Erm i promised to post though epople will have to bear with me if i seem of the point or somebody has said somethingthat maybe i say as i have not had time to read the post fully due to being extremely busy.
However, i would still like to post as breaca a good friend of mine and i believe to be a very intelligent young lady. I completely back her up on her on her questioning and most of the remarks posted that i have read.
Unfortuanately a while back when i joined this chess site i was given alot of sexist abuse by a guy who was later banned and it was through a game and the forums. I am glad that the breaca expresses her opinions and does not keep them bottled up as in my opinion that is a 'burying you head in the sand technique' that has lead some of the world to be as it is now.
The question of inequality and the 'isms' has been at the lips of many people that have wanted to ask why its allowed and why one thing is ok for some yet not others to express and how some are allowed to offend others yet the person being offended is expected to say nothing about it.
I am sorry if i am not following the forum if i am not my reasons above explain, but i think many of these issues can be not only expressed in questioning of sexism but i have heard many questions mirrored with slight alterations from matters of racism and xenophobia as more and more people throughout society see the difference from others and therefore section them into groups, for example : girls with bigger breasts would be better than girls with smaller ones or none at all, along with white people are better than black, or british are better than asian,.....which should never be the case!
I think that the more and more people in the world that are left asking questions about how we treat others in society diffent to what we ourselves would want to be treated, the better.
One day that many people asking questions such as the greats throughout history: Emily Panchurst, Martin Luthor King, Malcom X, or even the everyday people of today, that people will suddenly decide......'hey we are all humans aiming to achieve different goals in life and are all different in unique ways in personality and appearance, yet arn't our differences what makes us so special' Our world consists of so many dividing lines of inequalities that People in all different countries are faced with war and oppression.
I think that maybe one day there could be no such thing as sexism, racism and the likes......one day we will all come to realise that we all have qualities and to single out somebody for a diffence, even as much as being male or female is rediculous.
Anyway sorry if my view don't appeal to all but i am one for peace and happiness.
Gotta Go
Zoe :-)
Originally posted by purclecowgreat to see you on the forums even for this short time, zoe!
Wow, when you said i had a forum to read ...
it is wonderful that you could take the time to post despite the hectic schedule you must be on getting ready to travel the world.
your presence at RHP and your numerous contributions will be gratefully remembered throughout your absence.
always looking forward to your return!
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by kirksey957Kirk,
I have been sitting with this issue for a couple of days sorting out where I am with it. ...... So when I see a clan called the "Giant Juggies" I am not offended , but rather amused. ....
Men like to laugh about sex. We laugh b ...[text shortened]... efully receptive to hearing your truth as I hope others will be.
Thank you for sharing your experience and opening yourself to the questions Breaca has raised.
Yes, I agree, sex in our society is a very mixed up thing for men and women. As you said, our view of it is shaped and most often clouded by others around us. However, it is through opening one’s self to exploring some of our automatic reactions such as the “sniggers” you talked of, that we can come to some healthy clarity and hopefully peace.
You said you are amused by the name “Giant Juggies” because of how you came to learn about and view sexuality. Now, let’s take a look at what is being laughed at and the deeper effect of that laughter. It is one of those parts of a woman that makes her different from a man, a sexual body part, that is being made fun of. As I said in my previous post, women have been seen as property and, as such, objects for possession. Women are people with will, aspirations desires etc.. So, to keep them as objects (and therefore possessions) control needs to be exerted over these. One way of exerting control has been to do what one wants with the body. Throughout history women have been objects for the sexual gratification of men. A woman’s own sexuality has been systematically denied as evidenced by the negative view of women who are “promiscuous”. Laughing at a woman’s sexual body parts has it’s roots in this historical view of women as sex objects, and so perpetuates these views on a very subtle but powerful level.
Bringing to our awareness the link between our behaviour (in this case laughter) and oppressive views towards women can help us to consciously change those behaviours. With that will come a much deeper change in our attitudes. Women will be seen as equal partners and participants in sex and society in general. And we all will be liberated.
