DrP

'Stupid Woman'

Recommended Posts

@naitche Canada (MigL is Canadian) has never elected a female Prime Minister in it's history. Discussions about sexism in society whether one is from Canada, England, U.S. or etc are not merely rhetorical ones. I believe their are strong arguments to be made that sexism is a serious problem disenfranchising large portions on the population. 

5 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Can't you turn them off? Phones are a PITA for this stuff I reckon. It's so clunky to go back and correct. I don't want to distract the thread but just wanted to say it really messes up your posts sometimes.

I will attempt to do better. Phones can be clunky but ultimately I just need to be more mindful. Sometimes I do well for a awhile and then get lazy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

@naitche Canada (MigL is Canadian) has never elected a female Prime Minister in it's history. Discussions about sexism in society whether one is from Canada, England, U.S. or etc are not merely rhetorical ones. I believe their are strong arguments to be made that sexism is a serious problem disenfranchising large portions on the population. 

I think the population is ready to vote for the right leader, male or female. Hopefully when we do elect a female prime minister it will be based more on that than "it's time for one".

We did have Kim Campbell as PM, though she was not elected, and have had female Governors General, the "official" head of state when the Queen is not on Canadian soil.

Edit: I guess the Queen is always head of state

Edited by J.C.MacSwell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, naitche said:

Historical context of sexism.

I think its a mistake to bring that context into the present, with out evidence its the same context today. 

 

Have you been following the news? Heard of #MeToo? That is what is going on TODAY and as far back in time as you'd care to go. If we have to start with proving that sexism exists and has a negative impact on women today we'll have to do that in another thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I think the population is ready to vote for the right leader, male or female. Hopefully when we do elect a female prime minister it will be based more on that than "it's time for one".

 

Here in the U.S. I having been hearing similar attitudes my whole life. That we were willing and ready to elect a female POTUS but it needed to be merit based rather than gender based. Meanwhile idiots (my opinion) like Bush and Trump have been elected but not one single woman. We have elected men from across the scale, great to terrible, but no women. When something happens 100% of the time it isn't a coincidence. 

I will believe Canada and the U.S. are "ready" once it starts happening. Until then it seems clear to me Canada the U.S. are not "ready". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ten oz said:

Here in the U.S. I having been hearing similar attitudes my whole life. That we were willing and ready to elect a female POTUS but it needed to be merit based rather than gender based. Meanwhile idiots (my opinion) like Bush and Trump have been elected but not one single woman. We have elected men from across the scale, great to terrible, but no women. When something happens 100% of the time it isn't a coincidence. 

I will believe Canada and the U.S. are "ready" once it starts happening. Until then it seems clear to me Canada the U.S. are not "ready". 

Hilary Clinton won the popular vote. The coincidence currently is geographic and your system.

You know that...yet you spout this.

...and I'm sure you have females that would get more votes than Clinton.

And don't forget that after extreme left torments everyone into voting Trump in again in 2020 out of spite, you will finally get your Woman POTUS in 2024 (Nikki Haley)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Hilary Clinton won the popular vote. The coincidence currently is geographic and your system.

You know that...yet you spout this.

A President has won office while losing the popular vote 4 times in U S. history. A woman has become President zero times. As uncommon (stupid and convoluted) as it is for a President to win without the popular vote it has happened multiple times. It is a low percentage thing but it happens. A woman elected President have never happened: zero percent. The 2 are not equal. One of the two has been absolute through history to this day and the other hasn't. 

26 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

and I'm sure you have females that would get more votes than Clinton.

This is not an evidence based assessment. No woman has ever received even a tenth of the votes for President Clinton did. No woman other than Clinton has ever received a single electoral vote.

*As for Haley no woman running for the Republican nomination has ever won single state primary. 

Edited by Ten oz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

A President has won office while losing the popular vote 4 times in U S. history. A woman has become President zero times. As uncommon (stupid and convoluted) as it is for a President to win without the popular vote it has happened multiple times. It is a low percentage thing but it happens. A woman elected President have never happened: zero percent. The 2 are not equal. One of the two has been absolute through history to this day and the other hasn't. 

Who would dispute the historic evidence...or the fact that there likely was plenty of reasons for it based on sexism in the past. Not saying sexism doesn't exist, but sexism is certainly more balanced currently. Personally I don't like sexism against woman or men, but some seem to think it is justifiable.

