|
Post by Christine on Jan 27, 2017 21:35:34 GMT -5
I'm reminded of something I've heard, not infrequently, from some white people 'round these parts, in response to rap music lyrics, young-people speak, etc.: that because some black people use "the N-word," they, the white people, should be able to use it too. To wit: "They call themselves niggers, but I can't? What the hell?"
To which I hereby reply, "Fuck you, you ignorant fucking fuck."
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Jan 27, 2017 22:24:24 GMT -5
Like I said, I can't bring myself to even type it in this discussion, but if you're one of those white kids that grows up listening to that sort of music, you pick up on that sort of lingo. I can easily see someone using the word without malice, just trying to sound cool. Much like I did when I went through a phase of talking like Bill and Ted. (Guess what? I sounded like a moron.)
And I get what you're saying, those are the rules. But who writes those rules? Why should anyone follow them?
I don't think pussy is as bad. I've heard it used plenty in non derogatory way, but usually in a sexual way. Much like the way cock or dick is used. Nobody likes to be called any of those things, but if I were writing erotica, I'd probably use those words. Not so with the c word.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jan 27, 2017 23:03:26 GMT -5
Like I said, I can't bring myself to even type it in this discussion, but if you're one of those white kids that grows up listening to that sort of music, you pick up on that sort of lingo. I can easily see someone using the word without malice, just trying to sound cool. Well, a kid who does that will learn pretty fast that it doesn't work that way. Done. No one has to. It's social protocol. Anyone can give it the middle finger if they want to, and deal with the social consequences. The origination of pussy hats was in response to Trump's claim of "grabbing them by the pussy." It wasn't the word "pussy," it was the whole phrase. As in, a pussy is something to grab, not a part of an autonomous human being. That's where the degradation comes in (and it didn't start with Trump). Whatever happens in written erotica is obviously a separate issue. I have no opinion, other than that I'd personally rather watch porn. Muted.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Jan 28, 2017 7:10:41 GMT -5
Good, because if you had said I love fucking America so much right now... I'd suspect you were Donald Trump gaslighting us. Not me. If she'd said "I love fucking America so much right now," I'd suspect she was channeling Donald Trump in a rare moment of total honesty.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2017 7:45:47 GMT -5
No serious or conscious Black man would give such an insipid question the time of fucking day. No True Black Man?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2017 10:09:24 GMT -5
No True Woman enjoys hearing a man champion using the word "pussy" to refer to a vagina.
I'll give you some citations about historical sexism, if you require them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2017 10:36:04 GMT -5
If I were to do the equivalent of what you've done in this thread -- i.e., ridicule a member of a group (of which I am not a member) for finding a term that applies only to that group offensive, calling that person "precious" for finding it so, pointing at the fact that some others don't find the term offensive as evidence they are "precious" -- you'd be filling this thread with a wall of ranting text, lambasting me for my privilege.
Whatever. Go ahead and find the pussy hats and the "reclamation" of "pussy" awesome. Both will continue to make me cringe. And I'm the one with a vagina, neener neener.
As for the cites, I do not believe you actually require them. However, if you directly state that you don't believe (or even simply that you doubt) that sexism exists and has existed historically, I will go to the trouble of posting cites to prove my point.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Jan 28, 2017 10:55:04 GMT -5
This man is championing the effectiveness of the Women's March through the symbolic power of the pink pussy hats. There is evidence that many women wore pink pussy hats during the march. There's no evidence that this was effective. There is evidence, however, that there has been a run on hot pink yarn. As to reclaiming words, my opinion is that the pink pussy hats are doing no such thing, because there still are two meanings--three, actually--for "pussy." Wearing fuzzy pink hats that have cat ears are firmly in the Hello Kitty realm of that meaning. There's zero shock value in pink pussy hats. Indeed, the "pink" part just about guarantees this. When I first saw the pics--before I knew the background--I assumed all the pink was a tie-in to cancer stuff. Seriously, "cutesy" is a word one doesn't want associated with a serious movement, imo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2017 11:12:57 GMT -5
Seriously, "cutesy" is word one doesn't want associated with a serious movement, imo. Agree wholeheartedly. I dislike the underlying reclaim-pussy idea behind the hats, but even taking that quite aside, I think the hats themselves are cutesy and little-girlish looking, which is not a desirable association for a feminist movement, IMO. The signs denouncing Trump's pussy-grabbing comment are a far better, clearer statement. Here's an fun anecdotal point -- I spoke yesterday with a friend of mine who participated in the NYC march, and brought up the hats to get her take. She had no idea what I was talking about. She didn't notice the pink hats, hadn't heard about them, didn't know what they meant. She's not into social media at all, so managed to miss all the discussions about it. (Oh, and she thinks the idea is ridiculous. Which doesn't prove anything, any more than the woman in The Nation liking the hats. But it does go to show that the march and the hats are two different issues.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2017 16:22:37 GMT -5