In peace
Ranjana
Originally posted by imveganRanjana, I will share an interesting experience that may shed more light on me than perhaps the issue. Where I used to work, on occasions my male colleagues who were extremely enlightened and who would not disagree with your previous post, we would sometimes go to a restaurant called Hooters. I'm not sure if they have them outside of the US, but they are known for having waitresses who wear outfits that accentuate their breasts. However it is far from a seedy place or a strip club. In fact we often noticed couples with their children there. Occasionally we would ask ourselves why we were there and while we sometimes would make excuses like "it's the stress of work" we really enjoyed the "atmosphere." We sort of saw it as a "no shame zone" for men. The irony is that I have known men who would never be seen in a place like that, but would have no problem with going to a church where their wives were not allowed to speak. Or they were grown men and afraid what their father might think if he heard about it.
Kirk,
Thank you for sharing your experience and opening yourself to the questions Breaca has raised.
Yes, I agree, sex in our society is a very mixed up thing for men and women. As you said, our view of it is shaped and most often clouded by others around us. However, it is through opening one’s self to exploring some of our automatic reactions such as ...[text shortened]... participants in sex and society in general. And we all will be liberated.
In peace
Ranjana
As the waitresses are very attentive, I mentioned to my colleague/supervisor that this experience would even be helpful to student chaplains as they could learn a lot there about eye contact, physical presence, listening, all essential to my line of work.
Now my female colleagues, for the most part would not join us as they were uncomfortable with the atmosphere as they saw themselves as "feminists" and the outfits as there to meet men's urges and stereotypes. I respect their boundaries. But they always knew that I would be the first to back them up and support their perceptions related to this. So I guess what I'm telling you is that I am a hipocrit and a contradiction. But overall I still a pretty good guy. 🙂
One thing I always worry about in discussions of this nature is that we start down a road that says we should not focus on our differences, whether skin colour, breast size, beliefs or whatever, but instead look to see our shared humanity and.... blah blah, you get the gist.
Alas this idea ignores a fundamental aspect of humanity. We are all different. not just men/woman, but every single one of us. We do indeed share many similarities, but where's the interest in meeting 6 billion identical things? It is our differences that make us us. (an odd sentence, but I think grammatically correct: unlike my use of comma before that 'but'!).
So yes, why not wear tops that accentuate a breast (or two as is traditional). Or trousers (that's pants to our US friends) that fit a pert manly butt well. We have no problem wearing glasses that suit our faces, and by 'suit' what we generallly mean is 'look more attractive'. Only the most sexually retarded doesn't think your face a sexual feature of a person, so its ok to glam one sexual feature, but not another?
While this thread has a very significant point: sexism where women are made to feel that they are considered 'lesser' in some manner (be it playing chess, posting on forums or whatever) is indeed the resort of the nethandatal (sp?). However, the idea that being sexual equates to demeaning oneself, objectifing your gender or that humor, because of its reliance on difference, will pervert us all on a subconcious level and we are powerless to stop it is frankly OTT.
To return to my original worry, the will to avoid recognition of difference, creates an environment where people are afraid to be different, to stand out, to be themselves. It is called repression. It is bad. Those that have been taught to ignore the differences in others and that noticing such differences is itself bad are going to create societies where the risk of such 'anti-social' behaviour are lessened: they are going to form isolated groups where they won't have to deal with differences that now make them uncomfortable. All mens clubs. Woman's lunches. The forgien enclaves in Saudi. The workplace. Our fear of difference retards us almost everywhere.
Be free. Be different (as you are, not for the sake of it). Don't be afraid of the differences of others: celebrate it instead.
I will share another brief story that to me was somewhat of a holy experience. As I have shared with some of you, I was very involved in helping to resettle four young Sudanese boys in our community. It was a very close relationship that I had with these young men. As they had no family, they tended to see my family as theirs, even calling my wife "momma Ruth." I took these young men to Hooters and let's just say it was "culture shock." I explained to the beautiful waitress that they were new to our country. She embraced them, literally, and told them that if they ever needed anything explained on the menu to be sure to ask. It was a very heart-warming experience and I mean that seriously. We walked out of the restaurant and they broke out laughing while almost rolling in the parking. One of them got in the wrong car and didn't realize it. One said, "Oh, Kirk, you such a funny man."
Originally posted by Remora91I apologize as the last post really was by (Kirk) kirksey 957 as you know who forgot to log off . OK, I forgot to log on. 🙂
I will share another brief story that to me was somewhat of a holy experience. As I have shared with some of you, I was very involved in helping to resettle four young Sudanese boys in our community. It was a very close relationship that I had with these young men. As they had no family, they tended to see my family as theirs, even calling my wife "momma ...[text shortened]... them got in the wrong car and didn't realize it. One said, "Oh, Kirk, you such a funny man."
