Feminism

[CapTon 592]

 

Now (being a guy and all), I obviously think that the topic of this video is idiotic (however, the director or producer [forget which one] is a man). Feminism, by definition, is "the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men". However, many feminists appear to just blame men for everything that is wrong with this world. Global warming? Men constructed the cars and factories that contribute to it. Ebola? A man brought it to North America. 9/11? Men flew those planes into those towers. You get my drift.

Ugh, please... Feminism DOES NOT blame men for everything, especially not Global warming, Ebola or 9/11. Its not a movement of men hating lesbians or anything like that. Feminists don't hate men. Anyone that claims otherwise either does not know what feminists stand for or they are part of the MRA scene, which has a particularly misguided hatred for feminists, often to the point of misogyny. 

 

People please go check out what actual feminists stand for, go look up their view point on wikipedia or go follow a feminist blog somewhere. Read from feminists themselves what they think about particular subjects, rather than from people who aren't feminists themselves yet claim to know what feminists think. 

 

I just read posts from people that claim to be feminists on various websites. That's why I made the post I did I should probably watch the video, now that I think about it.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Those children need to be rescued from the abusive environment.  No matter how you look at it, it has no redeeming value IMHO, and is nothing but child porn.

[Duke87 1,070]

I've always wondered why Americans are so sensitive to swear words, especially with children. I mean, I can assure you that those children drop f-bombs all the time when their parents aren't watching. And those same parents drop f-bombs all the time as well when their children aren't around.

 

It depends. There are many adults out there in this country who actually legitimately do not swear, because they believe it to be sinful or otherwise inappropriate in any and all contexts. Then there are adults who constantly swear like sailors. The former type of person usually looks down on the latter type and thinks "his mama didn't raise him right".

 

As for the issue of children swearing, the trouble is that a child might not be aware enough to recognize the subtleties of when it is and isn't acceptable to use profanity, since children tend to lack filters and have no trouble repeating anything they hear, especially if it comes from their parents. We teach our children to never swear because they're not old enough to properly judge when it is and isn't okay.

 

But my concern here isn't that saying the words is itself damaging to the children. Yes, the children know the words and all that. But since it's on video and on the internet, it's preserved forever and may potentially damage the future careers of these girls. Think not about now, but about 15 years from now when one of those girls is applying for a job and the HR department finds this video of them. The existence of said video may very well cost them the job, because a lot of employers will disqualify applicants for having pictures or video online of them doing something inappropriate.

If the person depicted is an adult, whatever, their decision. But these children are too young to appreciate the risk they are taking by having this video of them online.

 

 

Furthermore, I DO NOT approve of children being exploited to make any sort of political point. These children are not old enough to really appreciate the implications of everything they are saying or to have formed a mature opinion about it. They are basically just being used as puppets. That is not right. That, indeed, is the exact opposite of empowering these young girls, because they are being taught to repeat canned ideology that they are fed rather than to think and form their own opinions. And no, it doesn't matter whether what they are saying is right or not. An intelligent and empowered person must be allowed to come to that conclusion themselves, not indoctrinated into it.

[Compdude787 916]

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/10/24/barbara-kay-feminist-video-turns-to-child-abuse-to-send-distorted-message/

 

Should this be deemed child abuse? Either way, this is sickening.

Why did I watch that video--why?! That is sickening! Also, we all need to remember where the real war on women is taking place: in Muslim countries in the Middle East. The treatment of women in Islamic countries is just sad, and a better use of feminists' time is to speak out against the oppression of women in the Middle East. The fact that it's illegal for women to drive in Saudi Arabia is just the tip of the iceberg.

[iLoveMusic 66]

I'd be lying if I said I thought that video was sick. I admit, I found that to be plenty entertaining. Thanks for that. 

 

Having said that, however, I do agree with some user's notions that the children are being used to push a political ideology to the public. I don't think it's necessarily a bad one, but I doubt that even this will be very effective, if at all. Rape has been going on during humanity's entire existence on this planet, and will likely continue to its end. To those who push for space colonization.....I bet the rest of the universe just can't wait for us! 

