogyny and that was mentioned nonetheless.
But uh yeah so..no evidence as of yet. Yet since as I pointed out this having misogyny involved was a theory sooo..
I guess, gun rights maybe? Or just bad parenting. Probably has more to do with parenting then gun rights.
Anyways, getting back on topic. There seem to be two main societally acceptable responses to shootings like this or the one in Oregon earlier. And that's either blaming gun control or mental illness (depending on your politics). And while at least gun control has a chance to contribute to making things better, I don't think either are even in the top three to prevent tragedies like that.
Misogyny definitely plays a part in violence against women, which in parts fits different circumstances than those of men (particularly domestic violence). And things like toxic masculinity, competitiveness and condoning of violence in boys and men, as well teaching boys that only anger is a valid emotional outlet for them (because otherwise they are "being like girls"😉 are big contributing factors (the latter is also a big part in the fact that so many more men commit suicide).
Additionally I think more than a lack gun of control, the gun culture in general and the glorification of violence in the media play a role in the rampant gun violence. However implementing gun control could work to change attitudes towards the other two.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
You're still off-topic. Just to note- I'm starting soon to give warnings to people that keep threads off-topic after a specific warning. Either post something useful or do not post.Bardock opened a can of worms when he brought misogyny into this as well but that's no excuse for this to become just some sort of barrage of sexist commentary. If serious, it's just abusive and unacceptable, if in jest, it belongs in the OTF.
Im on the straight and narrow topic wise from heretofore!
Originally posted by Bardock42
Anyways, getting back on topic. There seem to be two main societally acceptable responses to shootings like this or the one in Oregon earlier. And that's either blaming gun control or mental illness (depending on your politics). And while at least gun control has a chance to contribute to making things better, I don't think either are even in the top three to prevent tragedies like that.Misogyny definitely plays a part in violence against women, which in parts fits different circumstances than those of men (particularly domestic violence). And things like toxic masculinity, competitiveness and condoning of violence in boys and men, as well teaching boys that only anger is a valid emotional outlet for them (because otherwise they are "being like girls"😉 are big contributing factors (the latter particularly to the fact that so many more men commit suicide).
Additionally I think more than a lack gun of control, the gun culture in general and the glorification of violence in the media play a role in the rampant gun violence. However implementing gun control could work to change attitudes towards the other two.
Originally posted by Star428
I second that. Bardock is on another one of his many gun control rants. Yet, for all his talk, he has no power to actually do anything about it. 🙂
This is bizarre to me, literally everyone else in this thread is annoyed that I am not talking more about gun control instead.
But Star, you'd be a prime candidate to actually answer the thread. You don't believe gun control is an answer. So what do you think is the reason that these kinds of things happen so often, and what do you think could be changed to solve the problem?
Originally posted by Bardock42i don't disagree with that
That's cause misandry is not a thing in the same way that people talk about misogyny. One is individual hatred (which can be both misogyny and misandry), the other systemic dehumanisation (which is only misogyny). We have to be more clear about what definitions of words we use.
but the way you use misogyny as an explanation for this shooting, just cause it involves a boy and a girl, makes me feel like "misogyny" the way you conceptualize it is also "not a thing."
my main problem with your line of rationale is you picked a case where there's no clear indicatation of a sexist motive, and ran with some narrative about how female lives are valued less simply because the victim happened to be a female. bullying happens all the time and is by no means based on sex or gender alone... the strong pick on the weak. that is the way of the world. girls just happen to be (statistically) weak.
what makes me think you and other feminists are being fake when you tout this line of rhetoric is if the victim in this case happened to be male, with all of the other facts in this case being the same, that wouldn't at all seem inconsistent or unusual. but then of course the misogyny angle wouldn't be used... though of course you'd come up with a rationalization for why "patriarchy" is to blame... yawn... the idea that female lives matter less goes right out the window when you consider this fact. you are simply propagandizing and using local tragedies as emotional leverage to make your point.
Originally posted by red g jacks
i don't disagree with thatbut the way you use misogyny as an explanation for this shooting, just cause it involves a boy and a girl, makes me feel like "misogyny" the way you conceptualize it is also "not a thing."
my main problem with your line of rationale is you picked a case where there's no clear indicatation of a sexist motive, and ran with some narrative about how female lives are valued less simply because the victim happened to be a female. bullying happens all the time and is by no means based on sex or gender alone... the strong pick on the weak. that is the way of the world. girls just happen to be (statistically) weak.
what makes me think you and other feminists are being fake when you tout this line of rhetoric is if the victim in this case happened to be male, with all of the other facts in this case being the same, that wouldn't at all seem inconsistent or unusual. but then of course the misogyny angle wouldn't be used... though of course you'd come up with a rationalization for why "patriarchy" is to blame... yawn... the idea that female lives matter less goes right out the window when you consider this fact. you are simply propagandizing and using local tragedies as emotional leverage to make your point.
This is just not a true representation of my point. I never said that female lives are valued less.
What I am saying is that the type of bullying as described in the story is often excused or even condoned when done by boys to girl.
If the victim in this case had been male, many of the reasons I gave earlier would still apply, however the condoning of disrespectful male behaviour when it comes to girl would not apply.