Everyday sexism

[claire.foxx]

The arc of this thread illustrates the OP’s video beautifully.

You get a “thank you for not raping” badge for competitive #NotAllMen enlightenment & skill at making it all about yourselves.
Well done!

 

[Minio]

When I was a nipper there were no "... ist" words like sexist.

Then the word was invented and its been quite a long saga of reacting to the unfairness of it.

From wolf whistles on the building site at women, to obvious vocational bias. At least some progress has been made, arguably.

We are now in the further advanced scenario where much debate arises from how to condition children from birth.

I have seen the dilemnas in young families over basic decisions like whether to buy your daughter a Meccano set or a dolls house and a nice pink Disney dress. Upsetting for parents and child.

Life's not so simple these days.

 

[tuga]

Why do all these old white christian male farts in politics hate the Alexandrias and Gretas and Marins of this world?
Are they so afraid?


Estonian minister mocks Finland's 'sales girl' PM Sanna Marin

Estonia’s president has apologised after his country’s interior minister mocked Finland’s new prime minister – the world’s youngest serving government leader – as a “sales girl” and questioned her fitness for the post.

Mart Helme, 70, the leader of the populist far-right party Ekre, ridiculed Finland’s Sanna Marin, 34, and her government – in which four out of five coalition leaders are women under 35 – on his party’s radio talkshow on Sunday.

“Now we see how one sales girl has become a prime minister and how some other street activists and non-educated people have also joined the cabinet,” Helme said.

Estonia’s president, Kersti Kaljulaid, asked Finland’s president, Sauli Niinistö, to pass on her apologies to Marin and her government.

Marin, who has spoken about growing up in a disadvantaged family, worked as a cashier before studying at university and embarking on a political career.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ster-mocks-finlands-sales-girl-pm-sanna-marin

 

[Frankiesays]

Why do all these old white christian male farts in politics hate the Alexandrias and Gretas and Marins of this world?
Are they so afraid?


Estonian minister mocks Finland's 'sales girl' PM Sanna Marin

Estonia’s president has apologised after his country’s interior minister mocked Finland’s new prime minister – the world’s youngest serving government leader – as a “sales girl” and questioned her fitness for the post.

Mart Helme, 70, the leader of the populist far-right party Ekre, ridiculed Finland’s Sanna Marin, 34, and her government – in which four out of five coalition leaders are women under 35 – on his party’s radio talkshow on Sunday.

“Now we see how one sales girl has become a prime minister and how some other street activists and non-educated people have also joined the cabinet,” Helme said.

Estonia’s president, Kersti Kaljulaid, asked Finland’s president, Sauli Niinistö, to pass on her apologies to Marin and her government.

Marin, who has spoken about growing up in a disadvantaged family, worked as a cashier before studying at university and embarking on a political career.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ster-mocks-finlands-sales-girl-pm-sanna-marin

Old, white 'n' male, so unfashionable these days.

 

[TheDecameron]

Old, white 'n' male, so unfashionable these days.

Not at all, just old dicks like the far right party leader in the post you quoted. Are you looking for guidance?

 

[claire.foxx]

...for something so unfashionable it seems the straight white male is the default choice these days. The lowest difficulty setting there Is.

 

[cutting42]

...for something so unfashionable it seems the straight white male is the default choice these days. The lowest difficulty setting there Is.

I liked that article, good writer and analogy

 

[Marky-Mark]

Opponents of Sexism are mostly honest people who advocate for positive change. But like a growing number of isms in our post real_people_living_real_lives world, sexism of any shade is increasingly embraced and extended by the social justice set, a mostly malcontented bunch whose central reality thesis centers on a new ideal of the 'circle of diversity' they ostensibly promote. In case you don't know how that works, it goes like this:

 

[KrisW]

The "spaces" argument makes a huge assumption: that you somehow had ownership of the culture you live and work in, and so your rules were the "right" ones. That's the lie that holds up every kind of racist or sexist argument. No one person can own a culture, and cultures aren't static things - they change as new people bring new ideas into them. But being an asshole is not essential to any kind of culture worth preserving.

Back on the actual topic, nobody denies that sexism isn't a female specific problem, but most sexism is at the expense of females. The fact that there are incidences of the opposite direction, where males lose out, is also a problem, but being against those cases and not the many more cases that disfavour women is a different phenomenon, one we'll call "being sexist".​

 

[Marky-Mark]

But being an asshole is not essential to any kind of culture worth preserving.​

Yet not only does most culture get shittier, it marches on triumphantly!

Anyway, I'm specifically referring to the more self defined whack-a-mole social media cultures, social stratifications, and their spinoffs: cancel culture; the leisure class with their luxury beliefs; identity politics and its robust narcissism, on and on it goes. It's all predicated on making it "all about me" which is the common charge the culture warriors routinely use to indict those in traditional cultures, presumably wanting to maintain whatever is the culture's status quo - and was the point of the circle of diversity graphic (I didn't make it).

