Feminist Heroines

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.coh (More info?)

Dark Tyger wrote:

> I find it amusing how "women's rights" apparently doesn't include
> their right to dress in skimpy clothes if they want to according the
> feminist nazis. I'm all for women's rights. I'm just not for the
> insane twisting that these extremists take it to.

Feminism: the freedom for all women to agree with NOW.

--
Dennis F. Heffernan CoH: Venture (Virtue) hefferman@comcast.net
#include <disclaim.h> MS Messenger: Venture

"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days
when Victoria reigned!" -- T.S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.coh (More info?)

On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 20:12:36 -0500, Dennis Francis Heffernan
<hefferman@comcast.net> wrote:

>Dark Tyger wrote:
>
>> I find it amusing how "women's rights" apparently doesn't include
>> their right to dress in skimpy clothes if they want to according the
>> feminist nazis. I'm all for women's rights. I'm just not for the
>> insane twisting that these extremists take it to.
>
> Feminism: the freedom for all women to agree with NOW.

Well, no, that's the extremist end. Kinda like the extremist end of
Christianity is "Love thy neighbor....to death if he doesn't agree
with your religion". Feminism is fine and good. As long as it's not
taken to extremes. Taken to extremes, it becomes as sexist as the
worst of men can get in their discrimination against women. Anything
is bad when taken to an extreme.

--
Dark Tyger

Sympathy for the retailer:
http://www.actsofgord.com/index.html
"Door's to your left" -Gord
(I have no association with this site. Just thought it was funny as hell)

Protect free speech: http://stopfcc.com/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.coh (More info?)

Dark Tyger wrote:

> Well, no, that's the extremist end. Kinda like the extremist end of
> Christianity is "Love thy neighbor....to death if he doesn't agree
> with your religion".

And like the bible bangers, the extremists are the only ones who get heard.

The truth is that feminism's job was done a long time ago, but the various
organizations don't want to let go of their political power.

--
Dennis F. Heffernan CoH: Venture (Virtue) hefferman@comcast.net
#include <disclaim.h> MS Messenger: Venture

"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days
when Victoria reigned!" -- T.S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.coh (More info?)

Xocyll wrote:

> It's nothing to do with societal standards, it's all to do with the way
> we're wired and our expectations.

Your entire argument is nothing but a cultural stereotype, itself a double
standard.

--
Dennis F. Heffernan CoH: Venture (Virtue) hefferman@comcast.net
#include <disclaim.h> MS Messenger: Venture

"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days
when Victoria reigned!" -- T.S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.coh (More info?)

Dennis Francis Heffernan <hefferman@comcast.net> wrote:

> Xocyll wrote:
>> It's nothing to do with societal standards, it's all to do with the
>> way we're wired and our expectations.

> Your entire argument is nothing but a cultural stereotype, itself
> a double standard.

No, it isn't.

I understand how standing up and making any statement that this person is
different from that person pushes all your equality buttons, the ones
that have been built up by successive layers of indoctrination since
kindergarten, but the facts about differences between people don't bow to
enforced notions of equality. And judging people by irreconciliable
differences does not - does not, does not, does not - constitute a double
standard. Even judging people by differences that are societally shaped
and subject to change is not a double standard.

I don't see anything in X's post that represents a double standard,
except in that the way men and women are perceived in present-day North
American society is not entirely logical or consistent.

While the notion that "men don't (have to) dress for overt sexual appeal
and women (often) do" might sound like some kind of double standard, it's
not. It's a pretty obvious fact about how our society regards men and
women in the sexual arena. It's not that men can't be sexy or not; it's
that men have no equivalent to the tube top/short skirt/high heel mode of
dressing - the CumFukMe look.

You could write this off as some kind of aberration in 2005 American
society, but then you'd be ignoring the enormous, nearly universal fact
that virtually NO culture has ever had an overtly sexy mode of dress or
display for men, while virtually NO culture has NOT had proscribed or
disdained dress modes for women - because they were thought to be too
arousing and advertising sexual availability.