Originally posted by imveganI am offended by these statements, and all reasonable women
You said you are amused by the name “Giant Juggies” because of how you came to learn about and view sexuality. Now, let’s take a look at what is being laughed at and the deeper effect of that laughter. It is one of those parts of a woman that makes her different from a man, a sexual body part, that is being made fun of. As I said in my previous post, w ...[text shortened]... women as sex objects, and so perpetuates these views on a very subtle but powerful level.
should be as well. Your thoughts characterize women as being
weak, fragile, dependent on men's perceptions, and needing shelter
from reality. When you post these thoughts, it just perpetuates
those myths, and gives the impression that all women exhibit those
characteristics, when really it is just a few individuals such as
yourself that do. Hopefully you will think before you post next time
so as not to hurt my feelings or those of anyone else in our
community.
Dr. Cribs
Originally posted by Cribsi don't think you've understood what imvegan has written to kirksey.
I am offended by these statements, and all reasonable women
should be as well. Your thoughts characterize women as being
weak, fragile, dependent on men's perceptions, and needing shelter
from reality. When you post these thoughts, it ...[text shortened]... feelings or those of anyone else in our
community.
Dr. Cribs
more importantly i don't think you yet understand that putdowns and insults, towards individuals or groups are something we are trying to do away with in this community you seem to be so concerned about.
to say that imvegan is one of those few individuals exhibiting these characteristics specifically "weak, fragile, dependent on men's perceptions, and needing shelter from reality" is just another cheap personal shot as is your labelling of other posters here who you find disagreeable as belonging to the Sesame Street Squad.
you may not have heard of the feminist movement, but surely
1) you have heard of the TOS where it clearly states that you may attack the ideas being discussed, but not the persons discussing them.
2) you have heard of common courtesy which has been practised by every poster on this thread except you
just because you figure you are offended isn't an excuse to act offensive.
the intent of the forums is to "bond the community that has formed here, not destroy it" through deriding affronts which seems to have become your chosen "style of posting".
if you are going to post, act in a civilized fashion up to the standards expected here.
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by Cribsweak, fragile,etc.Where does this come from? I understand imavegan and breaca are persons with the courage to speak out for equitable treatment for all.
I am offended by these statements, and all reasonable women
should be as well. Your thoughts characterize women as being
weak, fragile, dependent on men's perceptions, and needing shelter
from reality. When you post these thoughts, it ...[text shortened]... feelings or those of anyone else in our
community.
Dr. Cribs
Jumper
Originally posted by CribsCribs,
I am offended by these statements, and all reasonable women
should be as well. Your thoughts characterize women as being
weak, fragile, dependent on men's perceptions, and needing shelter
from reality ......gives the impression that all ...[text shortened]... is just a few individuals such as
yourself that do....
Dr. Cribs
Please identify specifically what words in my post you find offensive. I certainly do not characterize women as weak or fragile. I only say that women have been oppressed. This is not a new idea. The women’s movement was about just this. This oppression has been recognized and resulted in legislative changes in many countries throughout the world.
I also said that some things we laugh about especially related to sex have their roots in that oppression. Those things have become systematized in society so that any “perceptions” I may have alluded to are societal perceptions not men’s perceptions … unless you are suggesting that society consists only of men …… 😉
Your statement that only a few individuals such as myself exhibit the characteristics of being “weak, fragile, dependent on men’s perceptions, and needing shelter from reality” is a direct “put-down” of me. A very disrespectful act. Surely in this community we can be kind and respectful of each other even if we don’t agree.
in peace
Ranjana
Originally posted by imveganMosquitos are bothersome and can inflict painful bites. Ants are fascinating and can be endlessly amusing to watch. You are bothered by mosquitos; there are several strategies you can pursue. You can simply kill anything on six legs, which eliminates the painful bites but also the endless amusement, or you can think of a way to differentiate mosquitos from ants and kill only mosquitos.
Cribs,
Please identify specifically what words in my post you find offensive. I certainly do not characterize women as weak or fragile. I only say that women have been oppressed. This is not a new idea. The women?s movement was about ...[text shortened]... ctful of each other even if we don?t agree.
in peace
Ranjana
In your first experiences with insects, the former strategy may be better--the mosquitos are pouring down on you and you are overwhelmed. However, as an understanding of insects forms in your mind, and you become accustomed to it, you find strategies of the second type can be implemented, and you can be free from mosquitos without causing all the harm that results from killing ants.
