'Stupid Woman'

[zapatos]

10 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Teaching someone that it's inappropriate is taking them aside and saying, "Look. You don't say that. It's wrong, it's hurtful, and it's sexist. Don't say it."

Not calling for their resignation from their career, calling you a sexist bigot on social media and the news, make you out to be a disgrace to humanity, and acting like you're one of the sexist bigots who actually do exist. 

 

Who made him out to be a disgrace to humanity? Or is this another example of the "misrepresentation" of the facts I was speaking about?

And as you may have noticed, I was talking about DrP's "learnt by all" comment, not just teaching the one individual who said it this one time. This entire conversation is about the wider problem surrounding the use of language, not just what one person said. 

[Raider5678]

Just now, zapatos said:

Who made him out to be a disgrace to humanity? Or is this another example of the "misrepresentation" of the facts I was speaking about?

What was the first example of the "misrepresentation" of the facts you were speaking about?

And nobody on this forum said it. However, there are plenty of people talking about it outside of this forum. And a lot of those people are.

[zapatos]

2 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

What was the first example of the "misrepresentation" of the facts you were speaking about?

 

DrP portraying the response to the 'stupid woman' comment to that of a shooting.

Quote

And nobody on this forum said it. However, there are plenty of people talking about it outside of this forum. And a lot of those people are.

Who? I was hoping for a quote or something.

[DrP]

22 minutes ago, zapatos said:

What you are doing here is acting like you accept the idea of people being informed about the appropriate use of language, but then undercutting that effort in the same sentence by misrepresenting the conversation as being equivalent to "shooting people". There will be no "official change" or "acceptance by all".

What we are doing here, and in all similar conversations about this matter in forums or in the press, is teaching people that this type of language is inappropriate. Let's not hinder that effort through misrepresentation or the setting of unrealistic goals.

....and that effort is undermined if you take it too far such that people stick their heads in the sand and won't listen to ANY of your messages. If he'd said 'typical woman' or anything at all that would suggest women are stupid in general then that would be sexist and I agree with what you have said entirely....  as it is he was using the language in the normal flowing correct way imo. That is not me undercutting the push for political correctness, it is me saying that the phrase is in no way sexist to anyone who is isn't polerised to the extreme left of politics. Not slightly left  -  totally extremist. The argument we have (you, the others and I) is not whether it is OK to be sexist or not....  it is whether what he said in particular is sexist or not. He (obviously to me) meant nothing about comparing genders nor did he make any general sweeping statements in general.

Do you realise how alienating the stance you take against his comment is to people to the right of ME politically? If I took your argument to actual right wingers they would use flowery language and say you were totally out of touch with normal people. Laugh and think you an idiot.  If you targeted your PCness towards comments made that actually ARE sexist or racist then they would hold more weight.

31 minutes ago, zapatos said:

There will be no "official change" or "acceptance by all".

There will be acceptance by a lot more if the PC brigade didn't go over the top and start branding normal speech as sexist. "Typical of a Woman"  -- very sexist.   'Stupid man' or 'stupid woman' - normal language.     I did NOT say it was pleasant or acceptable to call someone stupid... before anyone jumps on that again. I am saying that the phrase is NOT sexist imo.  Hold what opinion you like but as I have said over and over - people will ignore you and think you a crack pot...  thus they wont hear the important words you have to say....  then they go on to vote for Trump and brexit etxc..

I don't know anyone who voted to leave the EU who has now changed their thinking (apart from a small number of middle class types)... they still fervently argue that we are doing the right thing and want to leave without any deals.

38 minutes ago, Strange said:

So a specific use of "stupid woman" addressed to a woman who has just aid something stupid (which is entirely plausible as she was talking about Brexit and rarely has anything intelligent to say on the subject) may not matter too much. But it is symptomatic of a wider problem.

Again - I have to disagree that he said anything wrong anyway.  As I said already there is a big difference in saying that it is typical for a woman or a man to be stupid.....   pointing one out as stupid is just rude...  not sexist.

 

Sorry for long post.

 

 

14 minutes ago, zapatos said:

DrP portraying the response to the 'stupid woman' comment to that of a shooting.

It's a figure of speech.  It isn't a literal shooting with a bullet....  it is a verbal one. One that lasted several days that kept the front page of the newspaper busy for 3 days and had many calling for him to resign.

[StringJunky]

57 minutes ago, Strange said:

That thing that flew over your head just now? That was the point. I think you missed it.