[LexusInfernus 908]

It depends. There are many adults out there in this country who actually legitimately do not swear, because they believe it to be sinful or otherwise inappropriate in any and all contexts. Then there are adults who constantly swear like sailors. The former type of person usually looks down on the latter type and thinks "his mama didn't raise him right".

 

As for the issue of children swearing, the trouble is that a child might not be aware enough to recognize the subtleties of when it is and isn't acceptable to use profanity, since children tend to lack filters and have no trouble repeating anything they hear, especially if it comes from their parents. We teach our children to never swear because they're not old enough to properly judge when it is and isn't okay.

Ah I see, thanks for clarifying. We have a small group of people over here as well that are against curse words. They are generally looked down upon though by everyone else for being to patronizing and religious, and its considered to be non of their business if people want to use swear words or not. 

 

And well, I'd say the F word isn't much of a swear word any more. More like a way to give a little more strength to what your saying. Like youre not just serious, no you are f'ing serious. Or you are just not feeling well, no you are feeling f'ing sick. Of course you can over do it, but that only makes you look silly and stupid. Like you don't know the English language well enough to properly express yourself so you have to rely on one word so much. 

 

And in any case, I think its ridiculous to say that using the F bomb a lot makes you look like a slut or a whore, like the writer of the article stated. 

 

But my concern here isn't that saying the words is itself damaging to the children. Yes, the children know the words and all that. But since it's on video and on the internet, it's preserved forever and may potentially damage the future careers of these girls. Think not about now, but about 15 years from now when one of those girls is applying for a job and the HR department finds this video of them. The existence of said video may very well cost them the job, because a lot of employers will disqualify applicants for having pictures or video online of them doing something inappropriate.

If the person depicted is an adult, whatever, their decision. But these children are too young to appreciate the risk they are taking by having this video of them online.

 

Well they weren't on there by their full names were they? And don't you think your potential employer takes into account that you were 8 or 9 years old when you did that? You have to be a real inconsiderate *expletive* if you are refusing to hire qualified people for a job because of a video they did when they were minors over a decade ago. That is provided that they even find that video. Sure, once its on the internet its there forever, but that doesn't mean it will be easy to find. I mean, this video is going to be forgotten within a week and its gonna be buried by a decade of new videos and information. 

 

 

Furthermore, I DO NOT approve of children being exploited to make any sort of political point. These children are not old enough to really appreciate the implications of everything they are saying or to have formed a mature opinion about it. They are basically just being used as puppets. That is not right. That, indeed, is the exact opposite of empowering these young girls, because they are being taught to repeat canned ideology that they are fed rather than to think and form their own opinions. And no, it doesn't matter whether what they are saying is right or not. An intelligent and empowered person must be allowed to come to that conclusion themselves, not indoctrinated into it.

 

Well yeah, that is a fair point. At the same time, its also a little...well, a double standard. I mean, kids get raised by religious families, which means they are led to believe in religion without ever getting the chance to consent to any of that. Have you seen the documentary 'Jesus Camp'? There is a kid, perhaps 10 years old and he wants to be a minister. And he goes out on the street at some point to talk to people about Jesus. Why is that okay or why do those people get a pass? And every family has political leanings which are passed onto their children who also never get the chance to to first explore all the options before making an informed decision. And when those parents go to a political rally and take their kids, those kids are 'used' as well for a political movement to which they cannot consent or approve. When a politician kisses a baby, that baby gets used by the political movement that politician represents, but Ive never heard people complain about that, other than saying its such an obvious ploy of that politician to look good to the public. 

 

We are all products of our environment and we never get a chance or a say in which environment we are born. So why is that okay but it becomes a problem when you put a camera in front of them and have them parrot what their parents taught them? 

 

 

Why did I watch that video--why?! That is sickening! Also, we all need to remember where the real war on women is taking place: in Muslim countries in the Middle East. The treatment of women in Islamic countries is just sad, and a better use of feminists' time is to speak out against the oppression of women in the Middle East. The fact that it's illegal for women to drive in Saudi Arabia is just the tip of the iceberg.

