Misogyny and Sexism in the News

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by EnderD_503

It's frustrating. Society constantly goes through these phases of becoming more progressive before sending people back 50 years.

I'm not sure it really is a deliberate, calculated, informed choice. How informed is it? Yes, everyone has a right to a choice, but at the same time we can't ignore the social realities that inform that choice. In many ways this parallels the niqab debate in many Western nations...claiming that women have the "choice" and that they shouldn't be permitted to wear the niqab in places like schools and work places. So yes, the woman might have a "choice," but the choice is to defy your upbringing, your family, your culture as you were raised to understand it or be shunned from the rest of society (education, jobs etc.) While perhaps less extreme, the "choice" can be similar for many women in various societies. You are brought up to see yourself a certain way...and if you do something radical according to your culture...no longer subscribe to gendered norms or sexual norms (not talking necessarily about queer/trans community here) you still might have much to lose, if not what little privilege conformity gives you in society.

And what if you don't even question it?

At what point is that "choice" not so much a choice as a reaction to social programming...as is everything. We are all socially programmed and no choice we make is ever divorced from that. It just depends on whether we challenge it or conform to it.

I believe we all should have a right to make a choice except in the instances where it brings direct harm to other human beings. Yet in many respects these choices, as extensions of how these behaviours will affect how these women interact with other generations of women (namely younger women and girls), do do damage.

And if these choices are extensions of upbringing and social expectations, how do societies provide room for them while also making sure that future generations of children are not brought into such a world of gendered social expectations or into a world where it is deemed "the way things are" to sexually objectify half the population based on the sex they were assigned at birth. Where they might have more options to make choices that aren't framed around the ingrained need to focus those choices on the desires of cissexed hetero men.

All I know is the world is seriously too fucked up

I agree with you. We seem to share a common paradigm. Your words are my words. Your thoughts are my thoughts. Except when they arent. Sometimes, I see things differently when my values, morals, paradigm and life conflict in ways I dont expect. I have to adjust, adapt, make choices, change perspectives etc.

There is a distinct difference, it seems, between theory and real life. Lots of things work in theory. They dont always work in real life or maybe they dont work in quite the way we expect or maybe they work in various ways for ways people at various times. Is confusing stuff.

The "choice" I was referring to involves individual perspective which may be unknown or just plain foreign to me. Take any act as an example. I might see it as sexist and misogynistic. Someone else might see the partiarchy lurking in it but feel the act was an adaptation to conditions. Someone else might not even acknowledge the patriarchy paradigm, thus they see an act as what is expected or their role in life period and they are very comfortable with that. Someone else might see the patriarchy but their behavior is more geared to exploiting the exploitation for their own benefit. Someone else might see something totally different. Thats diversity.

Wish it was simplier but it isnt. The mere fact something is observed will change its properties. That is scientific fact. Funny thing this life can be.

You also said - "Where they might have more options to make choices that aren't framed around the ingrained need to focus those choices on the desires of cissexed hetero men."

We are of the same thinking and paradigm yet I dont limit my perspective to "the desires of cissexed hetero men". To me, it is much broader. It is the appearance or even just the suggestion of masculinity. Social programming runs deep, and there are perks and privileges all along the spectum of real and perceived masculinity.

Being a woman, this never occured to me until I began playing around with how best to word my id so I didnt have to keep explaining it. When I used butch or lesbutchian, I was treated differently. People related to me differently. They flirted with me differently. They "honored" my butchness in ways that were unfamiliar and uncomfortable to me because I am not male id. If I addressed something female i.e. pms, what I said could be miscontrued as a sexist comment rather than a shared female experience - because I wasnt seen as a female. It was a very weird yet enlightening kind of experience.

Of course, now, I just use lesbian and woman. Again, I am treated differently albeit in more familiar and comfortable ways. I am also mistaken for a femme more and this is ok cuz at least I am being seen as a female. And, I dont get as many perks and privileges as I used to. On the other hand, I dont get the feeling people are checking out my crotch anymore either.

Social programming works both ways tho. A femme can say something to me and I dont think twice about it. A male id person can say the exact same thing using the exact words and I want to smack him/hym upside the head. Tricky stuff this programming.

The older I get, the more I appreciate how life teaches us some interesting lessons. It is a journey of creativity not a destination. We are works in progress not a final product. In a lot of ways, it seems to me like we are making it up as we go. Sometimes we do good. Sometimes we dont. Sometimes we do good by accident not intent. Sometimes good intent turns into a unforseen fiasco.