 

[lazycat]

...for something so unfashionable it seems the straight white male is the default choice these days. The lowest difficulty setting there Is.

Although I agree with the point you're making.

I have to say that I experienced far more misogyny and racism in the gay 'community' when I was in the 'smoke'.

Quite frankly, I found it shocking. Admittedly I never, ever, fit into that environment but that's hardly f**kin surprising. I had a very multi-cultural upbringing at school (Birmingham) and a matriarical family. No my mother didn't make me a homosexual. lol

It's a white male thing I suppose, straight doesn't always mean asshole, 'cept in politics.

And sex.rofl... They do like being f**kd. Especially Essex boys.

 

[cooky1257]

I must confess to having a little chuckle listening to R4 yesterday when a guest was speaking/praising equality in the Finnish parliament; "63% of our MP's are female"

 

[claire.foxx]

The circle of diversity is weapons grade r/MGTOW and r/jordanpeterson bullshit. It pops up on incel groups too. A huge yikes. Incels, if you want to be a chad, don’t be a chud about it.

Mediocre old white straight guys talking about “culture” from a dominator culture that hoovers up every culture it can find and applies crapitalist perspectives onto it is also a huge ontological yikes. But Ok.

 

[calorgas]

Sports Personality of the year.

 

[Marky-Mark]

I have to say that I experienced far more misogyny and racism in the gay 'community' when I was in the 'smoke'.

That was absolutely my experience while in a relationship with a bisexual woman. She freely admitted that it was true, but had fun with it, so she said. And the club thing was actually fun. But that was in the late 80s / early 90s - I'm sure it's morphed a little since. To me, a straight white guy in my late 20s at the time, that particular culture (mostly in bars and her friends) seemed hyper-exaggerated in nearly all its aspects, which included, as you've said, misogyny, racism, narcissism, most any ism, really. Certainly alcoholism.

 

[KrisW]

@cooky1257 Did you perhaps hear two things rolled into one? The Finnish parliament is pretty much equal: 47% of MPs are female. However, the current Finnish government is unusual in having more female members than male - that 63% doesn't sound wrong. I'd be worried if that became a persistent feature, but as an overshoot, it's fine. The goal isn't to enforce a strict 51:49% ratio, it's to ensure that capable male or female candidates are not being excluded from parliament simply because they're male or female.

Yet not only does most culture get shittier, it marches on triumphantly!

That is, however, only your opinion. I'd argue that most changes have been to the better, but with regression in some areas. In the area of better treatment of women (this topic), I think it's hard to argue that things today are worse overall now than 50 years ago. I'm speaking about Western Europe, where I live, rather than the USA, where most of this rhetoric seems to come from.

Anyway, I'm specifically referring to the more self defined whack-a-mole social media cultures, social stratifications, and their spinoffs: cancel culture; the leisure class with their luxury beliefs; identity politics and its robust narcissism, on and on it goes. It's all predicated on making it "all about me" which is the common charge the culture warriors routinely use to indict those in traditional cultures, presumably wanting to maintain whatever is the culture's status quo - and was the point of the circle of diversity graphic (I didn't make it).

Execpt that that's not what the idea of diversity is about at all. While there are a few ignorant blowhards who've decided to appoint themselves as champions of diversity, that doesn't make the simple idea that we all have to share this place with everyone a bad one.

Some people don't like the idea of sharing because they see the world as a zero-sum game where you can't gain unless someone else also loses. That's simplistic, and it's wrong (and it suggests a mindset where you don't produce anything of value to gain wealth, but rather take it from someone else).

I steer clear of social media: it's full of people who would rather be right than helpful. The world isn't perfect, and never will be. We can accept that and work towards making things better, actively oppose that in a misguided attempt to keep our own little share, or sit and bitch and do nothing of value; I find too many of the latter two groups on social media.

 

[cooky1257]

@cooky1257 Did you perhaps hear two things rolled into one? The Finnish parliament is pretty much equal: 47% of MPs are female. However, the current Finnish government is unusual in having more female members than male - that 63% doesn't sound wrong. I'd be worried if that became a persistent feature, but as an overshoot, it's fine. The goal isn't to enforce a strict 51:49% ratio, it's to ensure that capable male or female candidates are not being excluded from parliament simply because they're male or female.


That is, however, only your opinion. I'd argue that most changes have been to the better, but with regression in some areas. In the area of better treatment of women (this topic), I think it's hard to argue that things today are worse overall now than 50 years ago. I'm speaking about Western Europe, where I live, rather than the USA, where most of this rhetoric seems to come from.


Execpt that that's not what the idea of diversity is about at all. While there are a few ignorant blowhards who've decided to appoint themselves as champions of diversity, that doesn't make the simple idea that we all have to share this place with everyone a bad one.

