It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What is a feminist, what is feminism, and what is a 'feminazi'? Do you know what they are?

page: 16
28
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
a reply to: nenothtu

I think though when terms become gender neutral it's the male version that tends to be used. Like the word tutor as I believe the female version is tutorvix which is a bit of a mouthfull.


That's so - which is why I think all ya'll ought to be speaking the more inclusive Southern US English!




posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: nenothtu

I'm not offended by being called Lovey, Honey, Sugar etc ----- it's the behavior that generally goes along with it.

Men being called Honey, doesn't usually demean them to a more subservient position.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
a reply to: nenothtu

I think that's why they use derogatory words, if you say to someone, I don't agree with your attitude towards sex, then you could accept that as a difference of opinion and be fine. When somebody says you are a slut, that is intended to make the other person feel bad and ashamed.
I hope my daughter will be strong enough to rebuff any attempt to tear her down in this way.


I think that likely starts with YOU, and the degree of toughness you instill in her, the attitudes toward the externals that she learns at home.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: nenothtu

I'm not offended by being called Lovey, Honey, Sugar etc ----- it's the behavior that generally goes along with it.

Men being called Honey, doesn't usually demean them to a more subservient position.



You must not know many southern women, then! They're pretty sure that they own, operate, and direct ALL of us knuckle draggers! "Sugar" may be dripping with sweetness, but make no mistake - it tells you who they think the boss is! It's often the preface to being told exactly what you're going to do, and how and when you're going to do it.

I'm curious - how are you demeaned by a supposedly endearing word, yet unable to see that another, clearly sexist, term (i.e. "feminist") is ALSO demeaning?



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: nenothtu


Never said I was demeaned by a word. It's about the behavior of the person using that word.

I worked for a company in Los Angeles area that was taken over by a company from Peach Tree City, GA.

As my new southern female boss stated: "I can stab you in the back, twist the knife, all while maintaining a honey dripping smile". Southern enough for you?



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: nenothtu

A camo umbrella.....not sure I ever saw one of those! Fashion is usually more female-friendly, in terms of knowing what looks good. I always figured guys wore camo because it's hunting wear. Never thought of it being easier. Giving away male secrets? I won't tell!

Just remember, moms can find pretty much ANYTHING you hide, bwahahaha!



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: nenothtu

Yes it's a big responsibility.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:29 PM
link   
a reply to: nenothtu

Why is feminist a demeaning word. It's the name of someone who believes in a certain ideology. It's like saying communist or republican are demeaning words.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: nenothtu
You must not know many southern women, then! They're pretty sure that they own, operate, and direct ALL of us knuckle draggers! "Sugar" may be dripping with sweetness, but make no mistake - it tells you who they think the boss is! It's often the preface to being told exactly what you're going to do, and how and when you're going to do it.



BTW - I already brought up "Feminine Wiles" in an earlier post. When women had no rights, they only had themselves.

The stereotypical south is very male dominated and Southern Baptist is very male dominated. Another of the bosses, male, from Peachtree was looking for a church. I told him where there was a Baptist church. He was offended that I suggested a "liberal" Baptist church that allowed women on the pulpit.

I personally don't think the southern woman is "cute" in continuing to cultivate the "Feminine Wiles" behavior. But, in some areas, that culture persists.



edit on 17-11-2014 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Dp
edit on 17-11-2014 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: WilsonWilson




I think using the derogatory term about someone who has different sexual morals is wrong.



Men have always been given the social nod to do what they want sexually, while I think a double standard still holds for women. Honestly, while women have been given the green light to be sexually open, men still want to marry the virgin, but have fun with the open woman and men rarely get called the same names. Women have paid the price for their foray into sexual equality, that is while on the surface it feel like equality to have the same ability to have casual sex, in truth women are just freely giving away that which should be treated as their most priceless possession, sexual exclusivity.
And how many times have we heard the story that after living with a woman for years he suddenly dumps her then marries a woman he's known for a few months.
edit on 17-11-2014 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 03:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: nenothtu
You must not know many southern women, then! They're pretty sure that they own, operate, and direct ALL of us knuckle draggers! "Sugar" may be dripping with sweetness, but make no mistake - it tells you who they think the boss is! It's often the preface to being told exactly what you're going to do, and how and when you're going to do it.

