Senate Misogyny, Entitlement, and Pop Culture

I don't understand why this is alllowed on a campus.

 

The bubble/echo chamber problem isn't going to get solved by making our bubbles smaller.

Reddit remains a useful tool to find free movies and TV shows online, and to read interviews and essays and whatnot. 4chan is a place for Anime obsessives, junior trolls, people who boil MLP in their own semen, and a giant meme factory. If you want proper hateful insanity breeding grounds there's always stormfront, UKIP, or one of the many American conspiracy and general right wing sites.

Sites like Reddit and 4chan have contributed to culture and do well in minority interest areas. American blockbuster movies 'mainstream' (not sure about using this word as a verb) hate and violence and, rather inexplicably, mix it with some sex or at least some tits, and they don't represent a wide or particularly informed range of views or moral arguments. PUAs and rape fantasy obsessed malcontents in random subreddits are not on the same level of cultural exposure.

I don't see how allowing crazy people online the same rights and privileges as we do 'IRL' is a bad thing. It's good that the entire moral spectrum is represented in public discourse, it's not just about being able to identify criminal or immoral behaviour (which can be defined arbitrarily and subbjectively in many cases).

These sites aren't only a corrupting influence. It's good that a youngster in a culturally repressive society (or a repressive community within a comparatively liberal society) can go online and assimilate information that contradicts their received political/cultural/moral indoctrination. That benefit outweighs the detrimental effects of some social reprobates in comparatively liberal utopias sharing their twisted ideas about sexual politics. It's good for everyone to have their moral compass oiled from time to time, and at least when conversations are held in public they are open to free criticism.

I don't think the website format changes all that much about human nature, we'd still compete to impress, to attract attention, to seek validation - we'd still be insufferably needy. I think as a species we've always policed ourselves and have generally taken the best (or least worst) moral direction, depending on circumstance, over time. Mass communication technologies just speed up the process, which if you're as optimistic as me, is good. We can't adopt or reject arguments and ideas that we haven't heard.

 

I don't dare go on 4chan.

 

Yeah, it's a scummy place, but I heard when the guy who created 4chan came down against GamerGate, some there went and moved to another board, 8chan, which is, well, I think you can get the picture.....

 

http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/06/promiscuous-women/

I find this article kinda of a mixed bag. Some of it ok but some of it, disturbing in the sense of telling everyone that that you can do whatever you want and everyone has to accept your decisions. As if its their fault for not accepting your decisions. Even if they are in poor taste. Men and women will get judged the same way regardless of how many partners they sleep with. And people will judge them but guess what too bad. If you like the fact that a couple doesn't think you are good company because you sleep with everyone on the first date then deal with it.


If you want the right to do whatever you want then you have to accept the right that people will judge you on those decisions based on their morals and their conscience and you have to accept it. If you don't want to accept it then don't be in their lives. Find a group of people who accept it and don't complain.

 

What on Endor, beezel26? Why do you think women think like that?

I am far on the asexuality spectrum and while I think that they could always include something assuring my minority when they write about things such as partnered and solo sex because we tend to freak out and think we're abnormal when still young; I have no problem with sexual people being sexual. That has nothing to do with their looks, their gender or anything else. Actual, real morals will come into question only if the person is an actual sex addict, but the article covered that, too.

The things you speak of are not morals but nonsensical social norms and outdated beliefs and since the article dissects every single one of them, I doubt you actually read it.

 

I did read and I had a different take on it. People are raised a certain way. They have religion in their lives, they have experiences that give them their moral compass. They opinions deserve to be respected. If they feel that it is wrong then so be it. Don't knock them for it, because you have points of view that may appear to be wrong to them.

This forum has a set of rules a set of rules we all follow. If we don't like the rules then we can leave or face the ban stick when we break them. It is the same thing. This person is just like the people of reddit who feel like they should have the right to say whatever they want and you have to go along with it. .

This is America, we as a society give you the respect as a citizen to say and act the way you want within the legal limits of the law. But no where does it say we have to respect your decisions or views and thus go a long with them.. We respect the right for you to express them that's all. But you have to accept the consequences of your actions.

 

1. So, they can question my beliefs and I can't question theirs because theirs are right and mine are wrong? Not convinced.

2. Half of Reddit's bigotry will stem from repression caused by the "morals" you're talking about. Violence gives birth to violence, "morals" give birth to bigotry.

3. I'm from Belgrade, Serbia and the automatic assumption that everybody is from America, a western Christian and whatever else is laughable.

 

This is MURICA.... we have the right to slut shame our wimmens, because Jaysus!!

 

Religious people in a nutshell.

 

I honestly don't think that every person who is religious is like that. But then again, Europe is more liberal in general, even in its very rectum over here.

Also, I was looking for an excuse to say rectum.

 

Any faction where the main guy didn't have a knowledge of metaphors while decyphering [insert the main religious text here].

 

I know. I am implying it through poking fun at fundamentalism as a concept in general. Just making sure.

Ever since a doctor told me that I owe somebody sex because god made me to give birth, I've been super-cynical about fundamentalism and fundamentalists' approach to human rights in general. Sorry if it was not coming across right.

 

I find the very idea of fundamentalism to be stupid, especially when a religious minded person doesn't do any research into what they should and shouldn't take literally.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

 

So, er, we can crap all over the US? Someone had to say it.....

This is why God gave us the West Wing and Martin Sheen:

 

To be fair, Aaron Sorkin is the king of strawmanning.

I wasn't really sure where to bring it up, as it seems more apt for the feminism thread proper, but whatever: the firing of Tim Hunt for his (blatantly) sexist comments about women in science. I think he deserved some shaming, but firing him is sort of counter-productive, isn't it? It's a weird term to use, but wouldn't rehabilitation or education about more appropriate views be more powerful and effective?

 

Maybe, but I think that once you reach a certain age, it becomes pretty much impossible to change people's views on racism and/or sexism. At most you can get them to keep their lesser views to themselves.

 

True, but I think the guy in question seems fairly set in his ways in regards to his views on women. As I said, more often than not, all we can expect from bigots is for them to keep their mouths shut.