 

10 minutes ago, DrP said:

....and that effort is undermined if you take it too far such that people stick their heads in the sand and won't listen to ANY of your messages. If he'd said 'typical woman' or anything at all that would suggest women are stupid in general then that would be sexist and I agree with what you have said entirely....  as it is he was using the language in the normal flowing correct way imo. That is not me undercutting the push for political correctness, it is me saying that the phrase is in no way sexist to anyone who is isn't polerised to the extreme left of politics. Not slightly left  -  totally extremist. The argument we have (you, the others and I) is not whether it is OK to be sexist or not....  it is whether what he said in particular is sexist or not. He (obviously to me) meant nothing about comparing genders nor did he make any general sweeping statements in general.

Do you realise how alienating the stance you take against his comment is to people to the right of ME politically? If I took your argument to actual right wingers they would use flowery language and say you were totally out of touch with normal people. Laugh and think you an idiot.  If you targeted your PCness towards comments made that actually ARE sexist or racist then they would hold more weight.

There will be acceptance by a lot more if the PC brigade didn't go over the top and start branding normal speech as sexist. "Typical of a Woman"  -- very sexist.   'Stupid man' or 'stupid woman' - normal language.     I did NOT say it was pleasant or acceptable to call someone stupid... before anyone jumps on that again. I am saying that the phrase is NOT sexist imo.  Hold what opinion you like but as I have said over and over - people will ignore you and think you a crack pot...  thus they wont hear the important words you have to say....  then they go on to vote for Trump and brexit etxc..

I don't know anyone who voted to leave the EU who has now changed their thinking (apart from a small number of middle class types)... they still fervently argue that we are doing the right thing and want to leave without any deals.

Again - I have to disagree that he said anything wrong anyway.  As I said already there is a big difference in saying that it is typical for a woman or a man to be stupid.....   pointing one out as stupid is just rude...  not sexist.

 

Sorry for long post.

 

 

It's a figure of speech.  It isn't a literal shooting with a bullet....  it is a verbal one. One that lasted several days that kept the front page of the newspaper busy for 3 days and had many calling for him to resign.

I was going to post this earlier but didn't, which aligns with your perception:

Quote

Raider's comment springs a thought; If he'd said "Stupid women" that would have been unequivocally misogynist. The fact it was singular likely means that it was strictly aimed at her and it was solely an identifier.

 

[zapatos]

6 minutes ago, DrP said:

....and that effort is undermined if you take it too far such that people stick their heads in the sand and won't listen to ANY of your messages. If he'd said 'typical woman' or anything at all that would suggest women are stupid in general then that would be sexist and I agree with what you have said entirely....  as it is he was using the language in the normal flowing correct way imo. That is not me undercutting the push for political correctness, it is me saying that the phrase is in no way sexist to anyone who is isn't polerised to the extreme left of politics. Not slightly left  -  totally extremist. The argument we have (you, the others and I) is not whether it is OK to be sexist or not....  it is whether what he said in particular is sexist or not. He (obviously to me) meant nothing about comparing genders nor did he make any general sweeping statements in general.

Do you realise how alienating the stance you take against his comment is to people to the right of ME politically? If I took your argument to actual right wingers they would use flowery language and say you were totally out of touch with normal people. Laugh and think you an idiot.  If you targeted your PCness towards comments made that actually ARE sexist or racist then they would hold more weight.

There will be acceptance by a lot more if the PC brigade didn't go over the top and start branding normal speech as sexist. "Typical of a Woman"  -- very sexist.   'Stupid man' or 'stupid woman' - normal language.     I did NOT say it was pleasant or acceptable to call someone stupid... before anyone jumps on that again. I am saying that the phrase is NOT sexist imo.  Hold what opinion you like but as I have said over and over - people will ignore you and think you a crack pot...  thus they wont hear the important words you have to say....  then they go on to vote for Trump and brexit etxc..

 

Wow. So I'm "totally extremist" and people will say I'm "totally out of touch" and "an idiot" and a "crackpot" because I disagreed the language was acceptable and instead found it  "inappropriate". It seems as if reasonable, civil conversation is indeed dead in these times.

[Strange]

4 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

was going to post this earlier but didn't, which aligns with your perception:

Quote

Raider's comment springs a thought; If he'd said "Stupid women" that would have been unequivocally misogynist. The fact it was singular likely means that it was strictly aimed at her and it was solely an identifier.

 

While that seems a simple and "obvious" analysis, I can't imagine anyone in that situation saying "stupid man". The phrase would normally be "stupid <generic insult>" (eg. stupid idiot, stupid bugger, stupid fool).

The only times I think the phrase would use a term that specifically identifies the person is when that identification already has negative or demeaning connotations (to the speaker); eg "wop", "fag", "woman", etc.

"Stupid boy, Pike!"

[StringJunky]

48 minutes ago, Strange said:

While that seems a simple and "obvious" analysis, I can't imagine anyone in that situation saying "stupid man". The phrase would normally be "stupid <generic insult>" (eg. stupid idiot, stupid bugger, stupid fool).

