Boggles the mind

[katikat]

I got into an argument about insults with someone today. I was basically told that it's bad for a man to call a woman a slut but it's okay for a woman to call a man a dick and that white people's insults toward black people can be conceived as racist but black people insulting white people can't ever be seen as racist. The wrongness of insults (because it is wrong to call people names no matter the race/gender/sexual orientation/religion/etc.) aside this is insane. So basically, the behavior of one group of people is always more excusable than the other's? What the...! Talk about equality. Sheesh.

Comments

[astri13.livejournal.com]

Let me guess, that goes on the grounds of "sympathy for past abuse"? I find that ridiculous. If I as a woman truly feel what that how men treated women for centuries is reprehensible, I then do not go and do the same. Because that would make me even worse for the hypocrisy.

If I as a person don`t show respect to my fellow people, then I deserve no respect visited upon me. Simple as that.

[katikat.livejournal.com]

No, it was because the men and white people insult women and black people from their position of power. And guess what fandom that happend?

*beat*

Yes, Supernatural. The racist, sexist, misogynist show where Dean hates on everything with a vagina and without a white skin *rolls eyes*

[astri13.livejournal.com]

Yeah, like Cassie. And initally Gordon. And Layla. Hailey. Andrea. Lisa. How he hated them on sight. Oh wait.

Pfft. To me that`s just people loving to see themselves in their role as a poor victimzed woobie where the mean, mean society is always down on them. And we`re talking about women in Western civilization here so STFU. There are people of each gender and every skin-colour that have it much, much worse than you.

[katikat.livejournal.com]

I just really really don't get it. Obviously, Missouri was a stereotype negro character. Rufus was just one black character and how come that there are no Asians or Hispanic people there. Oh woe! *rolls eyes*

As I told them, I don't care what color the character's skin is. If the character is interesting, they can be purple for what I care!

I hate these ratios, that there has to be at least one black character, one gay, two women etc. etc. Like in SGA - which is called "too white" obviously despite Jason Momoa being of Hawaian descend and Rachel Luttrell being of mixed origin - they introduced Woolsey as the leader so they had to introduce a young female soldier to balance it out *rolls eyes* It's ridiculous! The American political correctness is just... argh!

[astri13.livejournal.com]

It's ridiculous! The American political correctness is just... argh!

Word. I`m all for fairness but it has gotten to the point where no matter what happens, someone will jump to his feet and start a great wah-wah-ing about the injustices witnessed on them.

Sorry but I don`t got time for that. Sure, sometimes people treat me crappily or I have disadvantages for being a woman or for another reason, but oh boy, if any time that happened I threw myself onto the floor and had a temper tantrum for the great injustice of it all? Never get any work done.

Doesn`t mean I take any crap meekly but it does mean I`m behaving like a mature adult and not like a kid on the playground.

[misty-writes.livejournal.com]

Ugh. This kind of blatant ignorance and hate makes me want to STAB things.

[katikat.livejournal.com]

After that, I really didn't want to argue with them so I told them we should agree on disagreeing. And I was told that I said that only because no one agrees with me. Whatever *hands*

[lunardreamed.livejournal.com]

Okay. I just read all those comments and I want to say something as a perhaps more neutral party. This person did not say it was okay for women to call men dicks or for black people to insult white people. They said that it could not be called sexism or racism, because the definition of sexism and racism includes an element of power, ie sexism has two components: discrimination of a particular sex and acting on that discrimination from a historical and current position of power and domination over that sex. Therefore, at this point in time, women cannot be sexist. This does not mean that women can't hate men or treat them wrongly, but that it isn't called sexism. This does not mean and nowhere does it suggest that insults based on gender are okay. But they are not necessarily sexist insults, they are gender-based insults.

It's not an issue of equality or excusability, it's an issue of definition. If you want to disagree with the definition, that's one thing, but knowing that that is how the other commenter defines sexism, it is a misconstruction to say that she said it was okay to call men dicks.