I used to have a lot of answers. Now I have a lot more questions cuz nothing and no one is ever as simple as I would like it or them to be. The older I get, the clearer this becomes.

[EnderD_503]

Originally Posted by Kobi

I agree with you. We seem to share a common paradigm. Your words are my words. Your thoughts are my thoughts. Except when they arent. Sometimes, I see things differently when my values, morals, paradigm and life conflict in ways I dont expect. I have to adjust, adapt, make choices, change perspectives etc.

There is a distinct difference, it seems, between theory and real life. Lots of things work in theory. They dont always work in real life or maybe they dont work in quite the way we expect or maybe they work in various ways for ways people at various times. Is confusing stuff.

The "choice" I was referring to involves individual perspective which may be unknown or just plain foreign to me. Take any act as an example. I might see it as sexist and misogynistic. Someone else might see the partiarchy lurking in it but feel the act was an adaptation to conditions. Someone else might not even acknowledge the patriarchy paradigm, thus they see an act as what is expected or their role in life period and they are very comfortable with that. Someone else might see the patriarchy but their behavior is more geared to exploiting the exploitation for their own benefit. Someone else might see something totally different. Thats diversity.

Wish it was simplier but it isnt. The mere fact something is observed will change its properties. That is scientific fact. Funny thing this life can be.

You also said - "Where they might have more options to make choices that aren't framed around the ingrained need to focus those choices on the desires of cissexed hetero men."

We are of the same thinking and paradigm yet I dont limit my perspective to "the desires of cissexed hetero men". To me, it is much broader. It is the appearance or even just the suggestion of masculinity. Social programming runs deep, and there are perks and privileges all along the spectum of real and perceived masculinity.

Being a woman, this never occured to me until I began playing around with how best to word my id so I didnt have to keep explaining it. When I used butch or lesbutchian, I was treated differently. People related to me differently. They flirted with me differently. They "honored" my butchness in ways that were unfamiliar and uncomfortable to me because I am not male id. If I addressed something female i.e. pms, what I said could be miscontrued as a sexist comment rather than a shared female experience - because I wasnt seen as a female. It was a very weird yet enlightening kind of experience.

Of course, now, I just use lesbian and woman. Again, I am treated differently albeit in more familiar and comfortable ways. I am also mistaken for a femme more and this is ok cuz at least I am being seen as a female. And, I dont get as many perks and privileges as I used to. On the other hand, I dont get the feeling people are checking out my crotch anymore either.

Social programming works both ways tho. A femme can say something to me and I dont think twice about it. A male id person can say the exact same thing using the exact words and I want to smack him/hym upside the head. Tricky stuff this programming.

The older I get, the more I appreciate how life teaches us some interesting lessons. It is a journey of creativity not a destination. We are works in progress not a final product. In a lot of ways, it seems to me like we are making it up as we go. Sometimes we do good. Sometimes we dont. Sometimes we do good by accident not intent. Sometimes good intent turns into a unforseen fiasco.

I used to have a lot of answers. Now I have a lot more questions cuz nothing and no one is ever as simple as I would like it or them to be. The older I get, the clearer this becomes.

As far as the bolded text, I'm not sure I entirely agree. While spectrums of masculinity or "suggestions" of masculinity might mean something in the queer world, I don't think it means much in the cis, hetero world. When women are told to run around the media in short skirts and wet clothes as a marketing tool, it's not with the "masculine spectrum" in mind. It's not with butches in mind, masculine women or masculine lesbians in mind, not with masculine transmen who are attracted to woman identities in mind, not with masculine gay men in mind, not with bisexuals or pansexuals in mind. It's for the benefit of cissexed heterosexual men. They are 100% the target audience. It's to catch their attention on something capitalism wants them to consume. The world outside queer communities is still heavily reliant on the binary, and in that world there is really only one official masculinity (hence why we discuss it so damned much in queer communities ), and that is the masculinity of hetero cismen.

That's not me saying that varying perspectives on and responses to masculinity and masculine identities in the queer/trans or lgbtq communities is not valid. It totally is, and I think everyone needs to be aware of the way others might react to them, the way an environment can be made to feel safe or not, inclusive or not. And not only with regards to masculine identities. I think awareness and sensitivity is, more and more, becoming a huge part of those communities. In the rest of the world...not so much.

