Puerile sexist shite

yip

Anyway, Jimmy Carr summed it all quite nicely

Oh my lord - like that would happen...

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah...

Foolz...

17/6/07-11/9/09

See you, wouldn't want to be you...
Oh.
You've gone.
Never mind.

.........just because I dared to question the validity of list-making so many moons ago. If you dish out shit, you've got to expect a little in return, particularly during a fevered period of monopolising the forum with your prescriptive attitude........

I only just noticed this. Monopolising the forum? Are you for real?

Most of my posts and threads are in the Bikes and Bits section, with only a few in the General section, and only recently, with the Ditto thread, did I actually "monopolise" a discussion thread. I think I have only offered 2 things for sale in the Classifieds section, and only went onto the Polo section once, to proffer a birthday wish.

I felt this forum was crying out for a place where information was readily and quickly available. You, Nimbhus and Dogsballs took quite some exception to this. In the end, my efforts were regarded generally in a positive light by the forum. Still, I did always wonder why there was such animosity to some simple lists.

But since you obviously felt that I was in some way, monopolising your forum, it all makes sense now. I'm glad that time revealed the true sentiment that was disguised at the time as ribbing. I'm sure this will be laughed off as boring, and beneath you. No surprise there. I'm only content that I understand it now. I really didn't before.

The point about stereotypes is that they are to some degree fairly accurate. If they weren't there wouldn't be any. They have cultural resonance. Observation has confirmed them. We don't have stereotypes about, say, Welsh people having a great interest in shoes or Scousers preferring playing with dolls to cars or trains because there's no evidence to support either assertion. We do on the other hand hold these as stereotypes about women, largely because the majority of them conform to these stereotypes.

It's almost a chicken-and-egg question, Niall. :)

However, in this case, what 'came first' is conditioned by history.

Ashe to you, GA2G to most of the others.

I'm sure he's quite taken to have such an honour bestowed upon him.

I only just noticed this. Monopolising the forum? Are you for real?

Most of my posts and threads are in the Bikes and Bits section, with only a few in the General section, and only recently, with the Ditto thread, did I actually "monopolise" a discussion thread. I think I have only offered 2 things for sale in the Classifieds section, and only went onto the Polo section once, to proffer a birthday wish.

I felt this forum was crying out for a place where information was readily and quickly available. You, Nimbhus and Dogsballs took quite some exception to this. In the end, my efforts were regarded generally in a positive light by the forum. Still, I did always wonder why there was such animosity to some simple lists.

But since you obviously felt that I was in some way, monopolising your forum, it all makes sense now. I'm glad that time revealed the true sentiment that was disguised at the time as ribbing. I'm sure this will be laughed off as boring, and beneath you. No surprise there. I'm only content that I understand it now. I really didn't before.

Your blinkered and lack lustre comprehension skills never cease to amaze.

It may oversimplify things somewhat, but we are simply people, who have a myriad of behaviours and characteristics that define who we are - none of which are dependent on gender, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation or otherwise. The sooner society learns that, the better.

Then society will never learn that, because it isn't true. You work in diversity Mooks, your job is presumably to prevent people being subject to unfair stereotypes. In order to do this as effectively as possible you have decided that none of us are determined by biology in how we live our lives or what we might be capable of achieving. I'm pretty sure if you sat in a project meeting or workshop and stated otherwise you'd find yourself on rocky ground in your line of work.

You might not feel that you are ruled by your genome and I'm sure you could cite a list of people who would agree. This is not enough to debunk an argument or belief.
Very often on this forum someone holds up a single example in order to refute a generalisation, its not enough unfortunately. As Bluequinn stated in his great post a generalisation is usually founded on some sort of truth. That truth may be outdated and may lead to damaging stereotype but let's look for reasons behind the stereotype rather than dismiss the whole process.

Now that the subject is not so taboo, scientists (Evolutionary Anthropologists?) are looking at these generalisations and in almost all cases finding reasonable theories (based upon experiment) as to why there are differences in, for example, the sexes. It might well be the case that these differences are a result of deliberately applied stereotyping over millennia, but as already stated that's a bit 'chicken and egg'.

Like many people on here I consider myself to be reasonably intelligent (my posts may say otherwise) and an independent person. Certainly in my teens and twenties I believed that my life would be different to those around me. Now I'm in my mid-thirties, 2 kids, married and paying two mortgages. This is instead of living in a yurt making bows for a living. So, what happened there? Fucked if I know. Some will doubtless say I have conformed. So what drove that subconcious need to provide and ensure that my kids are safe and secure? BMMF gave a perfect example of when our 'true nature' might show itself. Having kids lights up those powerful instincts.

