"How Feminism Hurts Men"

[Elgee]

I completely agree with you, Sunshine!

[Ryrin]

 

 

Oh, I definitely wasn't trying to say that being told "to get in the kitchen" is worse than being dragged into the kitchen.

Far from it. I was just wondering if that kind of brutality is considered "easier" to fight, and to change, than a culture

where the woman isn't raped daily, but instead is never allowed to go to school, or have a career, etc. I have never

taken any sort of women's study course, so I am not sure which one is (if in fact either is) harder to change, to fight

against.

 

 

I guess it depends on who does the fighting. Most 1st world countries really couldn't give a toss about most 3rd world countries (or whatever the politically correct terms are this week) unless there's oil involved, and therefore are never going to push hard enough to stop attrocities against women, or any other oppressed people.

 

Do you believe that the strong would have the right to intervene to stop these atrocities, if it required the use of force and the destruction of a oppressive government/culture?

Yes.

[Ryrin]

And of course, the more developed nations won't "officially" do anything to change what goes on in less developed nations unless there's something to their benefit such as oil or some political advantage. It seems like the only ones from top tier nations that care and actually try to help out of the goodness of their hearts are the small organizations or individuals that go to these places and try to change them for the better.

Edit: not trying to detail the thread I promise Ry.

Lol, you are not derailing the thread! Yes, I would agree that stronger nations tend to operate from the vantage point of self interest.

[Guest]

i diont realy see come that far. sur there aren ads flat-out sayim woman aree bimbos and of cuorse havent seen any where showin abuse jokinglly, but seee ton of ads wher women display as sex objectts and stil made feell lesser abot themslves if they dont have this produc or dont look or act this way and stil ads belitling women, just not so blatanmt as thos old ones. almos any make-up or shavin/waxing ad good example. i saw ad recntly on youtube where tryied to make it lookk like men wil like women bette dependrmt on if they wearing nail paint, so sem case of activly promotin women to view thmselves a sexuall object to please men (for somtething that isnt even true, iv barelly met any man who realy cares woman is waering fingernaill paint though mayb that just hapen to be wear i live). that sort of stuf has huge impactt of culture even withh thos people who claom hav such progres - tellly was nevre big thingg wher i live, alll the women in my adge group didnt growi up withh it and e keep tht wa for yuonger genreaton for most partt, and culture is significanly diferent - most dontt wear make-up excep rarely like for specil ocasion, many bear themmselves lot more competlnly and lot more confidant in themsleve than i see lot of outsdier women, most dontt bothre with shaving, other diferences. i gues a step is prety signifcant but not very mmuch in large scope and realy nothin when conisdere that in som culture, womenn uesed to have lot more rights untilll this or that hapen and thenm went figurativly ten stepps bakward from whu they were

[Elgee]

You have a point, Taltos, but the same applies to men, really. All advertising is about "you're not good enough unless you buy our product". For men, it might be cars or aftershave or whatever. It's not sexist, per se, like those previous ads were.

[Tsukibana]

 

Objectification at it's finest... :P

[Tsukibana]

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-sexualizing-Samus-Aran/1477339922484688

 

Which side of the debate do you fall on?

 

Is putting a strong, independent woman, one of video gamings beloved characters, in high-heels and skin-tight jumpsuit automatically pandering to objectification?

Or does it send the mesage that a woman can be beautiful, intelligent, and independent all at once?

Is Nintendo wrong for allowing this, or are people over-reacting?

[Elgee]

I don't understand what you're talking about ...

[Tsukibana]

Samus Aran is a beloved character dating back to the rise of the original Nintendo console.

A strong, intergallactic bounty hunter with a cannon attached to the character's arm, the

gaming community received a "shock" when, at the end of the first game, the armor comes

off and you discover that the bad-ass character is a woman. (1986)

Fast forward to 2014, and a debate begins - the new Super Smash Bros game (a fighting

game involving characters from many genres and games) releases concept art showing

Samus Aran's "new look":

 

Old Aran, in Armor                                   New Aran, Circa 2010

 

Rather than going with the armored character for this new game, Nintendo

chose the 2010 version, creating a fierce debate over whether or not nintendo

is "sexualizing" this character, whether or not it is disrespectful, etc.

 

There seems to be 4 main views:

1) Who really cares?

2) Nintendo is objectifying this character, sexualizing her, and sending a negative

    message to girl gamers that you can't just be strong and bad-ass, you must be

    attractive as well.

3) Feminists are going over-board, and making mountains out of mole-hills.

4) What is wrong with sending a girl a message that she CAN be attractive while also 

    kicking much ass. What's wrong with that?

 

This seemed like an issue that fits the thread.

 

 

Concerning the book cover: Eye-candy for the Ladies :) (and proof that men are

objectified, yet there are no great protests... Perhaps men don't care, becuase

it doesn't threaten hard-earned societal changes?)

[Daruya]

Kind of off on a tangent here but has anyone noticed lately the number of commericals (and even sitcoms!) that make men look like incompetent buffoons or idiots?  I typically flip the channel because I don't want to watch when one comes on.  I don't care if it used to be the other way around. We've mostly gotten beyond that, I think (granted, not in all countries). 

 

Personally, I will steer far away from any product that tries to make ANY ONE look like an idiot.  For example, the realtors looking for a new phone plan.  All the women - bright, confident, professional, assertive . . . and then the token male off to the side who seems to be trying to fit in and fumbles around with an idiotic look on his face while the women continue to look bright, confident, assertive, professional, etc..  There are others but that's the one that sticks out as a recent one.

