Sexism in disguise

Snorrius · Feb 5, 2014

Lately during disscussion about Polanski and Bieber (the first one is world famous director, the second is some singer) I've stated a couple of obvious facts of life like "as soon as women become pubertal it is normal for them to try use their seductive abilities to get what they want" or "sometimes women exploit legal system by seducing men and blaming them for rape afterwards striving for money, fame or revenge" and was surprised by the utter shock of some posters upon learning something trivial as this. Some (f.e. Goodfella) even used such strong expressions like "sexist pig".

But is this valid? Of course not.

When I say that women can use their seductive abilities to get what they want, I admit that women have their own volition and agency, and able to act out of their self-interest -- exactly like men. On the contrary, my pseudofeministic opponents try to portrait women like lifeless automatons unable to act or decide for themselves, who are object to oppression of men or mythical "The Patriarchy".

This is the real sexism.

Of course, I would not call my opponents "sexist pigs" but term "sexists in disguise" seems to be appropriate because they try to assure us they are pro-women.

So, what are you thoughts? Why people think that obvious statements like aforementioned are "sexist"? And what we should do about this fake feminism and its adherents?

Antilogic · Feb 5, 2014

Aside from the fact that pubertal is a hilarious word, your comments do sound pretty sexist. They sound so because you are ascribing both a malicious and manipulative intent as a normal condition of a gender because... why? You respect their free volition and agency?

Kyriakos · Feb 5, 2014

I think that women who try to use sex to get somewhere, are already damaging their own self.
There obviously exists some somatic difference, which makes it (potentially) more likely that females are damaged more severely in such matters (psychologically). I am pretty sure that even teenage girls do not under normal circumstances try to pass their own self as a sex object, unless they are traumatised already.

Once people get over the phase where they view the other person as meat, it gets a lot better and humane..

Borachio · Feb 5, 2014

Pubertal is a correct word. Or at least one of them. Pubescent is the one I'd incline to. But this is neither here nor there, I think.

I've no idea about this subject: whether it's sexist, or sexism in disguise. I think it's true that many pubescent girls will inevitably test the water, as it were. By seeing just how much they are attractive to men and boys. And whether they can capitalize on their "assets". It's a dangerous game to play.

Oh, and why did nobody mention Nabokov in relation to the Polanski business?

luiz · Feb 5, 2014

The OP did say "sometimes" on his second (and perhaps more controversial) statement, so there's nothing wrong in what he stated. Sometimes women will make fake accusations of sexual harassment or even rape in order to obtain financial gains; this much is documented.

The first claim doesn't seem that controversial either, though I'd add a qualifier like "often". While not all women will use seduction/sex to advance their goals, it's patently obvious that this happens all the time and has happened throughout history across all cultures. And men do that too!

Antilogic · Feb 5, 2014

There isn't a "sometimes" in the first sentence, and "often" is the qualifier you would pick?

Kyriakos · Feb 5, 2014

luiz said:
The OP did say "sometimes" on his second (and perhaps more controversial) statement, so there's nothing wrong in what he stated. Sometimes women will make fake accusations of sexual harassment or even rape in order to obtain financial gains; this much is documented.

The first claim doesn't seem that controversial either, though I'd add a qualifier like "often". While not all women will use seduction/sex to advance their goals, it's patently obvious that this happens all the time and has happened throughout history across all cultures. And men do that too!

You are thinking of Brazil.
In England, women most often have less to work with :/

Spoiler :

luiz · Feb 5, 2014

Antilogic said:
There isn't a "sometimes" in the first sentence, and "often" is the qualifier you would pick?

The second and most controversial statement had a "sometimes". The first one is not controversial, though of course it needs a qualifier because not all women do that. But often seems appropriate as it is something that happens all the time. And as I said, men do it too.

Edit: in fact the only way the OP can be accused of sexism is perhaps by failing to acknowledge that women's seductive capacities (and seductive tricks, if you will) are hardly unique. Men are more than capable of seducing women and getting them to do what we want too. We do it all the time, sometimes unconsciously.

Traitorfish · Feb 5, 2014

I agree, people don't believe that women are intrinsically evil are the real sexists.

wait. :hmm:

Hygro · Feb 5, 2014

Snorrious, you're not going to get a satisfying reply because you've managed to use all the right hedge words to be technically accurate in describing what some people have done. But the big lie is that you are trying to fly under the radar while still claiming that women are naturally inclined to be evil and manipulative and we should treat them accordingly.

No one's buying it.

nc-1701 · Feb 5, 2014

Traitorfish said:
I agree, people don't believe that women are intrinsically evil are the real sexists.

wait.

Well if you believe that men are intrinsically evil and women aren't...

I'de say that makes you a sexist ipso facto. :lol:

Traitorfish · Feb 5, 2014

And you'd be right. But Disgustipated is over there; I'm Traitorfish. Spells and pronounces differently, see?

Disgustipated · Feb 5, 2014

Snorrius said:
Lately during disscussion about Polanski and Bieber (the first one is world famous director, the second is some singer) I've stated a couple of obvious facts of life like "as soon as women become pubertal it is normal for them to try use their seductive abilities to get what they want" or "sometimes women exploit legal system by seducing men and blaming them for rape afterwards striving for money, fame or revenge" and was surprised by the utter shock of some posters upon learning something trivial as this. Some (f.e. Goodfella) even used such strong expressions like "sexist pig".

But is this valid? Of course not.

When I say that women can use their seductive abilities to get what they want, I admit that women have their own volition and agency, and able to act out of their self-interest -- exactly like men. On the contrary, my pseudofeministic opponents try to portrait women like lifeless automatons unable to act or decide for themselves, who are object to oppression of men or mythical "The Patriarchy".