Is it bad in those countries? Well, yeah, from a western perspective it is. But that is not our business. Those women don't need well meaning westerners to tell them how to be 'liberated' from their particular form of patriarchy. They can and must do that themselves. Furthermore, just because some other place is perceived to have it worse does not mean we should therefor ignore the problems that still exist over here. Those problems are real and they are still problems, even if they are not as bad as what happens in Saudi Arabia. 

[Duke87 1,070]

Well they weren't on there by their full names were they? And don't you think your potential employer takes into account that you were 8 or 9 years old when you did that?

 

I personally think it is a ludicrous and unfair practice, but the reality is that a lot of employers in the US today do investigate the online presence of job applicants as a sort of informal background check. Meanwhile this is completely legal and that is unlikely to change anytime soon.

 

Well yeah, that is a fair point. At the same time, its also a little...well, a double standard. I mean, kids get raised by religious families, which means they are led to believe in religion without ever getting the chance to consent to any of that. Have you seen the documentary 'Jesus Camp'? There is a kid, perhaps 10 years old and he wants to be a minister. And he goes out on the street at some point to talk to people about Jesus. Why is that okay or why do those people get a pass?

 

I don't think that is okay either. It's the same thing and it's just as wrong.

 

But as for why those people get a pass, well, it's because preaching Christianity is more or less arguing in favor of the status quo in most of the US, while feminism is fighting it head on even in more progressive areas. People look the other way when they agree with what the kid is being brainwashed to believe, but flip out when they disagree with it. The nasty part about double standards is that it goes against human nature to not have them. It's a lot easier to criticize others than to accept criticism of oneself.

[LexusInfernus 908]

I personally think it is a ludicrous and unfair practice, but the reality is that a lot of employers in the US today do investigate the online presence of job applicants as a sort of informal background check. Meanwhile this is completely legal and that is unlikely to change anytime soon.

Well yeah. But isn't that usually looking up someones social media profile and see if there are a lot of pictures of that person getting wasted on booze or drugs, or saying some really inappropriate/racist/sexist things in their status updates? And maybe check if they are connected to some youtube account to see if you made any weird vlogs saying or doing inappropriate things. Because this video isn't linked to those children in person, it would be done only in like 15 years or so, I think it would be really difficult to find this video and link it to them. Not impossible, but so much trouble that even employers doing an internet presence screening are not gonna find it. 

[ROFLyoshi 1,760]

Whilst yes I agree with the message that the children are spreading, I don't think it's right as they may not understand the implications. As Duke said, it's like the poor WBC children holding the "God hates X" signs, only that far more people are likely to support this message.

Back to the supposed claims CapTon made about feminists, I believe that it's a simple case of 10% of the population garner 90% of the attention. Those "feminists" who secretly hate men and push radical agenda are not real feminists, but unfortunately their stance has grabbed the attention and hence people think of this when they hear the words feminism. The average feminist is much more sane minded and I think feminism is far more common, even if people who could be classed as feminists do not identify with the term.

[T Wrecks 10,209]

Yeah, you always have a problem when a legitimate cause is hi-jacked by screaming nutjobs. This is for three reasons:

 

1. The nutjobs scream louder than the voices of reason talk
2. Some spectacular nutjob actions are much more likely to make the headlines because not only the nutjobs behind these actions long for attention: By definition, all media compete for attention, all over the world, every day, every minute. Their business is built on attention.
3. Those people who are skeptical or have certain fears or reservations with regard to a cause will tend to take the most extreme and riduclous manifestations as a confirmation of their fears and as a reason to be against everything bad that they project into the cause because of their underlying fears and reservations.
4. Extreme positions and actions tend to cause emotional reactions, which makes people blind for factual arguments and incites hatred against each other.