The only times I think the phrase would use a term that specifically identifies the person is when that identification already has negative or demeaning connotations (to the speaker); eg "wop", "fag", "woman", etc.

"Stupid boy, Pike!"

Argument from incredulity. I have personally heard women say it on at least two occasions... as an identifier.

[Strange]

14 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Argument from incredulity. I have personally heard women say it on at least two occasions... as an identifier.

And that kind of makes my point!

But if you heard them say it, then it isn't really the same situation, is it?

 

[MigL]

Wow.
we're still tilting at this windmill ?

[Strange]

36 minutes ago, MigL said:

Wow.
we're still tilting at this windmill ?

Some of us have only just started!

 

[iNow]

We have cultural problems with inequality for women.

We have bigger problems with violence and safety, too, and all of these stem from individual reactions and expectations  

We have become so used to it that we often don’t see it happening. 

We have become so used to it that we often rationalize it or dismiss it as PC or being too sensitive. 

We have a hard time seeing it because it doesn’t happen every single day to us. It’s not as salient.

So...

We have some people trying to improve the situation and talking openly about different ways to interpret these events. 

We have some people trying to increase awareness and open doors.

We have other people saying those folks are extremist idiots with their heads up their butts.

Does that about sum things up?

Don’t we ALL want to find ways to be better and help the women around us continue to breakdown cultural limits and inequalities?

Don’t we all agree things are still in need of improvement and that improvement often comes from discussions like this?

[MigL]

Yet we still don't have an agreement that what was said ( or whispered ) was actually disparaging to women.
That is what the OP is about, not whether there is inequality for women.

So we are not trying to fix anything.
Just making sure that what is perceived by some, is acknowledged by all.
There is a word for making everyone think as you do, but it's not 'equality'.

[zapatos]

32 minutes ago, MigL said:

Yet we still don't have an agreement that what was said ( or whispered ) was actually disparaging to women.
That is what the OP is about, not whether there is inequality for women.

So we are not trying to fix anything.
Just making sure that what is perceived by some, is acknowledged by all.
There is a word for making everyone think as you do, but it's not 'equality'.

I fail to see that anyone is trying to make me think that the comment was not sexist. They are simply making an argument in support of what they believe to be the case.

[iNow]

52 minutes ago, MigL said:

So we are not trying to fix anything.

You seem to have just isolated a clear root cause of the persistence we continually see around this particular issue. 

[MigL]

Maybe I should have been clearer, INow…
By continuing to flog this dead horse we are not addressing the issue of inequality of the sexes.
The OP is about whether J Corbyn's whispered comment was sexist or not.

Let's not jump to the conclusion that, because sexism does exists, the comment must have been sexist.

[DrP]

16 hours ago, zapatos said:

Wow. So I'm "totally extremist" and people will say I'm "totally out of touch" and "an idiot" and a "crackpot" because I disagreed the language was acceptable and instead found it  "inappropriate". It seems as if reasonable, civil conversation is indeed dead in these times.

I won't....  but about a third of the population, the ones you need to reach, will. Get in touch and you might get through to them one day. I am afraid the horse has bolted though what with Trump and Brexit. They will ignore you because they see this thin end of the wedge where they see PC gone mad.

In the army, if a squad of 10 go across an assault course and 7 of them beat the world record and 3 struggle to finish the ones that finished first get the bollocking. They are supposed to drop back and help the others over the obstacles they are struggling with.

 

 

[iNow]

9 hours ago, MigL said:

Let's not jump to the conclusion that, because sexism does exists, the comment must have been sexist.

I'm confused. Are you suggesting that's what I've done? Are you saying I have jumped to a conclusion that "just because sexism exists, the comment must have been sexist?" 

If not, who are you saying did that?

Isn't this just a strawman, anyway?

[zapatos]

5 hours ago, DrP said:

I won't....  but about a third of the population, the ones you need to reach, will. Get in touch and you might get through to them one day. I am afraid the horse has bolted though what with Trump and Brexit. They will ignore you because they see this thin end of the wedge where they see PC gone mad.

In the army, if a squad of 10 go across an assault course and 7 of them beat the world record and 3 struggle to finish the ones that finished first get the bollocking. They are supposed to drop back and help the others over the obstacles they are struggling with.

 

 

That's what we are trying to do. But it would be helpful if when we extend our hand we don't pull back a stump.

[Phi for All]

9 hours ago, MigL said:

Maybe I should have been clearer, INow…
By continuing to flog this dead horse we are not addressing the issue of inequality of the sexes.
The OP is about whether J Corbyn's whispered comment was sexist or not.

Let's not jump to the conclusion that, because sexism does exists, the comment must have been sexist.