This is the real sexism.

Of course, I would not call my opponents "sexist pigs" but term "sexists in disguise" seems to be appropriate because they try to assure us they are pro-women.

So, what are you thoughts? Why people think that obvious statements like aforementioned are "sexist"? And what we should do about this fake feminism and its adherents?

haha, fake feminism, good read. Because that's exactly what it is. Guys act like women are always saints and would never lie about something like that. Or maybe they think by always taking the woman's side, they will get more *youknowwhat*. But I still think it's respectful to assume they are telling the truth until proven otherwise. Just because a few women are bad apples, doesn't mean all of them are.

I am pretty sure that even teenage girls do not under normal circumstances try to pass their own self as a sex object, unless they are traumatised already.

sounds a bit naive to me. But maybe that's just my experience. I grew up poor, and lived in poor neighborhoods my whole life (I still live in a poor neighborhood even though I'm technically upper middle class), and I see teenage girls act pretty slutty.

And you'd be right. But Disgustipated is over there; I'm Traitorfish. Spells and pronounces differently, see?

I see people misunderstood my thread. I never claimed there aren't evil women in the world. There are plenty of them. But perhaps society made them evil. Women don't have physical strength to get what they want, so they have to resort to manipulation and lies to get what they want. Perhaps if they had an equal playing field as men they wouldn't have to resort to such things.

Dralix · Feb 5, 2014

Snorrius said:
When I say that women can use their seductive abilities to get what they want

You didn't say they can. You said that it's normal for them to do so. You said that this is an obvious fact of life.

luiz · Feb 5, 2014

Dralix said:
You didn't say they can. You said that it's normal for them to do so. You said that this is an obvious fact of life.

I don't know what he said on the other thread so I won't say he is right, but what's written above kind of is...

I mean, historically men could get women to do what they want through superior physical force and/or financial means. Women's main tactic to get men to do what they want was, like it or not, seduction. This is quite cross-cultural (just read 1001 Nights). Of course, men also have always used seduction to get women to do what they want as well, but perhaps didn't have to use it as often.

Nowadays, where using physical force is not possible and financial means are more equal, both men and women use seduction all the time to get others to do what they want. I mean, how can this even be controversial? Just look around. We do it without even thinking about it. Probably in less advanced societies women still depend more on seduction than men.

Traitorfish · Feb 5, 2014

Disgustipated said:
I see people misunderstood my thread. I never claimed there aren't evil women in the world. There are plenty of them. But perhaps society made them evil. Women don't have physical strength to get what they want, so they have to resort to manipulation and lies to get what they want. Perhaps if they had an equal playing field as men they wouldn't have to resort to such things.

I don't know where you're getting the idea that men have the "physical strength to get what they want". As if that's how power actually works, guys just go around punching people in the face until they get what they want. You think Stalin or Napoleon got where they were because of pure physical might? It's always psychological, always about manipulation, and if punching people plays a role, it's as part of that manipulation.

Honestly, you just sound like a jock from a 1980s high school comedy who escaped into the real world and is struggling to come to terms with it.

luiz said:
I mean, historically men could get women to do what they want through superior physical force and/or financial means. Women's main tactic to get men to do what they want was, like it or not, seduction.

Abbesses were some of the most powerful women in Medieval Europe. By definition, seduction was not part of their arsenal.

Hygro · Feb 5, 2014

Disgustipated said:
haha, fake feminism, good read. Because that's exactly what it is. Guys act like women are always saints and would never lie about something like that. Or maybe they think by always taking the woman's side, they will get more *youknowwhat*. But I still think it's respectful to assume they are telling the truth until proven otherwise. Just because a few women are bad apples, doesn't mean all of them are.

Work with me here. What if I said you are viewing our 3 dimensional world in 1 dimension. What if the truth is at the coordinate 33x, 0.5y, 8999y and you're not even seeing y and z as entire whole dimensions that exist?

What would you do if you found out the world and reality is so much fuller and more nuanced than the world you're arguing, and that's why you come to these conclusions that any guy denying Snorrious is either unfairly idealizing women or trying to get laid, when in fact it's neither, and something else entirely?

luiz · Feb 5, 2014

Traitorfish said:
Abbesses were some of the most powerful women in Medieval Europe. By definition, seduction was not part of their arsenal.

Absolutely. It's never a 100% thing. But medieval Europe was very much a place ruled by males, with women in a (mostly) subaltern position.

Phrossack · Feb 5, 2014

Disgustipated said:
I see people misunderstood my thread. I never claimed there aren't evil women in the world. There are plenty of them. But perhaps society made them evil. Women don't have physical strength to get what they want, so they have to resort to manipulation and lies to get what they want. Perhaps if they had an equal playing field as men they wouldn't have to resort to such things.

I don't think physical strength has anything to do with it. Men really don't rely on strength at all in everyday life; it's not like threats and intimidation are used to buy groceries or get your average job.

Disgustipated · Feb 5, 2014

Phrossack said:
I don't think physical strength has anything to do with it. Men really don't rely on strength at all in everyday life; it's not like threats and intimidation are used to buy groceries or get your average job.

Not anymore. Lawyers have ensure that physical strength has no place in the modern world. Too much chance of getting sued. But it wasn't that long ago men took their differences outside.

Sexism in disguise

Librivorator

--

Creator

Way past lunacy

Trendy Revolutionary

--

Creator

Trendy Revolutionary

The Tighnahulish Kid

soundcloud.com/hygro/

bombombedum

The Tighnahulish Kid

Deity

Killer of threads

Trendy Revolutionary

The Tighnahulish Kid

soundcloud.com/hygro/

Trendy Revolutionary

Armored Fish and Armored Men

Deity

Similar threads