 

Regarding 4), I'd like to add my personal observation/impression that certain words have become "aggression triggers" in people whom I sketched under 3) above and can no longer be used without causing strong emotional reactions, rendering an actual discussion impossible. "Feminism" has become such a word. Just mentioning it makes some peoples' blood boil with rage because it triggers a whole series of associations that often tell not so much about "the others" but about the person who feels so angered by the trigger word. ("Obama" would be another example, I guess. )

 

That's why I find it useful to avoid these 'emotionally loaded' words altogether and talk about particular questions and problems instead. When you say "According to feminists, women should be allowed to chew bubble gum", the "f-word" will have some people on dangerous blood pressure levels already, even if the matter in question is pretty trivial. Just talking about the bubble gum affair can take a lot of pressure out of it because you reduce the "we against them" effect where one group projects loads of stuff into the other, and vice versa. Oh, and you can call a stupid opinion stupid without someone being able to say "THEY said WE are stupid". Same thing, really.

[SimCoug 5,973]

And well, I'd say the F word isn't much of a swear word any more.

I disagree - Interacting in a public setting one very rarely hears the Fbomb (or any swear words for that matter).  I'm not going to go to McDonadls and order a f'ing Big Mac because I'm really hungry and I want to emphasize that fact.  

 

In a private setting with friends, sure, swear words are ok.  But a YouTube video is anything but private. 

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Actually, over the years politesse has taken a real hit.  School yard language has slowly become the norm as more and more children are having children and parents, if you can call them that, abdicate responsibilities to state institutions like schools who really are not set up to handle it any more.  Too many 'entitlements' and not enough real responsibility on the procreation side.

[T Wrecks 10,209]

Wouldn't that be topic enough for a separate thread?

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Wouldn't that be topic enough for a separate thread?

If you really think its worth it, set it up and move the comment.

[LexusInfernus 908]

Back to the supposed claims CapTon made about feminists, I believe that it's a simple case of 10% of the population garner 90% of the attention. Those "feminists" who secretly hate men and push radical agenda are not real feminists, but unfortunately their stance has grabbed the attention and hence people think of this when they hear the words feminism. The average feminist is much more sane minded and I think feminism is far more common, even if people who could be classed as feminists do not identify with the term.

It doesn't help when the people who oppose feminism for some reason actively keep reinforcing the image that feminists are actually all angry men hating lesbians. Makes it super easy for them to just disregard feminists viewpoints as the viewpoints of a bunch of angry men hating lesbians. No one is gonna listen to what they have to say right? Which is sad because you are absolutely right, a lot of sane minded people would agree with a lot if not most of the things feminists stand for. 

 

Oh well, perhaps if enough Beyonce's, Emma Watsons. Jennifer Lawrence's and Miley Cyrus's come out as feminists they can convince other people that Feminism isn't about hating men at all. 

[Ocram's Razr 963]

See, feminism is misunderstood because of the extremists who get all the attention. The same thing applies to GamerGate. It was at first a boycott of certain products after a group of gamers found out that a person going by the name of "Zoe Quinn" (which was just a pseudonym) spread untrue defamation and turned out to not have any credibility (she was some sort of "erotic model"). Then it evolved to "Political Correctness in video games" then it evolved into a discussion on women in video games (players and characters). However, somewhere along the way, the movement got disrupted by trolls and other unsavoury commentators. There are confirmed cases of some users instigating both sides towards aggression by saying hurtful things in slightly different places about both sides. There are a fair share of misogynist men who play video games who put their opinion out but there were also extremist "feminists" who put their opinion out.

There are also a whole lot of "typical" Radical Feminists who claim not to hate men but want to violently overthrow the "patriarchal state." Most of the extremists, man-haters, anarchists, trollers, flamers, and violent women have flocked to the "Radical Feminism" movement.

Now, it is difficult to argue against the merits of the first wave and second wave of feminism but the method of carrying out the third wave is more controversial and upsetting to even most progressives.

Also Miley Cyrus and Ke$ha don't help the feminist cause but they are very strong fighters for the "third wave." Beyonce got in trouble with some feminists by being complacent in a duet with her husband while he rapped about Anna Mae eating cake. Emma Watson seems to be one of the better actresses for supporting the cause and I like her actions and words.

About that video going around exploiting young girls to "support feminism" and swearing, it disgusts me.