I happen to make eye contact. I'm given a sour look.
I happen to make eye contact. I'm given the "come talk with me look".
I happen to make eye contact. I'm given the "I wish you would talk to me but I'm supposed to pretend I don't want you to talk to me" look away.
I happen to make eye contact. I'm given the "OH #!" look.
I stop making eye contact.

I sit down in a chair and read my book. The woman sitting next to me moves away.

I browse some jelly. The woman pulls her child away.

I'm invited to hang out with a group of women. I don't invite anyone else and am told I was supposed to invite other men. I offer to buy the group a drink, I'm given a disgusted look. One lady, the one who actually invited me, spent the evening talking about life and we had a great time and I wished her well after walking her group back to the hotel they were staying at. I saw the perpetual eye of hate from everyone else.

I do what I can for the women I love. End of story.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
a reply to: nenothtu

Why is feminist a demeaning word. It's the name of someone who believes in a certain ideology. It's like saying communist or republican are demeaning words.


Well, words are words, and in themselves can't be demeaning. It's the meanings imparted to them and the uses they are put to. I happen to see "communist" and "Republican" both used in demeaning manners - they are often, along with "feminism" and a number of other "isms" used to try to impart an air of superiority by some folks, and implicit deprecation by others. Sort of like when a Republican spits out "liberal" coated in venom, or a liberal spits out "republican" coated in venom.

Now, in the case of "feminism", it's built right into the word what the speaker thinks to be the entire half of a species which is superior - or inferior, depending on the speaker.

As Orwell observed, words can be used to shape thought, because thought is put into words to make that thought comprehensible, and if the words don't exist for something, the thought can't be spread. That was the basis for "newspeak" in Orwell's "1984". Similarly, words can be defined or redefined in an attempt to shape thought. "Feminism" starts, right out the gate - within the word itself - creating and maintaining divisiveness. It is designed to divide one half of an entire species from the other half, and to widen and deepen that divide, perpetuating it. Then we wind up with women at men's throats, telling them how bad women have it, and how men have it so good. Then men react (generally poorly - because we can see that ain't nobody given us our roses to lay in yet), and it's on and widening. The whole time, the people who impart the meanings and connotations of the terms sit back and laugh, and laugh, and laugh - mission accomplished.

As Annee observed, it's not really the word itself, it's what gets carried along with it.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: nenothtu
You must not know many southern women, then! They're pretty sure that they own, operate, and direct ALL of us knuckle draggers! "Sugar" may be dripping with sweetness, but make no mistake - it tells you who they think the boss is! It's often the preface to being told exactly what you're going to do, and how and when you're going to do it.



BTW - I already brought up "Feminine Wiles" in an earlier post. When women had no rights, they only had themselves.



Yes, you did. I had that firmly in mind when I wrote that, because I figured you would be able to understand it, already knowing the groundwork that leads to it. THAT -what they do - is power! Real power - not legislated "power", which is really nothing more than "permission". Petitioning for legislation is just asking daddy for permission, nothing more. Further, once the legislation is in hand, it is useless and toothless until it is BROKEN. Women around here don't, in general, play that. They just take what they think is theirs, same as any man is presumed to do - just using a different tactical setup.

Legislation is useless. More laws just lead to more criminals when they're broken - they don't "fix" anything. laws are there so that politicians have something to point at if someone asks them what they're being paid for, and that's about it.

You're free to differ in opinion on that, of course, but before you do, check out the murder rate in "civilized" New York, Chicago, etc, and compare that to the murder rate in the "lawless" "wild " west, or the "lawless" frontier around the time of the American Revolution - then tell me how much crime laws have stopped. It's much the same, possibly worse, for laws that attempt to legislate behavior.

Laws won't help. Angry finger shaking won't help. Cooperation might fare a bit better in the social realm, but "feminists" are welcome to keep on picking at the scabs and shaking their fingers at us evil, hairy old men and see where that gets society.