As far as choice. Yes, again, everyone has the choice and that can be turned into "nothing is right or wrong." But to me, if you have one specific group of people consistently dominating other groups of people throughout human history and dictating acceptable behaviours, practices and ideas and punishing those who don't fall in line...then at some point it's time to think "well gee, I wonder why that is."

The same thing today, there's a reason why the world is still cis, hetero male dominated and why women are consistently put on display and told that's their only real purpose in life.

I agree with you, though, that obviously everyone reacts differently. I was trying to get at that in my first post in response to Jo, but it didn't quite come out well. That's why I'm not a fan of the blame game. Do I think women need to open their eyes and become more aware that this isn't "just the way things are"? Yes! But do I think that not being able to break through a person's upbringing and what's been hammered into them since birth is a reason to blame them? No. Ultimately, society is the problem, and this incessant media and social broken record that claims that feminism has "succeeded enough" and that women can go "back" to being "empowered" through being objectified at every turn.

Obviously it's complicated, and I don't really aim for "theories," so much as trying to work with others to make what ever small changes can be made. But this whole problem is so soaked in to every portion of society. From criminalization, to education, to the workplace, to media geared towards young people, to health care, to personal relationships. I think all you can do is really narrow down the areas of society that have the biggest chance of affecting the way youth grow up in society. So education, health care, the prison system (which should be largely abolished, imo). And hopefully with a change in respect in younger generations, the media will eventually follow. But I don't think its every going to be those with the most power to bring about change that challenge norms..which means we have a long way to go before the media or entertainment industry ever changes with their "Real House Wives of whatever" and reality tv shows telling 8 year olds that they need to dress like Kim Kardashian and be just like her. Fuck, I was looking at this site on infant and toddler "beauty pageants" and nearly vomited. But that's what this shit amounts to, plus a kid that has to grow up thinking that's their only value in the world.

[Kobi]

Ender, I am thinking we are talking the same thing just from a different perspective.

You referenced how the media caters to a certain target audience when it objectifies women. Agreed.

I broadened the topic to how social programming goes so freakin deep that it cuts across the gender/sexual orientation spectrum.

You would think by this point in history we would have a better handle on things. You would also think after 100 years, the freakin ERA would have passed. In 2012, you wouldnt think the GOP and its religious affiliates, including its female members, would be attacking the basic rights of women with such vengence.

I hear you. I agree with you. Very complex, interdependent, interrelated caca poo. (Forgive me, I am still buzzed from the lemon Pledge.)

[DMW]

First, i have to admit that i did not read the article, i only read the post.
I should have been more careful.

Secondly,I totally agree that if the women are being used as some tool in a negative and disrespectul way...that it is wrong...and that people should ban the park.

Hopefully, i will get more time and energy to respond more of what has been posted. And read the article before commenting. I am not a troll. But, that is ok if i receive that reputation here. Might just keep me out of trouble.

[DMW]

After thinking more on the subject,...i definately don't approve of the spraying of the women. The splashing of the women. I personally, would not go to the park just for that reason. Period.

Upon further analysis, i realize that, it really isn't ok to offer discounts to women just to get them to wear miniskirts. The idea that it would attract some people to go to the park, just for that reason alone,kinda grosses me out actually.

My mind didn't go there.
I understand why there is a reason to be upset about it.
It is like the innocence of the world is lost.
It also makes me realize that i should be way more careful with what i post
because what i post could be taken at face value when people don't know me here.

In addition, there was sarcasm in my original statement.
I think... well hell, if they are going to do that... then the women should rise up and make the park offer them a free pass. I realize that i don't condone what the theme park is doing after reading and really thinking about it. Especially, when i put the two together. miniskirts and spraying.
I suppose there is a part of me that was arguing for them too.
Like, what? america is any better.

Also, i am not sayin this to placate anyone here on this site. I believe my mind has changed because i don't like the idea that it is a theme park. I don't go to hooters for the same reason.

what was written here, by the admin, has me thinking...

To answer your question, it *is* misogyny to treat women as "things" rather than people. That goes for marketing tools, non-consensual class-targeted ploys for "free" stuff, and any situation that puts a woman in a position of having her body used to "lure" people to a theme park.

I wonder how this could be non-consensual? the marketing is because it is out there to the public.
However, The women don't have to wear the miniskirts.
Also, the woman do not have to put themselves in that position to be used.


Ultimately, it was the Admins post that got to me...
The idea of women's bodies being used as a tool to increase sales.
Just like hooters. There is no innocence in that really.


I appreciate the post and i learned.