--Ocram

[LexusInfernus 908]

See, feminism is misunderstood because of the extremists who get all the attention. The same thing applies to GamerGate. It was at first a boycott of certain products after a group of gamers found out that a person going by the name of "Zoe Quinn" (which was just a pseudonym) spread untrue defamation and turned out to not have any credibility (she was some sort of "erotic model"). Then it evolved to "Political Correctness in video games" then it evolved into a discussion on women in video games (players and characters). However, somewhere along the way, the movement got disrupted by trolls and other unsavoury commentators. There are confirmed cases of some users instigating both sides towards aggression by saying hurtful things in slightly different places about both sides. There are a fair share of misogynist men who play video games who put their opinion out but there were also extremist "feminists" who put their opinion out.

Wait what? Zoe Quin is not pseudonym of some erotic model. She is a legit game developer, having made a game called 'depression quest' (for which she also received a lot of abuse). This whole GamerGate thing happened when her ex decided to post a bunch of accusations of her sleeping with other people on the internet and the trolls who already hated her decided that was a good moment to start the abuse again. The thing was, that her ex accused her of sleeping with a writer from Kotaku, supposedly to get good reviews for her game (this claim has been debunked, the writer in question never wrote a review about her game). In any case, that caused the gamergate movement to be about journalistic ethics. And while some people who support it are really just about that (TotalBiscuit for instance) it still hides a lot of trolls who just use Gamergate as an excuse to go after women in the gaming industry. 

 

The both sides isn't between trolls and feminists, the both sides are both packed inside the gamergate movement. One side is the group of people that wants to have a serious discussion about the relation of games media with game developers and the games industry and the other side are misogynistic trolls attacking women. 

 

 

 

 

There are also a whole lot of "typical" Radical Feminists who claim not to hate men but want to violently overthrow the "patriarchal state." Most of the extremists, man-haters, anarchists, trollers, flamers, and violent women have flocked to the "Radical Feminism" movement.

Now, it is difficult to argue against the merits of the first wave and second wave of feminism but the method of carrying out the third wave is more controversial and upsetting to even most progressives.

 

Sorry but violently overthrow the 'patriarchal state'? Yeah no, we are not Marxists talking about violent revolution against the capitalists. I dont even think the most radical feminist of radical feminists thinks violently overthrowing patriarchy is even a thing. 

 

And sorry, but do you even know what third wave feminism is?

[Ocram's Razr 963]

1. This seems as credible a source as any in this particular subject: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152274323855882&set=a.412206445881.199341.597085881&type=1

2. Third wave feminism is about "sex-positive" feminism; it promotes sex work (including pornography and prostitution), "reproductive rights," and promiscuity while attempting to destroy various societal roles. There is also an attempt by some to be more inclusive but intersectionality is not very common.

3. I never said the trolls were on only one side. There are feminists on side and MRA's on the other side but there are also trolls on both sides and there are people on both sides who want a serious discussion (they just have different opinions). Saying that GamerGate is almost exclusively reasonable people who want a serious debate versus trolls shows your prejudices. One should always be aware of one's own prejudices and privileges.

4. I agree with the tenets of feminism but I disagree with most of the Radical Feminists that I am made aware of (the most vocal ones).

--Ocram

[Duke87 1,070]

Some random person posting a photo on Facebook is hardly a reliable or credible source.

 

But regardless of that, the fact remains that this woman was on the receiving end of tons of horrible harassment, for daring to commit the heinous offense of making a video game while female. Because we all know that only men are actually interested in video games, and any woman expressing interest is automatically a skank who's just faking it to seek the attention of men, right?

 

I fear that a lot of men who've grown up playing video games have gotten themselves too stuck in a particular mindset over it. Women are not an opponent to beat, and blue shelling one for daring to be successful earns you nothing.

[LexusInfernus 908]

1. This seems as credible a source as any in this particular subject: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152274323855882&set=a.412206445881.199341.597085881&type=1

2. Third wave feminism is about "sex-positive" feminism; it promotes sex work (including pornography and prostitution), "reproductive rights," and promiscuity while attempting to destroy various societal roles. There is also an attempt by some to be more inclusive but intersectionality is not very common.

