Is This Billboard Offenisve?

Off Topic
161

That’s a great point and one where I think feminists like Em and Feminists like Jessica Valenti might differ. Or maybe not.

Take the statement, “The average woman is weaker than the average man.” This can be shown to be empirically true. Does that make it sexist?

Or is it only the conclusions that are drawn that are sexist? “Ergo, women should not be firefighters because strength is a necessary component of the job.”

Or, is it only a man who can be sexist because of the greater context of male patriarchical authority?

by that line of reasoning, women can’t be sexist, they can only exhibit gender-based prejudice because there’s no historical context for female authority.

162

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
That’s a great point and one where I think feminists like Em and Feminists like Jessica Valenti might differ. Or maybe not.

Take the statement, “The average woman is weaker than the average man.” This can be shown to be empirically true. Does that make it sexist?

Or is it only the conclusions that are drawn that are sexist? “Ergo, women should not be firefighters because strength is a necessary component of the job.”

Or, is it only a man who can be sexist because of the greater context of male patriarchical authority?

by that line of reasoning, women can’t be sexist, they can only exhibit gender-based prejudice because there’s no historical context for female authority.

[/quote]

A curious phenomenon of sexism, in common with racism, is that one cannot seriously be accused of it if one is, has ever been, or could ever be a victim of it.

163

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Can we get a working definition of sexism?[/quote]

Any speech or action that makes a woman uncomfortably aware that she is not perceived as being the equal or superior of a man.[/quote]

I lol’ed because it’s all too true, especially on certain websites (Guardian, Slate, Salon, etc)[/quote]

I was going to ask; if the truth is inherently “sexist” is it still sexist, or just the truth?[/quote]

Does it fulfil the requirements of what I posted above?

Then it is sexist.

164

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

I am not counting her as one of the feministas who try to dictate what men “should” be attracted to,[/quote]

No, not at all, and that shit is silly.

[quote] but the fact of the matter is, being attractive has a high impact on the quality of life of girls and later woman.

Thats how it is and whether you implant the idea early or not, it will be that way. [/quote]

Agreed, but you’re conflating two things.

  1. attraction and the biological instincts we all have in that arena
  2. A person’s worth not only in society, but in the context of this thread, to themselves.

Yes the two intertwine, and that isn’t an issue until it goes to the extreme. I think she is saying getting bolt-on’s for the simple sake of “but da big boobz is da hotnezz” is extreme. Doing it because it makes HER feel good about HERSELF? Eh… I can’t really knock someone. Doing it because it makes her feel like she fits in better with what is expected of her? That’s when it starts to be an issue.

As a species we’ve really moved past the whole “every moment in life is about furthering the species, lets fuck” stage. Sexual attraction, and attractiveness matters, and helps in life, yes. But it isn’t the measure of a person, and that is the only line we’re trying to draw.

Fat fugly people can and do contribute great things to the world.

[quote]Now, you can indoctrinate your children that it should not be that way, but you will only create neurotic clusterfucks* who cannot deal with the real world.

Now, should women be all about pleasing the menz? No.

Should they ignore that they have to give in order to get from men? Hell no.

*read, hipster bitches, SJWs and tumblerinas. [/quote]

I guess the third point would be:

Are there things to measure your self worth outside of what men think or how they interact with you? Yes.
[/quote]

Well, here is the thing, if you present Rollo Thomassi`s (in?)famous SMV chart, women protest the loudest.

However, as he has made clear repeatedly, a woman�?�´s SMV is not the same as her worth as a human being.

It is not necessarily men who tie a womans worth to her sexappeal, but women do so as a matter of course.

\O_O/[/quote]

Perhaps the women protesting have had experiences that differ? I know perfectly well that my SMV (or more accurately my marriage market value) is enhanced by things that are not looks or fertility markers. It’s certainly not hurt by those things in context but I know my mind and disposition give me strong advantages with genuinely desirable men, i.e. men who are not foolish enough to make shallow choices with which they would soon be bored (cf. Adamhum’s thread “My Wife Talks Too Much,” which wife was believed to be v. hot).

[/quote]

Yeah, well, if you have nothing to offer except your poonany, you know, are you really being reduced to that?

Plus, even if they had more to offer, given that men these days have more obligations and less rights than under the patriarchay!!!, do they have enough to compensate for that?

It seems to me feministas have failed to take a simple truth into account:

You can make a deal as lopsided as you wish, but if the other side does not sign, you have simply priced yourself out of the market.

165

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
That’s a great point and one where I think feminists like Em and Feminists like Jessica Valenti might differ. Or maybe not.