The stereotypical south is very male dominated and Southern Baptist is very male dominated. Another of the bosses, male, from Peachtree was looking for a church. I told him where there was a Baptist church. He was offended that I suggested a "liberal" Baptist church that allowed women on the pulpit.



I don't know about the male domination, but I do understand that's a stereotype, and it's gonna be hard to dispel, as such. About as dominant as most of us get to get is saying "oh HELL no! I'm goin' fishing!" and then deal with the fallout that creates - which is NEVER good. We're just hard headed - otherwise, we couldn't even survive here.

I don't much trust Southern Baptists - I don't much trust anyone whose philosophy is that if they hold your head under water long enough, you'll come around to their way of thinking. While possibly a true statement, it lacks finesse.

Women preachers is mostly a matter of the congregation - except, possibly, among Southern Baptists. They've got that whole centralized club thing going on, with top-down orders from the central office. Some people around here will not countenance a "lady preacher", and others will listen to no other kind. There have been women pastors around here in some congregations for as long as I can recall - certainly before I ever got to High School - but that's a story I ain't gonna tell, so fear not for your sanity from yet another of my long-winded stories.

"offended" sounds accurate. people around here ARE opinionated and hard-headed, whatever those opinions might entail - not all alike, and subject to change over time particularly concerning religion and politics.




I personally don't think the southern woman is "cute" in continuing to cultivate the "Feminine Wiles" behavior. But, in some areas, that culture persists.



I don't think it's "cute", either - I think that it borders on downright evil, and certainly unfair!

That's just the way it is, though.



edit on 2014/11/17 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 05:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: WilsonWilson




I think using the derogatory term about someone who has different sexual morals is wrong.



Men have always been given the social nod to do what they want sexually, while I think a double standard still holds for women. Honestly, while women have been given the green light to be sexually open, men still want to marry the virgin, but have fun with the open woman and men rarely get called the same names. Women have paid the price for their foray into sexual equality, that is while on the surface it feel like equality to have the same ability to have casual sex, in truth women are just freely giving away that which should be treated as their most priceless possession, sexual exclusivity.
And how many times have we heard the story that after living with a woman for years he suddenly dumps her then marries a woman he's known for a few months.


I used to work with a guy that we all knew as a "man-whore". He didn't get any slack, and was the butt of many a joke for his questionable activity - from guys and gals alike. Our boss was a female Captain, and she's the first one I ever heard tell him he wasn't anything other than a "man-whore". he seemed happy with the situation, however, and was ok because he kept those nefarious goings-on out of the workplace. It was a little difficult for him to find drinking buddies, but I have a notion that wasn't top priority for him, anyhow.

I never figured out why guys chase virgins. I personally avoided them like I would catch fire from 'em. Didn't want to have to train 'em.

Guilty as charged on the last count, though. I lived with a woman seven years, and bailed to marry someone who was actually compatible. Now, that could never have happened had there not been major trouble in paradise to begin with, but it DID happen... and I never looked back.

Admittedly, most of that is subjective, and not stereotypical, but it has been my observation - and I reckon it takes all kinds.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 05:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: WilsonWilson




I think using the derogatory term about someone who has different sexual morals is wrong.



Men have always been given the social nod to do what they want sexually, while I think a double standard still holds for women. Honestly, while women have been given the green light to be sexually open, men still want to marry the virgin, but have fun with the open woman and men rarely get called the same names. Women have paid the price for their foray into sexual equality, that is while on the surface it feel like equality to have the same ability to have casual sex, in truth women are just freely giving away that which should be treated as their most priceless possession, sexual exclusivity.
And how many times have we heard the story that after living with a woman for years he suddenly dumps her then marries a woman he's known for a few months.


Her sexual exclusivity is a woman's most priceless possession? I don't recall when I've laughed so hard. What utter, sexist rubbish.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: nenothtu

originally posted by: diggindirt

Being the hedonistic heathen that I am, pleasure is one of my primary concerns. I can't imagine anything less pleasurable than a world filled with only women. Excess estrogen is just as toxic as excess testosterone. I've seen it and it's nasty. I think some of those women you met might have been some of my former students....or their spiritual sisters.