3. I never said the trolls were on only one side. There are feminists on side and MRA's on the other side but there are also trolls on both sides and there are people on both sides who want a serious discussion (they just have different opinions). Saying that GamerGate is almost exclusively reasonable people who want a serious debate versus trolls shows your prejudices. One should always be aware of one's own prejudices and privileges.

4. I agree with the tenets of feminism but I disagree with most of the Radical Feminists that I am made aware of (the most vocal ones).

--Ocram

Like Duke said, Facebook is not a reliable source. All we see is a photo of three women, and a story claiming she made nude pictures. No links to those pictures, no evidence, just her word. And even if she did that, it doesn't make her any less of a game developer or a human being. It does not, in any way, excuse the death and rape threats. 

 

No, third wave feminism is not about sex positivism, at least not solely. And even then its still a contentious issue within the feminist community. Third wave feminism is about lots of things. Indeed, reproductive rights are an issue, mostly because they are under heavy attack, at least in the US, but also about issues pertaining to women of color, work, sexual assault (against both genders I might add),  LGBT right issues, etc. In short, third wave feminism has no clearly set of defined issues its dealing with, unlike the first and second wave. Also, I think you don't understand what sex positivism means. It does not mean that its promoting people to sleep or promote work in the sex industry. It means that women own their sexuality and that they are not 'sluts' if they like having consensual sex with someone else even if its outside the a relationship. Its also not inherently against porn or the sex industry (and no, that does not mean you promote working in the sex industry) as long as the actors or sex workers are not there against their will. Even so, this last bit is pretty contentious within the feminist community, and feminists remain critical of the sex and porn industry at large because of its mistreatment of a lot of actors and sex workers. 

 

Now as for destroying social roles? What? No, I think you meant gender roles. Aka roles that are arbitrarily assigned to a specific gender. What they want is that people can pick whatever role they like the most, not the one society sort of forces them to take, even if they have no interest in it.

[Ocram's Razr 963]

I was trying to say that there are no reliable or credible sources on this matter. There is a lot of misinformation going around and it is hard to know what to believe.

--Ocram

[LexusInfernus 908]

Hmm well, perhaps this will help clear things up a little.

 

It gives a nice oversight of the start of the whole controversy, the movement itself and the various critiques on the movement. 

 

It should be clear by now that Gamergate is a serious [excrement]storm. 

 

 

 

 

Edited to remove masked swearing - ST Staff

[cmdp123789 710]

OMG.. I will only say it once, because this is overwhelming...

 

First off, women are a subject that gets lots of attention, and of course lot of money, so dont believe everything you see in a commercial.

 

Second, for the love of god, I dont mean to be rude, but please, if you dress up in a way that provokes people around you, and you know whats going on, dont complain about consequences later.. My girlfriend and I have this conversation very often, about behavior vs society.. of course it is wrong to rape a woman.. but its natural behavior overcoming our civilized senses.. what happens if you wave a piece of meat in front of a dog? SPOILER ALERT.. the dog will try to get it.. so.. dress and cover your body, and please, show some respect to yourself, and things will change.

 

Finally.. hearing those girls say bad words, thats nothing, and sorry to be so direct, but, they probably say them anyways, so.. I mean, its wrong, I know, but those kids are like what.. 8? 9? nowadays thats pretty common.. 

 

If you think about it, this is pretty messed up, and its never gonna change.. it is easier to find someone with money that will support you, than having to go to university and burn your eyes off reading books and doing homework.. Lets be real and honest... young people nowadays spend more time partying than anything else, and then they complain about society not caring about them.. It is awful to look at our generation and think that they are the future.. specially when they are your classmates, and they are more interested in how many likes they get in instagram than their midterms (MASTERS DEGREE FOR GODS SAKE)...