Do you understand the metaphor?
Regards,
Mark
Originally posted by royalchickenMark,
Mosquitos are bothersome and can inflict painful bites. Ants are fascinating and can be endlessly amusing to watch. You are bothered by mosquitos; there are several strategies you can pursue. You can simply kill anything on six legs ...[text shortened]... killing ants.
Do you understand the metaphor?
Regards,
Mark
I don't understand the metaphor....but I don't kill mosquitoes or ants or any insects knowlingly.
in peace
Ranjana
I see the discussion is still raging like a bull in Pamplona. And still I've not heard the politically correct venture to where their stand will lead us.
Yes, there will be fewer insults thrown at individuals because of race, colour, religion and sex. But what sort of insults will you then create? You won't be left with a void. It will be filled.
I've not heard who's going to judge whether bared breasts are sexist on the Venus de Milo. I've not heard who's going to judge if clothes are sexist. (huh? if a woman is wearing a very short skirt and very flimsy top clothing; thus accentuating her body, is this sexist? If she wears it to a job interview, is it sexist?)
I seriously fear you are embarking on creating a bland world which will not defeat sexism in the least.
You will find that the leaders of the nazi party are dressed like honourable businessmen and probably never utter a racist word in public.
You will find that the least sexist men in the world still earn shit loads more money than women, whilst doing the same job.
This is the status quo of the world. Banning a use of language will not ban the ideas, just serve to make them less visible.
Is it not better to have an enemy you can hear, than one you cannot?
Obviously I do find it honorable and noble that folk are standing up against sexism (and I'm talking humour here), but I find it very misguided.
Not only will it not lead to a different way of thinking, it will only serve to stop the discussion.
For example:
Say the politically correct achieve their aims and no more sexist jokes are cracked here at RHP.
Does anyone seriously think that attitudes will have changed?
Of course not. But now you will have sexism brooding and festering like a rampant puss-filled wart on a bum. Not expressing itself and having noone to question it. It won't be questioned you see, for noone will be openly posting it.
And in this censorship you will not only alienate sexists, but probably just serve to make them more sexist. You will reinforce their attitudes and condemn yourselves to the: "Oh. It's the political correct nazis again" train of thought.
Thus sexism will grow, rather than diminish.
The same obviously goes for racism.
Originally posted by imveganRanjana,
Mark,
I don't understand the metaphor....but I don't kill mosquitoes or ants or any insects knowlingly.
in peace
Ranjana
I'm sorry if I confused the issue with my violent choice of metaphors.
The mosquito is symbolic of actual, insidious, degrading, harmful sexism. The ant is symbolic of simple awareness of the fundamental biological, social, and point-of-view differences between genders [a (female) friend commented to me the other day, after a comment (not related to any gender issues) I made, that ''Girls are SO not guys.'']. The ant also symbolizes the ability to step out of one's own shoes, look at a situation in an unemotional way, and perhaps respectfully make light of those differences. Finally, the ant symbolizes the act of poking fun at the mosquito.
Something like the women's movement is, at least in parts, an effort to eliminate the mosquitos that ends up killing the ants as well. This might have been acceptable collateral damage thirty years ago, but I think society has matured to the extent that we should not be so sensitive as to kill ants when we kill mosquitos. An anecdote may help.
When my mum was at college, she saw a lecture by the feminist theorist Mary Daly. There was a question period at the end, and a male student stood up and began to respectfully dispute one of Daly's points. Halfway through his sentence, Daly responded: ''Man..sit down.'' I consider this a shameful and stupid thing to say, and I told my mother that the fact that she applauded this was also shameful and stupid. An innocent ant was caught in the battle against mosquitos.
Additionally, one important way of exposing how dangerous mosquitos are is to satirize them. I don't think Cribs' pimp persona is intended to degrade women. Instead, it is pretty clearly an attempt to satirize an aspect of popular culture which degrades women, among other things. I also think it is obvious enough that characterizing it any other way constitutes ant-killing.
In fairness, I don't know a lot about these issues--my attitude toward feminism comes largely from observing the indifference toward it that is pretty universal among my female friends, many of whom are fairly politically-minded in other arenas.
Regards,
Mark