I believe you may be from similar origins as myself - both geographically and culturally, based upon information from your posts. We take life a little differently around here, and you probably do there, too.

I so wanted to respond to this comment of yours:




Yeah, we didn't have any Little League in our neighborhood. It ticked me off that the boys could go shirtless and I had to wear one.



But didn't. I no doubt would have been pounced upon for what I would have flippantly answered, even though it would have been in jest.

Sort of.

How 'bout this instead - Northerners are inherently misogynistic, and Southerners inherently inclusive. As evidence, I submit that it's built into the very language differences. For example, Northerners, when addressing a group, mixed or not, will begin with "you guys...", masculinizing the whole regardless of gender. Southerners, on the other hand, invariably begin with "you all...", "y'all... " or "yawl..." - a far more inclusive phrase.

I blame those militant feminists on the NC campus on Yankee invaders.

let the flames fly, and release the kraken!




You could be onto something here about the loud-mouthed Yankees. I've always hated that "you guys" thing and have since I first heard it from some Yankees who had invaded our town to attend college. It just seemed so ignorant to me as a teenager to hear it directed at a mixed group of males and females and it did tick me off to the point that I would sometimes say---"Who are you calling a guy?" but then my Mama told me, "Honey, they just don't know any better, bless their hearts, they are from New Jersey."
But the nest of feminazis that I got tangled up with was led by a woman from California who claimed to be in western Kentucky to get a college education. Problem was, she was a bit confused I think because she already knew everything she needed to know about everything and was actually here to enlighten one and all about the downfall of civilization as we know it because men still exist in society and their opinions matter to some of us. I was the crew chief and that was one strange summer. The gang mentality I saw was truly frightening to me---what I saw then, and later was a group of spiteful, angry, man-haters interested only in revenge for things that happened a century before they were born.
They were as different from the feminists of the '70s as baseball is to hockey. Back in the '60s and '70s if you didn't want to burn your bra but you did want equal pay for equal work, it was okay---you could still be a feminist if wearing one of those things made you feel feminine. Not so with the new breed of feminists---aptly named feminazis by the fat guy.
I had seen, up close and personal how intolerant the newer members of the movement had become in the late '80s when I was exiled for the choice I made to put career second to family. Gone were the days of sitting around and discussing the issues with a view to finding resolutions to our problems. This bunch was out for blood and if you stepped off their approved path you were a June Cleaver. Ideas of equality had been tossed aside for "making them pay for centuries of oppression." Since my philosophy was more along the lines of "Living well is the best revenge." I was cast out. But that's okay because I've managed to live a happy, fulfilled life without their companionship.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 05:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
I think the greeting "you guys" is almost genderless these days. I use it when I send emails to multiple people.


Is "almost genderless" like being "a little bit pregnant'?


No, it isn't "genderless" it is masculine. The feminine is gals. The gender neutral term is folks or people or populace or...there are lots of them...perhaps being married to a linguist has affected my views....but you must admit the power of language as a tool.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 06:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: nenothtu

Legislation is useless. More laws just lead to more criminals when they're broken - they don't "fix" anything. laws are there so that politicians have something to point at if someone asks them what they're being paid for, and that's about it.


Oh, totally disagree. Women had very little legal protection ---- accompanied with social/cultural expectations.

Just one law: financial credit. It used to be everything was in the mans name, especially if the wife was a homemaker. The man could just up and leave ----- leaving the woman with nothing. No established credit, or financial history.

And I still want mandatory paternal DNA testing for every baby born.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 06:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: diggindirt

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
I think the greeting "you guys" is almost genderless these days. I use it when I send emails to multiple people.


Is "almost genderless" like being "a little bit pregnant'?


No, it isn't "genderless" it is masculine. The feminine is gals. The gender neutral term is folks or people or populace or...there are lots of them...perhaps being married to a linguist has affected my views....but you must admit the power of language as a tool.


This reminds me of the argument that mankind or men can mean people (including females). I always tell those who claim that to substitute womankind/women and pretend that means people (including males). The fact that it is culturally understood that mankind/men refers to males can be illustrated by asking children to draw a picture of mankind or a group of men. None of them will include women in the picture.



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join