 

Anyways, to keep it short.. dress like a regular girl, MORE STUDY AND MORE WORK and LESS PARTY, dont tease people with th way you dress, and please, dont use your body as an object.. women complain about being looked as objects to men, then, please tell me that you never used your "assets" (body, or anything girls have in their favor) to get something out of someone.. you do it all the time girls.. to get discounts, to get better grades.. to get anything you wish, and then complain when things dont turn out the way you want.. hypocracy at its best isnt it?

[Duke87 1,070]

Second, for the love of god, I dont mean to be rude, but please, if you dress up in a way that provokes people around you, and you know whats going on, dont complain about consequences later.. My girlfriend and I have this conversation very often, about behavior vs society.. of course it is wrong to rape a woman.. but its natural behavior overcoming our civilized senses.. what happens if you wave a piece of meat in front of a dog? SPOILER ALERT.. the dog will try to get it.. so.. dress and cover your body, and please, show some respect to yourself, and things will change.

 

This is bogus. There are societies on Earth where women keep everything except their eyes covered in public. These societies are not exactly known for being respectful to women.

 

Also, for god's sake, men are not hungry dogs and women are not pieces of meat. That kind of thinking is why we have this problem.

 

It is a valid philosophical/moral debate what level of modesty in dress is or isn't appropriate in what situation. And yes, how you choose to dress does send a message about yourself. Too revealing for the circumstances and you may send a message that you're a bit short on self-respect. But under no circumstance, even if someone goes outside butt naked, are they sending the message "rape me". Women don't get raped because they lack dignity. Women get raped because the men who rape them lack dignity.

[cmdp123789 710]

Pardon me for the dog example.. I was trying to give an obvious example.

 

I agree on the societies part, yet, those are culturally different to us, and dont apply to our western standards, and Im not saying it in a bad way, but I have friends from that part of the world and they dont see it as a weird thing, in fact they are raised that way.

 

Back to topic, I know that even if you are naked, you have the right not be raped, but come on.. we dont live in utopias, you need to adapt and understand what today's world is made of. You cant just pretend things dont happen, specially when you are half of the reason they happen.

 

Im not trying to say ALL women behave the same way, and Im not trying to say it is their fault that this happens. But we cant ignore the fact that they appear half naked in tv adds for some reason.. and we cant ignore the fact that they use their bodies to get things... Again, Im not saying it is completely their fault.. but then again, go to youtube and see today's music videos, like something from Iggy Azalea? or Nicki Minaj.. women as sex objects sells... and then girls tend to lean that way because they get attention.

 

Oh, btw when I mean cover, I didnt mean like eastern cultures, I meant like cover your body the right way... I see girls nowadays that walk out with no bras.. side boobs? really? Im sorry, but you cant pretend people are going to see you half naked, and dont get "excited" about it.

[Duke87 1,070]

Whether they see it as weird or not isn't the point. The point is that women still get raped in societies where they are expected to entirely cover up, even though the purpose of making them cover up is ostensibly to prevent men from ogling them.

 

I do see your point that pop culture's treatment of women as sex objects leaves an impression on young women and perhaps dressing a bit more modestly would be a way to fight that tendency. But while it is tempting to say "if you want men to stop treating you as a sex object, stop treating yourself as one", the above example shows this is hardly a cure-all solution.

 

Still, it's not unsound advice. I don't blame anyone for wanting to dress very lightly in the middle of summer, and indeed it kinda sucks I can't get away with showing as much skin as women can. At the same time, though, I have seen plenty of examples of women being dressed in such a way in cooler months that I look at and can't help but think "how are you not freezing your ass off?". Clearly there is a different motivation there.

[Compdude787 916]

2. Third wave feminism is about "sex-positive" feminism; it promotes sex work (including pornography and prostitution), "reproductive rights," and promiscuity while attempting to destroy various societal roles. There is also an attempt by some to be more inclusive but intersectionality is not very common.

And that is what bugs me most about feminism. Why is it that women want to express their sexuality, yet at the same time complain about how they're being "sexually exploited?" You feminists can't have it both ways....