Take the statement, “The average woman is weaker than the average man.” This can be shown to be empirically true. Does that make it sexist? [/quote]

No. That is simply truth, as I see it.

Correct. By my view it’s appropriate to say “Rare is the woman strong enough to carry out the duties of a firefighter without risk to self or others, but those women who can should not be disadvantaged by being female.”

[quote]Or, is it only a man who can be sexist because of the greater context of male patriarchical authority?

by that line of reasoning, women can’t be sexist, they can only exhibit gender-based prejudice because there’s no historical context for female authority.
[/quote]

I don’t know, here you sound like the zealots and I can’t make out the meaning. People who assign negative attributes to individuals based on assumptions about their group membership are in the wrong. I think women can as easily be sexist and misogynist - we’ve seen a number of these at TNation, though less since SAMA and its Vixen photo thread went away. The women who can only be friends with men because women are all catty while guys are all cool, and who tend to be competitively seductive in dress and manner.

I don’t necessarily hold as sexist a woman or a man who lives in a traditional culture. They may or may not be, but it would not be readily apparent because he wears the pants and she the dress.

I guess that’s all I have to say about it. Because I need to leave for dinner with friends.

166

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

I am not counting her as one of the feministas who try to dictate what men “should” be attracted to,[/quote]

No, not at all, and that shit is silly.

[quote] but the fact of the matter is, being attractive has a high impact on the quality of life of girls and later woman.

Thats how it is and whether you implant the idea early or not, it will be that way. [/quote]

Agreed, but you’re conflating two things.

  1. attraction and the biological instincts we all have in that arena
  2. A person’s worth not only in society, but in the context of this thread, to themselves.

Yes the two intertwine, and that isn’t an issue until it goes to the extreme. I think she is saying getting bolt-on’s for the simple sake of “but da big boobz is da hotnezz” is extreme. Doing it because it makes HER feel good about HERSELF? Eh… I can’t really knock someone. Doing it because it makes her feel like she fits in better with what is expected of her? That’s when it starts to be an issue.

As a species we’ve really moved past the whole “every moment in life is about furthering the species, lets fuck” stage. Sexual attraction, and attractiveness matters, and helps in life, yes. But it isn’t the measure of a person, and that is the only line we’re trying to draw.

Fat fugly people can and do contribute great things to the world.

[quote]Now, you can indoctrinate your children that it should not be that way, but you will only create neurotic clusterfucks* who cannot deal with the real world.

Now, should women be all about pleasing the menz? No.

Should they ignore that they have to give in order to get from men? Hell no.

*read, hipster bitches, SJWs and tumblerinas. [/quote]

I guess the third point would be:

Are there things to measure your self worth outside of what men think or how they interact with you? Yes.
[/quote]

Well, here is the thing, if you present Rollo Thomassi`s (in?)famous SMV chart, women protest the loudest.

However, as he has made clear repeatedly, a woman�??�?�´s SMV is not the same as her worth as a human being.

It is not necessarily men who tie a womans worth to her sexappeal, but women do so as a matter of course.

\O_O/[/quote]

Perhaps the women protesting have had experiences that differ? I know perfectly well that my SMV (or more accurately my marriage market value) is enhanced by things that are not looks or fertility markers. It’s certainly not hurt by those things in context but I know my mind and disposition give me strong advantages with genuinely desirable men, i.e. men who are not foolish enough to make shallow choices with which they would soon be bored (cf. Adamhum’s thread “My Wife Talks Too Much,” which wife was believed to be v. hot).

[/quote]

Yeah, well, if you have nothing to offer except your poonany, you know, are you really being reduced to that?

Plus, even if they had more to offer, given that men these days have more obligations and less rights than under the patriarchay!!!, do they have enough to compensate for that?

It seems to me feministas have failed to take a simple truth into account:

You can make a deal as lopsided as you wish, but if the other side does not sign, you have simply priced yourself out of the market. [/quote]

I suppose, but I see the market alive and well where I am. Obviously people with only one easily replaced asset are going to have a challenge gaining buyers, whether they are men or women. But as far as that is concerned I would note that “as it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end, amen.” It hasn’t changed that I can tell.

167

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
Correct. By my view it’s appropriate to say “Rare is the woman strong enough to carry out the duties of a firefighter without risk to self or others, but those women who can should not be disadvantaged by being female.”
[/quote]

The problem is that you need an entire separate system to accommodate female firefighters (different sized equipment, separate changing facilities) and then you have to deal with the different group dynamics that arise when you add a woman. All that for the one in a thousand woman who can actually be a firefighter. It simply doesn’t make sense.