I would never say that race based insults are acceptable, but I do understand why there has been a choice to define racism and sexism with an added component. It IS different for me to be called a cracker than it is for me to be called a slut. Just because I find it frustrating that my potentially racist comments will be more heavily scrutinized than the race based comment of a minority does not change the fact that, as a white person, I enjoy privilege that changes the connotations of the insult. The cracker insult does not convey an entire system and history that dehumanizes me for what I am. It conveys a person that dehumanizes me, yes, and I do think that makes it wrong, but it's not the same.

It's a funny thing about equality. People want to say, we should treat everyone equal now. It's a nice thought. But it disregards the fact that history means that people are not in a position of equality to start with. Think about a race. Everyone has to start at the same time, and end at the same place. They have to wear the same shoes and the same uniform and the track is exactly identical. Sounds like equality. But one guy has to start 50 yards behind the other guy. In our world it's not so obvious, but minorities are starting behind others. One person has spent his life preparing for this race. He has spent thousands of dollars on training. He always knew he was going to run this race. The other person was told his whole life that he could never run this race. He never had the money to train. Suddenly, people are telling him he can run the same race as the other guy, just get on the track and run. How can he possibly win? But if we gave him a little boost, that's not fair because there's no equality for his more prepared opponent. Do you see the problem? Because there isn't equality in treating people exactly the same if some are starting at different points.

Does that mean it's okay to call a man a dick when it is sexist to call a woman a slut? Not necessarily, but they can't be called the same type of insult because the people you are insulting are hearing them from entirely different positions.

[katikat.livejournal.com]

The thing is I don't get it. Like really. Either we are equal or we are not. I never got why a woman can hit a man, right hook and all, but the other way around it's wrong. A woman can insult a man with sex-related insults, but the other way around it's wrong. Etc. etc. Either it's wrong or it isn't. Doesn't sound like equality to me. It seems like women want to be called equal but they still want to keep the whole "I'm the weaker gender" net to catch them when needed. And I am speaking from personal experience here - a man threatened once to hit me. I told him to go ahead and that I would hit back. He never tried it again. I got my job because I'm good at what I'm doing and not because of or despite my gender.

And with the racist thing. So it's racist to say "black trash" but it's not racist to say "white trash". That's wrong on so many levels. And that people actually agree with it is even worse. As far as I know, the most common definition of racism is: Prejudice or discrimination based on an individual's race; can be expressed individually or through institutional policies or practices.

Also, I hate discrimination, be it negative or positive. I hate it when someone doesn't get a loan because the color of his skin. But I hate it when he gets the loan because of the color of his skin. They should get the loan because their project is good. Again, talking from experience here.

And about the sexism thing - the whole point was that said person raved about how wrong the slut insult was. They didn't even mention that said female character dished as much as she got. Because of course, she was the injured party and she could have done that. Again, equality gone out of the window.

I always, always view people/characters as equal. A man or a woman, black or white or whatever, I don't care. That's why I never understood the whole misogyny etc. etc. accusations.

But I'm really whatever about the whole thing. I was more confused than anything else, really. From what I was reading there, it felt like the whole SPN show was just some masked Ku-Klux-Clan operation. People just read way too much into a simple TV show *hands*

[lunardreamed.livejournal.com]

Okay. But no one said it wasn't wrong. They said it wasn't racism or sexism. You're saying two different things. And the person you were talking to told you what her definition of racism and sexism is. Both definitions are used. She was using that one, so when she says that it wasn't racism, she wasn't saying it wasn't wrong. And focusing on the sexist insult was not saying that the other insult wasn't wrong either, it's just saying that her focus was on the issue of sexism and mysogyny. She didn't feel the same about men being called dicks because male gendered insults are not the SAME as female gendered insults because they don't have the same connotations.

Either we are equal or we are not.