Some people don't like the idea of sharing because they see the world as a zero-sum game where you can't gain unless someone else also loses. That's simplistic, and it's wrong (and it suggests a mindset where you don't produce anything of value to gain wealth, but rather take it from someone else).

I steer clear of social media: it's full of people who would rather be right than helpful. The world isn't perfect, and never will be. We can accept that and work towards making things better, actively oppose that in a misguided attempt to keep our own little share, or sit and bitch and do nothing of value; I find too many of the latter two groups on social media.

Like I posted, it was just a chuckle.

 

[Marky-Mark]

That is, however, only your opinion. I'd argue that most changes have been to the better, but with regression in some areas. In the area of better treatment of women (this topic), I think it's hard to argue that things today are worse overall now than 50 years ago. I'm speaking about Western Europe, where I live, rather than the USA, where most of this rhetoric seems to come from.

Execpt that that's not what the idea of diversity is about at all. While there are a few ignorant blowhards who've decided to appoint themselves as champions of diversity, that doesn't make the simple idea that we all have to share this place with everyone a bad one.

Some people don't like the idea of sharing because they see the world as a zero-sum game where you can't gain unless someone else also loses. That's simplistic, and it's wrong (and it suggests a mindset where you don't produce anything of value to gain wealth, but rather take it from someone else).

I steer clear of social media: it's full of people who would rather be right than helpful. The world isn't perfect, and never will be. We can accept that and work towards making things better, actively oppose that in a misguided attempt to keep our own little share, or sit and bitch and do nothing of value; I find too many of the latter two groups on social media.

Totally agree with you on diversity, sexism, and the general condition of things. But this is social media so I coiled it up and dropped it here since I believe -here- it's relevant to point out how absolute shit the culture wars are. And unfortunately, what happens on social media doesn't always stay on social media. Far from it, actually.

 

[KrisW]

This is social, but it's not "social media". The first way it's better is that you have to actively find a topic to discuss here, whereas Facebook, Twitter and company will just keep throwing things at you regardless of your own interests, based on some misguided faith in "the algorithm". Whatever you had a moderate position on, Facebook or YouTube will make sure you get to see the most extreme, bat-shit crazy version of it before too long.

The second thing that keeps forums reasonably free of such nonsense is that, no matter how stunningly insightful and amazing my posts are (and I'm sure you'll agree... ), there's zero chance of half the world reading them, or me being quoted in the Guardian or the New York Times as a "commentator" on the back of them. I dread a future where a hard-pressed news editor says "I need a hot take on this - someone log into a hi-fi forum!". (Tomorrow's lead story: "Government Would Improve Health Outcomes By Raising Hosptials Two Inches Off The Ground, Says Expert").

 

[Marky-Mark]

This is social, but it's not "social media". The first way it's better is that you have to actively find a topic to discuss here, whereas Facebook, Twitter and company will just keep throwing things at you regardless of your own interests, based on some misguided faith in "the algorithm". Whatever you had a moderate position on, Facebook or YouTube will make sure you get to see the most extreme, bat-shit crazy version of it before too long.

The second thing that keeps forums reasonably free of such nonsense is that, no matter how stunningly insightful and amazing my posts are (and I'm sure you'll agree... ), there's zero chance of half the world reading them, or me being quoted in the Guardian or the New York Times as a "commentator" on the back of them. I dread a future where a hard-pressed news editor says "I need a hot take on this - someone log into a hi-fi forum!". (Tomorrow's lead story: "Government Would Improve Health Outcomes By Raising Hosptials Two Inches Off The Ground, Says Expert").

There's a quantifiable difference between forums and corporate versions, sure. But this is still a social media. I don't know of a semantical position that changes that. And I can see 'batshit' here, and do, pretty much every time I log on. I didn’t research the Circle of Diversity graphic. I can’t recall the site I was on when I found it, but I know it had to do with online triggering and the cancel culture and the culture of taking offense. That was the context. I think it fits perfectly fine within that.

Whether it’s also used by disreputable groups with dubious intent, I didn't know and I didn't care, so long as it worked in the context of the post. Ironically, an example of the sort of people to whom I’m referring, in the post and with the graphic, make my point for me by linking the graphic to hateful groups and, then by extension, me to those groups when I know very little about those groups and am certainly not affiliated with them.

This is exactly the point I was trying to make with the graphic. Social media - the internet in general - promotes shitty little culture wars anyone can use to project a bucket of their own neurosis or hate onto anyone in disagreement with them under the guise and jargon salad of any number of pop culture issues. It's essentially a cancel culture of people one simply doesn't like. And that's increasingly the gist of our entire online culture; it has become a circular and recursive rhetoric of resentment and conquest. As the graphic illustrates.