'Mansplaining'

[Landlord]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

Look at the percentage of comedies have the husband or guy being the idiot and the woman is the smart/normal one.

 

 

Even in the sitcoms where the husband is a bumbling idiot and the wife is a smart, capable professional, which one is considered the main character? 

[Moiraine]

12 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I guess my side of the question is....why do women feel their side of this equation is automatically demeaning?

Now, I fully understand that any sexual act can be demeaning to someone involved.  But, that has more to do with the attitude in the relationship than the actual sexual act.

 

So....why do women feel this is automatically demeaning while a man automatically feels our side of the equation is not?

 

 

 

I don't know what you're talking about. Did you read the previous posts about this? Not trying to be rude but I'm not sure why you asked me the question - it doesn't make sense given what I said in my posts.

[BigRedBuster]

1 minute ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

 

I don't know what you're talking about. Did you read the previous posts about this?

I'm strictly talking about the sentence that I quoted.

The entire issue of how the two terms are viewed when said, boils down to the underlying feelings about the sexual acts.

 

Why is one seen as a conquest and the other one demeaning.  

 

After all, if both sex acts are viewed the same, then calling one person a c***licker wouldn't be different than calling another person a c**cksucker.

[Moiraine]

9 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I'm strictly talking about the sentence that I quoted.

The entire issue of how the two terms are viewed when said, boils down to the underlying feelings about the sexual acts.

 

Why is one seen as a conquest and the other one demeaning.  

 

After all, if both sex acts are viewed the same, then calling one person a c***licker wouldn't be different than calling another person a c**cksucker.

 

 

 

Why did you ask me why women think it's demeaning?

[zoogs]

Why, indeed, do we live in a world where "things women do" is used to demean other people but "things men do" is not? 

[B.B. Hemingway]

4 hours ago, zoogs said:

The sheer degree of resistance kind of illustrates the point.

 

But yes, let's absolutely go down the road of talking about women and their portrayal in popular culture. It's not going to flatter your side in this argument, even though media (TV moreso than cinema) tends to attempt to be more progressive. For starters, it's interesting that "chummy averageman husband who is the lovable, relatable protagonist" and "hypercapable woman" is viewed as evidence of equality. Can it be the other way around? Do protagonist women even get to be [with notable, trailblazing exceptions perhaps] average-looking dummies? (Reflects a larger aspect of society as well, and the role that looks plays)

 

So now we're upset because leading role women aren't often portrayed as morons?..... 

 

 

[B.B. Hemingway]

2 hours ago, zoogs said:

Why, indeed, do we live in a world where "things women do" is used to demean other people but "things men do" is not? 

 

Do all of us live in this world? I'm not sure I do. The world I live in these things go both ways. In amounts of equal proportions? Maybe not.

 

I don't know why every liberal is so hell-bent on fighting every little stereotype out there. They're in for an uphill battle. A losing one too.

 

They're fine for conversation, but seem like a grain of sand on a beach of problems worth fighting (How's my analogy, Landlord?)

[zoogs]

We all live in this world. That's not the same thing as we all contribute to it. 

 

The entire point is that the proportions are not equal. 

 

It's kind of mind-numbing how resistant you are to this. 

 

Quote

So now we're upset because leading role women aren't often portrayed as morons?..... 

 

Not at all what I said. C'mon -- you can work this out. 

 

To try to be succinct and appeal to arguments that have already been written, it seems like we're having "Not all men" / "yes, all women" play out here. Please do go look that up. 

[Landlord]

11 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

I don't know why every liberal is so hell-bent on fighting every little stereotype out there. They're in for an uphill battle. A losing one too.

 

 

Even though this premise isn't even accurate, it seems you're entirely mistaken as far as the bold goes. Liberalism is the crazy kind of thing that led to the civil rights movement, women being able to vote, gay marriage becoming legalized, and so on. 

 

The losing side of the battle is the side that gets upset and digs their heels into their ideology after it's been exposed as being antiquated, or culture has learned a better way of moving forward. 

[Moiraine]

24 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

I don't know why every liberal is so hell-bent on fighting every little stereotype out there.

 

 

Can we try not to veer too far into politics in this topic? I know it's in the politics & religion forum, and I think it's the best place for it, but we can argue that stuff in the 500 other topics here. This shouldn't be an issue of conservatism vs liberalism, anyway. I'm not sure why it is.

 

 

As for the grain of sand comment, we've been over it, but it was an example that shows how pervasive and subconscious this stuff is. It's not the one small example that matters.

[BigRedBuster]

3 hours ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

 

Why did you ask me why women think it's demeaning?

I understand why the conversation is odd or uncomfortable. But, I wasn't the one that brought up the terms. 

 

And, the terms are only viewed differently because some people obviously think one is demeaning while the other isn't. 

 

So, that leads to the question.....why is that?

 

and, I'm not only asking you. 

[BigRedBuster]

2 hours ago, zoogs said:

Why, indeed, do we live in a world where "things women do" is used to demean other people but "things men do" is not? 

That's sort of to my point. 

[B.B. Hemingway]

14 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

 

Even though this premise isn't even accurate, it seems you're entirely mistaken as far as the bold goes. Liberalism is the crazy kind of thing that led to the civil rights movement, women being able to vote, gay marriage becoming legalized, and so on. 

 

The losing side of the battle is the side that gets upset and digs their heels into their ideology after it's been exposed as being antiquated, or culture has learned a better way of moving forward. 

 

Jesus. There's a difference between a stereotype, and actual inequality. There are even a few for white men (white men can't jump, white people can't dance) and somehow we've still found a way to rule the world!

 

You're so quick to paint anybody that questions your position as a bigot standing in the way of equality. As I've stated before, I have two daughters. So the the world they're growing up in certainly matters to me, as does what kind of obstacles they might face.

 

-- And the premise of "liberals fighting every little stereotype" is incredibly accurate(no further elaboration on that is needed).

[Moiraine]

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

I understand why the conversation is odd or uncomfortable. But, I wasn't the one that brought up the terms. 

 

And, the terms are only viewed differently because some people obviously think one is demeaning while the other isn't. 

 

So, that leads to the question.....why is that?

 

and, I'm not only asking you. 

 

 

 

It's not uncomfortable for me. And I'll reply once my fiancé gets off my computer. Men are the worst sometimes.

[Moiraine]

2 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

-- And the premise of "liberals fighting every little stereotype" is incredibly accurate.

 

 

 

Please stop. I'm asking politely that this not turn into a politics discussion.