But that's the point. We're not. That's what the race analogy was about. It's all very nice you want to treat everyone equal, but how does that take into account that they aren't starting equal? Let's say our two runners have the exact same skill and potential. One's still starting out 50 yards ahead, so if we treat them both equal, where do they end up? In the same position they started in. That's the problem. If you want to give them the exact same chances, they have to start in the same position. That means overcoming historical and systematic imbalances. That's hard to do. And it looks pretty damn unequal sometimes.

I respect that you got your job through hard work and competence. That's true in a lot of cases. That doesn't change the fact that women as a whole make 70 cents on the dollar for men. That doesn't change the fact that black men as a whole have more trouble getting jobs than white men (it's about as hard for a black man as for a white man with a criminal record - does that sound like equality to you?). Just because individuals manage to run the race and win even though they don't have the privileges of their opponents doesn't overcome the fact that the race IS inherently unequal. Just because you can find black people with "privilege" and women in "powerful" positions doesn't mean that the inequalities aren't there, and treating everyone as equal NOW without accounting for the inequalities that they are starting with gives people an advantage by default. Is that equality?

It's easy for you to say that you think that the "quota" system of political correctness is ridiculous. What are the odds that you are going to turn on the TV and see a show without a regular white character? It's incredibly painful to see signals everywhere you go that something you identify so strongly with is thought of as inferior or wrong in some way. That it isn't worth the time. And when it is worth the time, it's because you are the villain - confirmation of the fear that this is how you are perceived by the majority of society. I, personally, think that the odds of turning on the TV and seeing a female character that is not in the stereotypically female role are a lot better, but the reason for that is constant struggle. I don't know that I agree with the commenter's feelings about SPN, but I understand where she is coming from. Objectionable portrayals and insults are confirmation of a system that denies and denigrates the female sex and we are constantly fighting to change that in one place and prevent backsliding in another. A lot of us feel that we have to be vocal about those things because WE AREN'T EQUAL. It hasn't been fixed. So, we aren't going to give the same attention to the converse (men being called dicks) because then you've knocked the women's issue back 50 yards again, because they weren't starting at the same point to begin with. All that noise over one and not the other is about bringing the one forward those 50 yards to be equal.

[katikat.livejournal.com]

But no one said it wasn't wrong.

From the way I view sexism, she said exactly that. She tore the guy's sexist comment out of the context, presented a biased argument about the sexist nature of his insult, didn't take the same time to criticize/reject the woman's insult throwing objectivity out of the window and therefor rendering the whole argument useless. From the way I see sexism, it was a pat on the shoulder for the female character.

But as you said, it's because we view sexism differently. I presented the way I perceived what she said.

male gendered insults are not the SAME as female gendered insults because they don't have the same connotations

For me they do. Any gender related insult is sexist. And if women want to cry sexism, then they have to back off from using such language too - as the Golden Rule says: Do unto others as you would have others do unto you. A change in attitude has to start with ourselves. There's no difference between men and women. If we want to be viewed as equal than in everything and not only where it suits us.

But that's the point. We're not.

And that's the point. If we start out thinking we are not equal, we will never get anywhere. I refuse to be vocal as you said on principle just because I'm a woman. Either I am good at what I do or I am not. If I am and someone says differently, then I will be vocal but only because the other person is lowering my worth as a professional.

You say it's the individuals. Then obviously, my friends are all individuals - an IT, a medical researcher, a manager... all women in positions of power.

[astri13.livejournal.com]

And that's the point. If we start out thinking we are not equal, we will never get anywhere.

Can I just say hallelujah. I`m a woman, I`m not physically handicapped, so someone has to hand me special needs stuff to "catch me up" to men.

When I lost out on oh, say a dozen jobs because they went to men, I was equal.
When a guy grabbed my ass unwanted in a club, I was equal.
When a "nice" guy on the street called me "cunt" when I walked by, I was equal.

When I insult a man with gender-based insults, I`m sexist. I don`t want carte blanche as a woman. I don`t want pity.

[lunardreamed.livejournal.com]

They should get the loan because their project is good.

That's a good example.