So it's either something that's deeply ingrained into Western culture
(and much of world culture) because men are pigs or something, or it's
something that goes right to the physiological base of differences
between men and women, and their mental makeup.

Observing this difference in how men and women are perceived is not a
double standard.

--
-= Victory Server =-
-= Shenanigunner: Level 36 Natural Tanker, Fire/SS, M =-
-= Sgt Glory B: Level 16 Tech Blaster, Electric/Energy, F =-
-= Mean Mr Mustard: Level 8 Science Scrapper, Dark/Regen, M =-
-= Duke Miasma: Level 8 Science Controller, Grav/Force, H =-
-= the Nonpareil: Level 7 Magic Defender, Emp/Rad, F =-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.coh (More info?)

"Shenanigunner" <nsp@nitrosyncretic.kom> wrote in message
news:Xns95FA67C1CCA25nitropressatnitrosyn@216.168.3.44...
| Dennis Francis Heffernan <hefferman@comcast.net> wrote:
|
| > Xocyll wrote:
| >> It's nothing to do with societal standards, it's all to do with the
| >> way we're wired and our expectations.
|
| > Your entire argument is nothing but a cultural stereotype, itself
| > a double standard.
|
| No, it isn't.
|
| I understand how standing up and making any statement that this person is
| different from that person pushes all your equality buttons, the ones
| that have been built up by successive layers of indoctrination since
| kindergarten, but the facts about differences between people don't bow to
| enforced notions of equality. And judging people by irreconciliable
| differences does not - does not, does not, does not - constitute a double
| standard. Even judging people by differences that are societally shaped
| and subject to change is not a double standard.
|
| I don't see anything in X's post that represents a double standard,
| except in that the way men and women are perceived in present-day North
| American society is not entirely logical or consistent.
|
| While the notion that "men don't (have to) dress for overt sexual appeal
| and women (often) do" might sound like some kind of double standard, it's
| not. It's a pretty obvious fact about how our society regards men and
| women in the sexual arena. It's not that men can't be sexy or not; it's
| that men have no equivalent to the tube top/short skirt/high heel mode of
| dressing - the CumFukMe look.

REALLY?!?
http://www.californiamuscle.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code
=CM&Category_Code=SS
http://www.californiamuscle.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code
=CM&Category_Code=LE

Just GOOGLE for "male escorts" and you'll see the fellas peddling their
wares.


| You could write this off as some kind of aberration in 2005 American
| society, but then you'd be ignoring the enormous, nearly universal fact
| that virtually NO culture has ever had an overtly sexy mode of dress or
| display for men, while virtually NO culture has NOT had proscribed or
| disdained dress modes for women - because they were thought to be too
| arousing and advertising sexual availability.

And here I thought the unbuttoned shirt showing off a hairy chest
underneath + hot pants (or short-shorts) was rather standardized.

| So it's either something that's deeply ingrained into Western culture
| (and much of world culture) because men are pigs or something, or it's
| something that goes right to the physiological base of differences
| between men and women, and their mental makeup.
|
| Observing this difference in how men and women are perceived is not a
| double standard.

Trust me, the "Stupid Spoiled Slut" look applies to men, they just have
a differing set of uniforms.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.coh (More info?)

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 12:44:33 -0500, Dennis Francis Heffernan
<hefferman@comcast.net> wrote:

> Xocyll wrote:
>
>> It's nothing to do with societal standards, it's all to do with the way
>> we're wired and our expectations.
>
> Your entire argument is nothing but a cultural stereotype, itself a
> double standard.

Only if you assume that pretty much all vertebrates and most insects as
well have culture.

Nature does not believe in sexual equality, and hasn't for more than half
a billion years.

--
"When someone starts bragging about how much debt they have, it's not a
good sign." -G