6 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

This is not an evidence based assessment. No woman has ever received even a tenth of the votes for President Clinton did. No woman other than Clinton has ever received a single electoral vote.

 It is opinion...I recognize that, but I don't believe it is without some evidence. There are a number of females running for the Democrat ticket with considerably less baggage than Clinton had and has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Who would dispute the historic evidence...or the fact that there likely was plenty of reasons for it based on sexism in the past. Not saying sexism doesn't exist, but sexism is certainly more balanced currently. Personally I don't like sexism against woman or men, but some seem to think it is justifiable.

Quote

 

BNN Bloomberg reviewed the 100 most influential companies within the S&P/TSX Composite, a group of companies that represents 88 per cent of the index. Within that industry-spanning group there is currently one woman serving as a CEO: Nancy Southern, who runs Calgary-based Canadian Utilities, which is controlled by ATCO Ltd. 

The S&P/TSX Composite is Canada’s dominant stock market index, Link.

 

If a man had never been elected Prime Minister of Canada, if only 1 in 100 publicly traded Canadian companies had a male CEO, or etc do you believe you'd feel as you do today about the state of sexism? Forget the "historical" stuff for a moment and consider that today, real time, these disparities exist. Only 1 in 5 Universities in Canada are led by women, only 1 in 4 Canadian Parliament members are women, and 40% of Canadian women report having been sexually assaulted since the age of 16 or above.

I understand that you are not denying sexism exists but I get the feeling from your posts that you feel adequate headway has been and is being made. I believe you'd feel very different if roles were reversed. 

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

It is opinion...I recognize that, but I don't believe it is without some evidence. There are a number of females running for the Democrat ticket with considerably less baggage than Clinton had and has.

Saying maybe one day a woman will be President doesn't seem like equality to me. Men do not have to wonder, you have never once wondered, if a man might ever be President or Prime Minister. For a woman it is a hypothetical notion without any precedent. You belief that the day may be close if meaningless in the absence of it happening. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

If a man had never been elected Prime Minister of Canada, if only 1 in 100 publicly traded Canadian companies had a male CEO, or etc do you believe you'd feel as you do today about the state of sexism? Forget the "historical" stuff for a moment and consider that today, real time, these disparities exist. Only 1 in 5 Universities in Canada are led by women, only 1 in 4 Canadian Parliament members are women,

What factors effect this small, very successful group of people?

How much of this is effected by females personal choices, and influenced by personal biology and the decision to have kids and/or stay home for the most important development years of their lives? (a time that often coincides with a critical point in their careers)

How much of this is sexism, and how much lifestyle choice? How much of the choice is driven by the fact that they chose to request, and successfully gained custody of their children after a break up?  How much from the fact that the father is often older, and already further in his career? 

How much of it is from sexism in the past having put a very small percentage of men in these types of favourable positions? Do we kick them out, or do we disadvantage men vs women going forward? (fight past sexism with current sexism)

2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

 and 40% of Canadian women report having been sexually assaulted since the age of 16 or above.

 

This is obviously a problem. What can be done to reduce it without restricting rights and freedoms of both men and women? (other than the perpetrator's after the fact)

Education is important IMO, but not in a manner that vilifies men, which is both sexist and counterproductive long term IMO.

 

2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

 

Saying maybe one day a woman will be President doesn't seem like equality to me. Men do not have to wonder, you have never once wondered, if a man might ever be President or Prime Minister. For a woman it is a hypothetical notion without any precedent. You belief that the day may be close if meaningless in the absence of it happening. 

So how would it effect your vote? Would you vote for who you considered the best candidate regardless of sex? Or not?

Edited by J.C.MacSwell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
!

Moderator Note

I suggest we return to the topic of the OP. If you wish to discuss sexism more broadly, you are welcome to open a new topic. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, MigL said:

This was my 'offensive' post.

"Well, that particular 'stupid woman' ( T May )has just lost the vote on the BREXIT deal and may face a no-confidence vote.
But at least she's not as bad as that particular 'stupid man' ( D Trump ) in the White House."

I don't see how much clearer I can make it, to identify one specific woman and one specific man.
NOT all womankind or mankind.
Are we going to toss context out the window too ?

Some are so focussed on sexism that they'll find it no matter what.
And even go to the extent of being sexist in their criteria.

( also, you 'll notice a lot of objections to 'stupid woman' but not a single complaint about " stupid man' )
 

1

It's not about who's right or wrong, it's about this...