How do you ensure that the black person had the same opportunity to create a project? What if he didn't have a college education? What if he didn't have a college education because he had a bad high school education? What What if he had trouble self compensating because his grammar school passed him up to the next level when he was functionally illiterate? What if the school passed him up because they couldn't get federal funding because if they didn't show progress? What if they need federal funding because the community funding is less than the community funding for the white guy because it's inner city and the white guy is suburban? What if the inner city can't afford higher taxes for their schools because they don't make as much money? What if they don't make as much money because they don't have the education and experience for better jobs? What if they don't have the education and experience because they have the same chances of getting a job as a white guy with criminal history? What if they have those chances of of getting jobs because segregation fostered biases and racism that still impacts their lives? What if segregation resulted when they were released from slavery? What if they were slaves for hundreds of years before they were freed?

I'm not saying this is why you give the black guy the project. I'm trying to show you why the black guy is starting 50 yards behind in the race. I'm saying that people are trying to find the way to bring him forward, but how do you fix something that started hundreds of years ago in a way that's fair?

[katikat.livejournal.com]

How do you ensure that the black person had the same opportunity to create a project?

You can't. And therefor, the only way to ensure that nobody will cry "discrimination" is to set objective parameters that measure the project and not the person behind it. How can you know that the white guy isn't from a poor family and that he didn't have to study and work and work on the project during the nights too? You can't. Therefor, any discrimination, positive or negative is wrong. Objective parameters that view every person equally is the only way to go.

[layne67.livejournal.com]

I could never, ever understand that kind of double standard *shakes head*

[katikat.livejournal.com]

Me neither, me neither :(

[llywela13.livejournal.com]

Urgh. Oh, tell me about it.

My little sister has huge problems with the children who live down the road. They moved in about 3/4 years ago, and on their very first day in the street tried to steal the toys she was playing with. They have caused nothing but trouble for her ever since, bullying both verbal and physical - my mother has had to go to the police about them more than once. They moved from their last address because the children had anti-social behaviour orders taken out against them. But if you try to talk to the parents...

The family is Asian. And they use that as their defence. "How racist of you to suggest that our children behave badly!" Apparently, it is okay for their children to taunt Small and chant "White Welshie" at her, but if she retaliates even the tiniest bit, that is racist. Bah.

Political correctness started out as a really positive thing. But it has now become a banner beneath which all kinds of inexcusable behaviour is allowed to hide.

The 'Supernatural is anti-feminist/racist' arguments make me want to tear my hair out.

[katikat.livejournal.com]

Word to everything! I'm happy to see sane people around me *hugs*

[llywela13.livejournal.com]

*sigh* Surely the height of equality is to admit that all people, whatever their colour, religion or gender, are equally capable of being both good or bad.

And that characters in a TV show are just that: characters. Who exist for the purposes of storytelling, rather than to hang political agendas off. I only once allowed myself to be drawn into one of those wanky debates that popped up on my f-list, but was immediately subjected to incredibly viscious personal attack for not agreeing with the (to me) insanely narrow-minded POV being stated. So rather than argue, I just withdrew from the debate. But it still bugs.

I mean, the arguments are ludicrous. Oh no! Gordon and Henriksen both died! Therefore obviously the show hates black men! Except...Mary and Jessica (and maybe also Ruby? Her body looked dead in the finale, but who knows) also died, so maybe the show also hates blonde women (and Jo had a lucky escape). Except that John also died. Sam and Dean have both died. Bottom line, this is a show that likes to kill characters, regardless of who they are or what they look like. There's nothing deeper to read into it! And yet the wank of all kinds persists in arising time and time again.

*sigh*

I also cling to the people I know to be sane *hugs back*

[yami-tai.livejournal.com]

So basically, the behavior of one group of people is always more excusable than the other's?

I agree with you, hun, it isn't excusable at all!

[katikat.livejournal.com]

OMG, you still have a One Piece icon? O.O

[yami-tai.livejournal.com]

I do ^_^! I did love what I saw of that show *muses* maybe I should get the manga...