[iLoveMusic 66]

I know this isn't a popular opinion in America, but I for one would be completely supportive of legalizing prostitution here in the United States. I mean state-regulated, licensed brothels. Penn & Teller did an episode on this subject in their show Bullsh*t! a few years ago, which shows both sides of the argument (which you can find the 30-minute episode in it's entirety on YouTube, but there is a lot of nudity in it so I don't know if I can post the link here). I do believe it would just slightly reduce rape in the U.S., but I'm not sure if it would be noticed in statistics as the rapes it would prevent are generally not reported to the police in the first place (street-walking prostitutes being raped and unable to report it for obvious reasons). On the other hand, studies have shown (sorry for the weasel words, but I don't have any sources on this) that many rapes are committed by men for the feeling of power & control, not necessarily the desire for sex. Me personally, I'm not so desperate for sex that I would commit a rape, it doesn't really even occur to me. But, I also believe legalizing prostitution would lead to higher happiness among U.S. citizens, including myself. I'm aware that prostitution is legal in several Nevada counties, away from any major cities. The nearest one to me is a brothel in Pahrump, NV, about a 4-hour drive from here (yes, I look into this stuff!). 

 

I believe that those who are against prostitution are interested in social control. Religion and politicians getting into people's business in the bedroom. It's wrong, you shouldn't control other people's lives. Two consenting adults should be able to do as they please with each other, in private. State-regulated prostitution is legal in Germany, Switzerland, parts of Australia, Mexico, Turkey, Colombia, Venezuela, Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay, Tunisia, Taiwan, New Zealand, Netherlands, Greece, Austria, Slovakia, Latvia, Lebanon, Panama, Senegal, and Bangladesh. With that said, however, I am against forced prostitution and child prostitution. Not my thing, those two.

 

For now, in the U.S. most of us have to look into escort services (usually online) and risk getting caught and arrested in a police sting. That's really low, even for the police IMO. In some towns where there isn't enough crime to keep the police busy, they are either hiding behind bushes or dumpsters with a LIDAR gun, busting people for going 5 MPH over the limit, or setting up these horrible prostitution stings. Why? Do they really have nothing better to do than to bust two consenting adults conducting private business in their bedroom (or van, motel room, etc)? Terrible. There's no vote for that, of course. They just do it and nobody can stop them. So I say legalize it. Let those of us who want sex get it without all the bull that comes with it. Woman offers (protected) sex to strangers who seek it, I pay woman, she gives me sex. We do our business and then go our separate ways, never seeing each other again. She gets to pay her bills/rent/tuition or whatever, and I'm a happy guy! 

 

Edited to remove profanity - ST Staff

[NMUSpidey 3,956]

This is a general reminder to abide by our site's rules, available here: https://community.simtropolis.com/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules

 

Take note of the following:

Personal Member Safety and General Site Conduct.
Simtroplis is a PG-13 site. It recommended that members do not give out personally identifiable information to anyone else on the site or the internet. There is zero tolerance for the following behavior:

• Swearing (masked or otherwise), offensive, or profane language;
• Any offensive, pornographic, or obscene material;

 

 

Thank you for your time.

[Fantozzi 4,067]

Feminism is about how genders are a construction of cultural idears.

 

The sentence „Women do not owe men sex „ (initial post) is a perfect example for this.

 

If this, what it's saying, was bound to a specific gender – other sentences like for example

 

„men do not owe men sex“ or „flowers do not owe bees sex“ had to be proofed different. But if the sentence „no one owes sex to anybody“ is true, than we're talking about a human idear that isn't gender specific at all. Therefore to make a basic human idear a gender specific idear isn't „feminism“ it is the opposite, as it presumes „owe sex“ is female related, female specific.

 

It isn't.

 

Therefore – even if this sentence was written with a good purpose – it supposes allready a difference of genders regarding a basic idear of human behavior. It's like to say: woman do also have human rights.

 

This – in my opinion is very chauvinist. It's offending, as if males were to approve rights to females.

 

On this sort of generosity I can't feel proud. I feel ashamed.

 

I'll stop here. If I continue to say what I personally think about this thread it would become offending. I don't want to.

 

Sorry for my bad english.