I'll give you some citations about historical sexism, if you require them. As for the cites, I do not believe you actually require them. However, if you directly state that you don't believe (or even simply that you doubt) that sexism exists and has existed historically, I will go to the trouble of posting cites to prove my point. Well, either you do or you don't, but if your citations are going to come with ridiculous preconditions that I must admit to something I don't believe, you can go ahead and keep 'em. There is evidence that many women wore pink pussy hats during the march. There's no evidence that this was effective. There is evidence, however, that there has been a run on hot pink yarn. As to reclaiming words, my opinion is that the pink pussy hats are doing no such thing, because there still are two meanings--three, actually--for "pussy." Wearing fuzzy pink hats that have cat ears are firmly in the Hello Kitty realm of that meaning. There's zero shock value in pink pussy hats. Indeed, the "pink" part just about guarantees this. When I first saw the pics--before I knew the background--I assumed all the pink was a tie-in to cancer stuff. Seriously, "cutesy" is a word one doesn't want associated with a serious movement, imo. "Cutesy" is only your word, and as I have emphasized, only your opinion. Men only had a supportive role to play in the Women's March. The opinion of men, whether pro or con about the march and whether they praise or snark at the pink pussy hats, really means very little in the overall scheme of things. Women are not empowered by how men view them. Women empower themselves when they don't give a damn about how men views them. I can't see any point whatsoever in my putting in time proving an assertion that no one disputes. Therefore, if you don't dispute sexism exists, I'm not wasting my time with citations about historical sexism. By the way -- it may have escaped your notice, but I am a woman and you are not. Yet you continue to mansplain about how women should be empowering themselves. I don't really care, mind you, but I do find it amusing. Mansplain away.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Jan 28, 2017 17:06:04 GMT -5
"Cutesy" is only your word, and as I have emphasized, only your opinion. Men only had a supportive role to play in the Women's March. The opinion of men, whether pro or con about the march and whether they praise or snark at the pink pussy hats, really means very little in the overall scheme of things. Women are not empowered by how men view them. Women empower themselves when they don't give a damn about how men views them. Sure. It's my opinion. Just as your opinion is your opinion. Yours in no better or no worse than mine. Glad that's settled. As to what does or does not "empower" women or anyone else, that's a whole other ball of yarn. The issue is the effectiveness of the pink pussy hats in relation to the women's march. The question in that regard--that was the basis of this thread--is "what do YOU think" of the pink pussy hat project. When someone asks "what do think about this or that," what they're asking for is opinions. When we're going back and forth about things, the basis of that back and forth is opinions. But by all means, continue to point out the obvious...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2017 17:56:04 GMT -5
I can't see any point whatsoever in my putting in time proving an assertion that no one disputes. Therefore, if you don't dispute sexism exists, I'm not wasting my time with citations about historical sexism. By the way -- it may have escaped your notice, but I am a woman and you are not. Yet you continue to mansplain about how women should be empowering themselves. I don't really care, mind you, but I do find it amusing. Mansplain away. Dubbing a difference in opinion as "mansplaiing" is an obvious attempt to choke off an dissenting viewpoint with politically correct language meant to silence. And no, it hasn't escaped my notice, that you are a woman and I am not. I'm a man and you're not. I'm Black and you're not. I support and applaud the women who conceived and executed the pink pussy hat protests and you do not If a man expressing an opinion different from a woman is "mansplaining" then I'll wear that label and wave it like a flag. I reserve the right to disagree with you despite our obvious differences in gender and viewpoint. While I am Black, I am not the ultimate arbiter on all matters related to race and I do not believe your feminine gender makes you the end-all and be-all on matters related to sexism, vaginas or even the best way for women to protest. I respect your right to see it differently. " Womansplaining is a thing too, ya know? Actually, I'm totally fine with that. *bookmarks thread for the next time a race issue comes up*
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Jan 28, 2017 18:10:36 GMT -5
No, you first. You said there is no evidence the pink pussy hats protests were effective. How would you quantify "effective?" If Trump and his entire rotten gang of thugs had resigned en masse and fled Washington? "Effective" as I define it is thousands of women embraced the symbolism and sported the hats. What else would define being "effective" in your book since you are dismissing them as unworthy of anything but ridicule? Me first what? I didn't ask for anything from you. As to what is and what isn't effective, it's going to come down to opinion--which you seem to recognize in one moment, then completely forget in the next--when there isn't hard evidence to demonstrate effectiveness (really, it will probably not be apparent in this case until down the road). I understand your position. But I disagree, because I don't think the march was any larger because of the pink pussy hats; I don't think the march carried any additional meanings because of the pink pussy hats, especially since there were plenty of people--like me--who had no idea that the pink hats signified something when the march actually occurred. And fyi, your definition of "effective" is circular reasoning, i.e. women wearing pink pussy hats was effective because women wore pink pussy hats. Using that definition, every action is effective.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jan 28, 2017 23:40:49 GMT -5
Maybe I'll ask them about this one guy I know online who claims to speak for black people and can judge my authenticity, and whether they've heard of him. No serious or conscious Black man would give such an insipid question the time of fucking day You really don't get sardonicism, do you?
|
|