- Dec 12, 2008
So just call trump a dick and let's just get on with our day.
The issue isn't whether a woman is being dragged through the mud. The issue is whether a woman is being targeted in ways that men have always targeted women, for example by saying that she is a witch. Then dunking her in a pond where she either dies of drowning (proving her innocence) or lives (to be burned at the stake since she is a witch). Don't tell me that isn't a Catch 22, Jenn, old pal.JoCoJenn|1458233887|4006836 said:I'd like to know where all this care & concern about misogyny and treatment of women was when it was Sarah Palin & her daughter being drug through the mud.
I think I was pretty darned nice to say I'd lay my life on the line in order to protect Donald Trump's First Amendment right to freedom of speech. Calling him a fascist pig should, now, be my right under the First Amendment!diamondseeker2006|1458236269|4006860 said:So it's okay for people to call Trump Hitler but they can't say Clinton sounds like a witch? I am scratching my head over that one. I can't stand either one of them. But to say that if she is criticized, it is misogyny, that is totally absurd.
But Deb, IMO it's still no different than to call Trump names because he has a fake-bake orange tan, or to make fun of his hair, or Rubio making reference to his "small hands" (as if ANYONE didn't know what he meant by that comment), or for me even to mock his name by calling him 'Chump'. Let's face it (and guys, chime in here to correct me if I'm wrong) - two things men are VERY sensitive about that hit them hard when it comes to criticism are: 1) their hair (especially if they're losing it); and 2) their penis size. He's not crying about it; he rolls with the punches and throws them back.AGBF|1458237856|4006876 said:It would be absurd to say it was misogyny simply because Secretary Clinton was criticized, but that was not the case. Those of us who mentioned the misogyny we saw were referring to how the Secretary was instantly labelled "a witch" and criticized for her shrill laugh and raised voice, whereas a man would never have been. It was the old double standard at work. All one has to do is to call a woman a b*tch or a w*tch and a man can get her back into line more easily. What woman wants to carry a nasty label like that? We're all supposed to be sweetness and light, after all. We all want to be 10's for Donald Trump. We all want to win his beauty pageants. No one wants to be the ugly witch from our childhood story books. Well, as kenny implied, the times should have been a changin! (Sorry to take your name in vain, kenny. I know you don't like me to think I know what you think.)
Jenn- It's not the same. Men have not been the underdogs for millennia. Men are also impervious to insults about their looks. They may wish to be taller (it's good for their jobs as well as good for them socially). They may wish for bigger equipment. But just being male gives them an advantage. The way being white in the United States gives us white people an advantage (see "white skin privilege"). I have to go drive my daughter to school (where, tonight, she has an Italian class). See you later.JoCoJenn|1458240593|4006895 said:But Deb, IMO it's still no different than to call Trump names because he has a fake-bake orange tan, or to make fun of his hair, or Rubio making reference to his "small hands" (as if ANYONE didn't know what he meant by that comment), or for me even to mock his name by calling him 'Chump'. Let's face it (and guys, chime in here to correct me if I'm wrong) - two things men are VERY sensitive about that hit them hard when it comes to criticism are: 1) their hair (especially if they're losing it); and 2) their penis size. He's not crying about it; he rolls with the punches and throws them back.
This is exactly what I was trying (but I guess unsuccessfully for some) trying to convey. Thank you Monnie (and Deb) for making it more clear.monarch64|1458238703|4006884 said:It is misogyny to call a female a witch, period. Same with other terms Missy noted on the previous page. As far as double standards and hypocrisy, sure I'll go along with that. But here's the deal: you can choose to use those terms or you can choose to get your point across with other words that do not contribute to the misogynistic culture we live in. In other words, use your intelligence and vocabulary to say what you feel instead of resorting to dehumanizing people. At least Hitler was a human (in terms of genetics only, obviously), not a made-up figure known for eating children, something to be feared, hated, and drowned or burned at the stake. Idk what's so difficult to understand about the points Missy made (and Deb reinforced.)
Hate speech creeps into our everyday vernacular in so many aspects of life. Yes it is easy to pooh-pooh it and say Oh, it's just a word, don't get offended, everyone says it, blah blah blah. But when people start questioning why we use the words we use and discover that they're saying things that might seem like no big deal to them but make others feel excluded or hated, we have an opportunity to learn something and change our speech so that it does not continue to denigrate others.
Thanks momhappy and yes same for me. Personally I have difficulty articulating my thoughts well so I should just stay out of the political chats here but sometimes I can't help it lol. I appreciate your polite posts and even if we disagree it's A-OK. We are PSers and always share the love of bling.momhappy|1458309726|4007380 said:I understand what you're saying, missy. I think I've engaged too much into political debates lately (I try not to, so doing so has made me uncomfortable) and I need to just let it go. I appreciate your thoughtful post as always