168

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Doing it because it makes HER feel good about HERSELF? Eh… I can’t really knock someone. Doing it because it makes her feel like she fits in better with what is expected of her? That’s when it starts to be an issue.
[/quote]
I don’t buy that women get implants to feel good about themselves in a direct sense. Perhaps larger breasts make women feel better about themselves because it pleases their boyfriend/spouse, which results in positive feedback/attention for them. Or because it helps them win the figure contest. Or because it makes them feel valued because of all the attention they receive out in public. I truly believe the motivation is external. Just like it is to wear makeup and high heels. How many women doll up when they’re not going to encounter anyone all day? I’d venture it’s zero.
[/quote]

Late to the thread, but I know a couple women. I’m assuming lying on the couch all day watching netflix isn’t what you’re talking about though, because nobody male or female would get dressed up for that. But if by not “encountering” anybody you mean just running errands under the headphones or something mundane but practical, yes I do know some strong women who will on occasion dress up to do that sort of thing.

169

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Doing it because it makes HER feel good about HERSELF? Eh… I can’t really knock someone. Doing it because it makes her feel like she fits in better with what is expected of her? That’s when it starts to be an issue.
[/quote]
I don’t buy that women get implants to feel good about themselves in a direct sense. Perhaps larger breasts make women feel better about themselves because it pleases their boyfriend/spouse, which results in positive feedback/attention for them. Or because it helps them win the figure contest. Or because it makes them feel valued because of all the attention they receive out in public. I truly believe the motivation is external. Just like it is to wear makeup and high heels. How many women doll up when they’re not going to encounter anyone all day? I’d venture it’s zero.
[/quote]

Late to the thread, but I know a couple women. I’m assuming lying on the couch all day watching netflix isn’t what you’re talking about though, because nobody male or female would get dressed up for that. But if by not “encountering” anybody you mean just running errands under the headphones or something mundane but practical, yes I do know some strong women who will on occasion dress up to do that sort of thing.[/quote]

How do you run errands without encountering anyone? It’s not if you don’t meet anyone you know. It’s not meeting anyone period. Yes, no one gets dressed up if they aren’t going to see another living human being. That’s the point. The claim that women wear makeup for themselves is ridiculous.

Maybe they wear makeup because knowing that they look good makes them feel better about themselves, but that’s just internalizing external judgments.

170

[quote]Silyak wrote:
The claim that women wear makeup for themselves is ridiculous.

[/quote]

I’ll be sure to tell my wife what she feels and thinks is ridiculous. I’m sure she’ll be happy to know some random on the internet has her all figured out.

171

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Silyak wrote:
The claim that women wear makeup for themselves is ridiculous.

[/quote]

I’ll be sure to tell my wife what she feels and thinks is ridiculous. I’m sure she’ll be happy to know some random on the internet has her all figured out. [/quote]

Well, evolution very often does not work through ultimate but through approximate causes.

So, if a woman applies make up because she FEEEEEEAAAALLZZZ better, that is as good a reason as any, as long as it gets the job done, i.e. attract the most fit males she can.

There is no real evolutionary reason as to why she needs to be aware of it.

172

[quote]Silyak wrote:
The problem is that you need an entire separate system to accommodate female firefighters (different sized equipment, separate changing facilities) and then you have to deal with the different group dynamics that arise when you add a woman.
[/quote]
What different sized equipment is required?

173

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Silyak wrote:
The claim that women wear makeup for themselves is ridiculous.

[/quote]

I’ll be sure to tell my wife what she feels and thinks is ridiculous. I’m sure she’ll be happy to know some random on the internet has her all figured out. [/quote]

Well, evolution very often does not work through ultimate but through approximate causes.

So, if a woman applies make up because she FEEEEEEAAAALLZZZ better, that is as good a reason as any, as long as it gets the job done, i.e. attract the most fit males she can.

There is no real evolutionary reason as to why she needs to be aware of it.[/quote]

lol… The contemporary world doesn’t revolve around truffle butter.

edit: added contemporary

174

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Silyak wrote:
The claim that women wear makeup for themselves is ridiculous.

[/quote]

I’ll be sure to tell my wife what she feels and thinks is ridiculous. I’m sure she’ll be happy to know some random on the internet has her all figured out. [/quote]

Well, evolution very often does not work through ultimate but through approximate causes.

So, if a woman applies make up because she FEEEEEEAAAALLZZZ better, that is as good a reason as any, as long as it gets the job done, i.e. attract the most fit males she can.

There is no real evolutionary reason as to why she needs to be aware of it.[/quote]

lol… The contemporary world doesn’t revolve around truffle butter.

edit: added contemporary
[/quote]

Now it all makes sense with you Orion, was Freud a relative?