You and StringJunky and DrP seem to be of the opinion that women don't need to be singled out for special consideration in this context. Many people take this stance on affirmative action issues. Some feel it's unfair to the present to redress inequalities of the past. You probably feel you treat women just fine (maybe MORE than fine), so affirmative action on your part seems superfluous. That's why you mistakenly think this horse is dead, and we should stop flogging it. You're being subjective in this.

Personally, I think modern attitudes about women are still heavily tainted by our past, and they need to be addressed just as much as any other sort of discrimination. I think Jeremy Corbyn used "woman" as a negative epithet in this situation, I think he was wrong to do so even if it was an aside, and I think people who try to justify his remarks aren't being objective. As a society, we need to reverse our unequal and unfair treatment of women, and we should start by not making them synonymous with negative feelings and traits. 

Along the way, I'd also like a word for women who like sex that's as cool as "stud" or "Romeo" or "wolf". Again, all the words for women who like sex are heavily negative.

[DrP]

9 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I'd also like a word for women who like sex that's as cool as "stud" or "Romeo" or "wolf". Again, all the words for women who like sex are heavily negative.

Vixen, fox, sex kitten?   I don't think those are classed as offensive are they? There are so many other offensive variants - I hate it.

I have all my life cringed at people that call women sluts - it is a disgusting attitude imo. Usually one shown by the most hypocritical - either those that sleep around (or would if they could but can't) or those that choose not to for religious beliefs...  passing judgement on those that don't fall for the same delusion they have. Totally hypocritical usually. 

 

 

  

 

[koti]

2 hours ago, Phi for All said:

You and StringJunky and DrP seem to be of the opinion that women don't need to be singled out for special consideration in this context. Many people take this stance on affirmative action issues. Some feel it's unfair to the present to redress inequalities of the past. You probably feel you treat women just fine (maybe MORE than fine), so affirmative action on your part seems superfluous. That's why you mistakenly think this horse is dead, and we should stop flogging it. You're being subjective in this.

Personally, I think modern attitudes about women are still heavily tainted by our past, and they need to be addressed just as much as any other sort of discrimination. I think Jeremy Corbyn used "woman" as a negative epithet in this situation, I think he was wrong to do so even if it was an aside, and I think people who try to justify his remarks aren't being objective. As a society, we need to reverse our unequal and unfair treatment of women, and we should start by not making them synonymous with negative feelings and traits. 

Along the way, I'd also like a word for women who like sex that's as cool as "stud" or "Romeo" or "wolf". Again, all the words for women who like sex are heavily negative.

Gosh, I wish some woman would call me „man” or some other word instead of spending 9 years in partial family courts, not knowing my twins and being on the virge of suicide all because a woman decided to lure me into IVF (not successful with her previous husband, dozen misscariaged with him then eith me) and then take the kids, not work and ruin my and my families life for a decade. No matter how hard I try to position myself (and every second other Father with family problems) in the inequality towards women you mention - I can’t. I have no idea what world you live in Phi but its most definitely very different from mine.

I apologise, I couldn’t resist. 

[zapatos]

9 minutes ago, koti said:

Gosh, I wish some woman would call me „man” or some other word instead of spending 9 years in partial family courts, not knowing my twins and being on the virge of suicide all because a woman decided to lure me into IVF (not successful with her previous husband, dozen misscariaged with him then eith me) and then take the kids, not work and ruin my and my families life for a decade. No matter how hard I try to position myself (and every second other Father with family problems) in the inequality towards women you mention - I can’t. I have no idea what world you live in Phi but its most definitely very different from mine.

I apologise, I couldn’t resist. 

It is a shame that the lousy experience you had to go through has affected you in such a way that you cannot see what is demonstrably true or feel empathy for those who are impacted by inequality. Perhaps you'll one day see them as allies as both you and the women hurt by sexism have both been mistreated by an unfair system.

[iNow]

His fallacy is known as hasty generalization

[koti]

6 minutes ago, zapatos said:

It is a shame that the lousy experience you had to go through has affected you in such a way that you cannot see what is demonstrably true or feel empathy for those who are impacted by inequality. Perhaps you'll one day see them as allies as both you and the women hurt by sexism have both been mistreated by an unfair system.

 

3 minutes ago, iNow said:

His fallacy is known as hasty generalization

You both seem to have no idea how women are favoured in family courts, children are alienated from their parents and grand parents. I have no isuue with feeling empathy towards people who experience abuse wether its a woman, man or a child. It’s a just surreal that you are disecting someone who called somebody else „a woman” while one of the fathers I knew who was in a similar situation as me is no longer with us because he hung himself NYE. He wasn’t lucky enough to have a new family like I do.