On 1/13/2019 at 11:59 PM, iNow said:

She impressed me as a human. My reflexive response was to call her an impressive woman. I had to question and challenge my reflex and consciously try harder to be better. I shared it as an attempt to relate to those who feel they've disagreed with me here... to remind you that we’re not all that different and all have an opportunity to improve. 

 

 

Edited by dimreepr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zapatos previously said
"MigL seems to either not know that the term "stupid woman" might be offensive to some"
and that is a mis-characterization.

I have stated my personal stance on the subject.
If I say or do something offensive to another, and I am informed, I will do my best to avoid doing or saying it again.
That is how I think.

However, every thinking person has the option of considering other viewpoints, and I've often done this in the past.
Even viewpoints that I don't personally agree with are worth consideration and exploring.
This is after all, a discussion forum, with differing opinions. Not a blog.

I understand that some words may cause perceived offence ( for a multitude if reasons, including historical ), and I certainly don't like to make anyone uncomfortable, however I'm also a firm believer in free speech. And changing what you can say, in a free society, according to someone's constantly changing sensibilities seems like going too far.

When even saying 'intelligent woman' or 'handsome man' is considered sexist, maybe we need to look at the cult of 'victimhood' which has taken over our Western societies, where everybody is a victim, and offended by the most trivial slight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@MigL what is the difference between "preceived" offense and offense? If someone preceives themselves to be offended are they not in fact offended?

As for victimhood taking over Western Society; isn't that just your own judgement regarding how others should feel? Why should "we" take a look just because you disagree with the things which offend other people? Neither you or I get to dictate what offends individual people any more than we get to dictate how people feel about climate change, flat Earth theory, Bigfoot, or any other number of things we might definitely think people should not believe.

Edited by Ten oz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why are you telling me I should find the term offensive ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He’s not. He is, however, trying to remind you that others do and encourage you to potentially update your approach accordingly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, MigL said:

Then why are you telling me I should find the term offensive ?

Please provide a post where I have told you what terms you should or shouldn't be offended by. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well then, it seems we've wasted 17 pages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MigL said:

Zapatos previously said
"MigL seems to either not know that the term "stupid woman" might be offensive to some"
and that is a mis-characterization.

Perhaps, but perhaps you are sending mixed messages.

Quote

I have stated my personal stance on the subject.
If I say or do something offensive to another, and I am informed, I will do my best to avoid doing or saying it again.
That is how I think.

 

Quote

I understand that some words may cause perceived offence ( for a multitude if reasons, including historical ), and I certainly don't like to make anyone uncomfortable, however I'm also a firm believer in free speech. And changing what you can say, in a free society, according to someone's constantly changing sensibilities seems like going too far.

So what is it? You change your speech, or changing your speech is going too far?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said, I, personally, don't like to make others feel uncomfortable.
But I will not dictate to others what the limits of offensive speech are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, MigL said:

I said, I, personally, don't like to make others feel uncomfortable.
But I will not dictate to others what the limits of offensive speech are.

That doesn't answer Zap's question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I change MY speech because I consider it good social behavior.
( and I'm a nice guy )
I don't suggest everyone should change theirs because it's sexist.

How is that a conflicted position ?
And how does it not answer Zap's question ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it conflicted because you say you change your speech, yet you say changing your speech to meet changing social mores is going too far.

I also find it conflicted because you think it is important enough that you will change your speech, but feel people's right to say what they wish is more important that asking them to be considerate of others.

If your attitude was followed by all there would be no social pressure to limit racist or sexist language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you decide to refer to a woman as an "intelligent person" so as not to offend anyone that reads that as "intelligent for a woman"...and then someone gets offended because they feel saying "intelligent person" is obviously condescending toward woman... What do you do next?

Edited by J.C.MacSwell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I do next is try to to be inoffensive and not support those who don't try to be inoffensive. And I don't look for ways to justify offensive language by suggesting that since it is impossible to be inoffensive all the time, then we should just accept the status quo and not try to improve things. It's very simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, zapatos said:

What I do next is try to to be inoffensive and not support those who don't try to be inoffensive. And I don't look for ways to justify offensive language by suggesting that since it is impossible to be inoffensive all the time, then we should just accept the status quo and not try to improve things. It's very simple.

Do you allow yourself to be manipulated in your speech by anyone who might feign offence? Or are you sure no one would do that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now