 

Vendors, please don't tell me can't sell the product without denigrating a gender or race or . . . (fill in the blank).   *grumbles*

[Tsukibana]

Kind of off on a tangent here but has anyone noticed lately the number of commericals (and even sitcoms!) that make men look like incompetent buffoons or idiots?  I typically flip the channel because I don't want to watch when one comes on.  I don't care if it used to be the other way around. We've mostly gotten beyond that, I think (granted, not in all countries). 

 

Personally, I will steer far away from any product that tries to make ANY ONE look like an idiot.  For example, the realtors looking for a new phone plan.  All the women - bright, confident, professional, assertive . . . and then the token male off to the side who seems to be trying to fit in and fumbles around with an idiotic look on his face while the women continue to look bright, confident, assertive, professional, etc..  There are others but that's the one that sticks out as a recent one.

 

Vendors, please don't tell me can't sell the product without denigrating a gender or race or . . . (fill in the blank).   *grumbles*

Very interesting... I must admit to having not seen this trend, but I usually avoid adveertising like the plague - adblock on my PC, DVR and fast-forwarding through commercials...

Now, I watch "Castle", and Fillion's character is occasionally bumbling, while Katic's character is a strong, intelligent (and SOOO sexy) character, but I think it fits the character's 

relationships. Can you point out the shows you are thinking of, and does the "buffoon" role have a purpose, as far as you know? Most sitcoms seem to make SOMEONE look like

an idiot - I think it is a requirement.

Not a tangent at all, seems quite relevant to the main point of the thread.

[Daruya]

Leaving aside sitcoms because I realize people watch them for the comedy aspect (and I haven't watched any recently at all), it mostly bothers me in the commercials.  Honestly, it makes me wonder about the marketing team.  If the commercial isn't supposed to be comic, why is it necessary to have a buffoon? 

 

If you have 7 or 8 women in a commercial but only 1 man and the one man is made to look like an idiot, that bugs me.  If you have several of each and the commercial is supposed to be somewhat funny and you have 1 that is a bumbler, I'm okay with that.

 

If we would take offense at a commercial with 7 professional guys but one "dumb bimbo" why is it okay or even accepted to go to the opposite extreme?  Can't we get beyond that?

[Tsukibana]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lubeIPY_B3Q

 

This must be the commercial you are thinking of.

Anyone else with thoughts?

[Jak 0' the Shadows]

This one made me really mad. It portrays men as Neanderthals. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9HMhSvnbmk

[Tsukibana]

Holy hell... how did that NOT create backlash?

[Daruya]

There are no words . . .  smh

[Ryrin]

Ugh.

[Elgee]

I agree with you, Dar. Though I must admit to sort of gigglesnorting wryly at that last video.

 

As for Tsuki's Nintendo girl - it gets my goat a bit, but then I remember that there are no plumpish, flabby, plain Joe male characters either, are there? Sexy sells.

[Guest]

I agree with you, Dar. Though I must admit to sort of gigglesnorting wryly at that last video.

 

As for Tsuki's Nintendo girl - it gets my goat a bit, but then I remember that there are no plumpish, flabby, plain Joe male characters either, are there? Sexy sells.

ther is - hes callled mario and hes beenn video game cash cow fior at lest 20 years. me and brothrs cal him the fat italiann plumbr whos adicted to pschedilic mushrooms, but we lov him lol

 

[Elgee]

Awww man that's cute!

[Brandie]

I ran across this video today and I think it's really great. Goes with this thread so I thought I'd share:

http://youtu.be/SDYFqQZEdRA

[Tsukibana]

Nice.

[Tsukibana]

Saw this while perusing:

[Jak 0' the Shadows]

I agree, dude. It's not just the ladies, but I will say that with them it's more publicized so I hadn't really thought about it like that before. I have not turned to steroids cuz I'm a gymnast and I don't need 'em. 

[Guest]

i think this was very muchh worth a read; its a paperr from an older isue of Canbera Anthropology titled: 'The Conditions of Egalitarian Male-female relationships in foraging societies"

 

http://www.peacefulsocieties.org/Archtext/Endic81.pdf

 

prety much sums up at the end with:

 

"When a society has authority positions to be filled,male dominance seems to be the usual, if not universal, consequence, if for no other reason than that men may preclude female opposition by sheer brute force. Immediate-return foraging societies appear to be the only type of society in which male dominance cannot get a foothold. The immediate-return foraging societies have shown that male-female egalitarianism can and does exist but is tied to a level of social organization that occurs today in only a handful of societies."

 

ii think makes sennse becuse ties into th notion i always held, that foood is fundamentall unit of power - "immediate-return society" is basicaly one author define as wher any individuall can go out and obtain any resourcce, such as food, they need and make wahtever they need from it withuot having to rely on othres, and in taht way everyy individual has prettyy even distrubition of power becuse no one, excpt children, are much dependent on the other for basic needs. thiis helps discuorage the formation of authority figuress who base thir power on coveting or monopolin resuorces and in that way status of everyoen and betweenn genders is fairly even. gues the take home mesage is equality of resuorces and very litle division of labuor equals incresed power to individual and equalityy of genders and onlly in a society thatt is designd as such (which as we knoww it are only imediate-return foraging societies) is onlly way women willl have lasting equalityy. id recomend reading the wholle thing and not just what i said