You base everything down his theories.

175

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]Silyak wrote:
The problem is that you need an entire separate system to accommodate female firefighters (different sized equipment, separate changing facilities) and then you have to deal with the different group dynamics that arise when you add a woman.
[/quote]
What different sized equipment is required?

Bras

[/quote]

176

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]Silyak wrote:
The problem is that you need an entire separate system to accommodate female firefighters (different sized equipment, separate changing facilities) and then you have to deal with the different group dynamics that arise when you add a woman.
[/quote]
What different sized equipment is required?
[/quote]

Bras

[/quote]
I’m asking this tongue-in-cheek as I work for a fire department and know that no equipment is specifically sized for females other than bunker gear, which is sized to the individual regardless of gender.

177

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]Silyak wrote:
The problem is that you need an entire separate system to accommodate female firefighters (different sized equipment, separate changing facilities) and then you have to deal with the different group dynamics that arise when you add a woman.
[/quote]
What different sized equipment is required?
[/quote]

Bras

[/quote]
I’m asking this tongue-in-cheek as I work for a fire department and know that no equipment is specifically sized for females other than bunker gear, which is sized to the individual regardless of gender.[/quote]

You ever run across anyone that makes you want to leave them in a burning building to die? Or are you willing to put your life on the line for anyone?

178

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]Silyak wrote:
The problem is that you need an entire separate system to accommodate female firefighters (different sized equipment, separate changing facilities) and then you have to deal with the different group dynamics that arise when you add a woman.
[/quote]
What different sized equipment is required?
[/quote]

Bras

[/quote]
I’m asking this tongue-in-cheek as I work for a fire department and know that no equipment is specifically sized for females other than bunker gear, which is sized to the individual regardless of gender.[/quote]

You ever run across anyone that makes you want to leave them in a burning building to die? Or are you willing to put your life on the line for anyone?[/quote]
I’m not a responder. I work in administration. It’s unlikely I could pass the physical tests to be a career firefighter. But I know a number of women who are great assets to the profession. The other point that wasn’t touched on is that very few calls actually require mass feats of strength. Most calls are medical and do not involve structure/wildland fire or serious rescue. Medical calls usually only require the strength to help lift a stretcher into an ambulance. Also, 70% of firefighters are volunteers that cover rural areas. Trust me when I say you are glad to have the hands to help, whether male or female.

179

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]Silyak wrote:
The problem is that you need an entire separate system to accommodate female firefighters (different sized equipment, separate changing facilities) and then you have to deal with the different group dynamics that arise when you add a woman.
[/quote]
What different sized equipment is required?
[/quote]

Bras

[/quote]
I’m asking this tongue-in-cheek as I work for a fire department and know that no equipment is specifically sized for females other than bunker gear, which is sized to the individual regardless of gender.[/quote]

You ever run across anyone that makes you want to leave them in a burning building to die? Or are you willing to put your life on the line for anyone?[/quote]
I’m not a responder. I work in administration. It’s unlikely I could pass the physical tests to be a career firefighter. But I know a number of women who are great assets to the profession. The other point that wasn’t touched on is that very few calls actually require mass feats of strength. Most calls are medical and do not involve structure/wildland fire or serious rescue. Medical calls usually only require the strength to help lift a stretcher into an ambulance. Also, 70% of firefighters are volunteers that cover rural areas. Trust me when I say you are glad to have the hands to help, whether male or female.[/quote]

Damn it… Answer my attempt at a moral quagmire. lol.

180

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]kpsnap wrote:

[quote]Silyak wrote:
The problem is that you need an entire separate system to accommodate female firefighters (different sized equipment, separate changing facilities) and then you have to deal with the different group dynamics that arise when you add a woman.
[/quote]
What different sized equipment is required?
[/quote]

Bras

[/quote]
I’m asking this tongue-in-cheek as I work for a fire department and know that no equipment is specifically sized for females other than bunker gear, which is sized to the individual regardless of gender.[/quote]

You ever run across anyone that makes you want to leave them in a burning building to die? Or are you willing to put your life on the line for anyone?[/quote]
I’m not a responder. I work in administration. It’s unlikely I could pass the physical tests to be a career firefighter. But I know a number of women who are great assets to the profession. The other point that wasn’t touched on is that very few calls actually require mass feats of strength. Most calls are medical and do not involve structure/wildland fire or serious rescue. Medical calls usually only require the strength to help lift a stretcher into an ambulance. Also, 70% of firefighters are volunteers that cover rural areas. Trust me when I say you are glad to have the hands to help, whether male or female.[/quote]
I would only add that with our society now going to the supersized variety that just picking up medical patients has changed a bit.