I'm sure that none of what I am saying is new to anyone and no doubt there are plenty of counter-arguments. As yet I've not seen anyone change their mind a bit in any of these more contentious threads so I doubt I'll be the first.

I have Casanova fingers, so your stereotypes can't touch me*

*except for the stereotype about females with testosterone markers from early brain development being more likely to enjoy sports, have better spatial reasoning, and to have certain susceptibilities to autistic spectrum disorders and alcohol and drug use, that is :-D

Then society will never learn that, because it isn't true. You work in diversity Mooks, your job is presumably to prevent people being subject to unfair stereotypes. In order to do this as effectively as possible you have decided that none of us are determined by biology in how we live our lives or what we might be capable of achieving. I'm pretty sure if you sat in a project meeting or workshop and stated otherwise you'd find yourself on rocky ground in your line of work.

i don't think mooks suggested that none of us are determined by our biology, that is crazy talk, it kind of refutes the existence of reproduction and traits being passed on.

what i think they meant is, if you took two, white, lesbian, one legged women, they would not be the same, and these things do not define who they are.

I have Casanova fingers, so your stereotypes can't touch me*

*except for the stereotype about females with testosterone markers from early brain development being more likely to enjoy sports, have better spatial reasoning, and to have certain susceptibilities to autistic spectrum disorders and alcohol and drug use, that is :-D

Boom! That's the kind of thing I'd have mentioned if actually knew what I was on about.

i don't think mooks suggested that none of us are determined by our biology, that is crazy talk, it kind of refutes the existence of reproduction and traits being passed on.

what i think they meant is, if you took two, white, lesbian, one legged women, they would not be the same, and these things do not define who they are.

Yep, understood. I do tend to miss the finer points of discussions, probably because I am a man and therefore tend to not listen to anyone else.

i don't think mooks suggested that none of us are determined by our biology, that is crazy talk, it kind of refutes the existence of reproduction and traits being passed on.

what i think they meant is, if you took two, white, lesbian, one legged women, they would not be the same, and these things do not define who they are.

Spot on...

We are so diverse a society that to use a gender determiner to define who we are is an absolute waste of time. Yes there are biological markers, but in terms of social characteristics there is no one behaviour or character trait that can be attached to one of these groups.

Not all gay men are effeminate, not all women like kittens, not all scousers are criminals... And so it goes...

In the context of this thread - and the site as a whole - there is sexism, and lots of it at that, but it affects us all in different ways. Some, like myself and Fred, are acutely aware of it, others, like Plurabelle (I think?) aren't as much. This isn't an exclusively female domain, but as Tracey Emin said in the Guardian this week:

"I don't think about feminism - I have a strong voice and I'm quite feisty but there are a lot of women who aren't and they need to have laws protecting them and rights too."

Minor point, but didn't Tracey Emin say in the Guardian that 'I don't think about feminism' is what she said when she was asked about it in a college interview and that things have changed since then?

edit: yes.

"Yes, I am a feminist. I haven't always been; when I had my interview for Maidstone Art College they asked, "What do you think of feminism?" I said, "I don't think about it." I have a strong voice and I'm quite feisty but there are a lot of women who aren't and they need to have laws [protecting them] and rights too."

Spot on...

We are so diverse a society that to use a gender determiner to define who we are is an absolute waste of time. Yes there are biological markers, but in terms of social characteristics there is no one behaviour or character trait that can be attached to one of these groups.

Not all gay men are effeminate, not all women like kittens, not all scousers are criminals... And so it goes...

In the context of this thread - and the site as a whole - there is sexism, and lots of it at that, but it affects us all in different ways. Some, like myself and Fred, are acutely aware of it, others, like Plurabelle (I think?) aren't as much. This isn't an exclusively female domain, but as Tracey Emin said in the Guardian this week:

"I don't think about feminism - I have a strong voice and I'm quite feisty but there are a lot of women who aren't and they need to have laws protecting them and rights too."

Ach, no, I totally agree with you. I'm a mad feminist, me :-) I just meant that on this particular site I think that the neanderthal-type sexists are in a minority. It seems to me that there is a dominant tone on here which is intelligent, enlightened, and pretty solidly liberal. That's not to say that there isn't any sexism, of course. My point was supposed to be a subtle one, which probably was badly made – that the more insidious form of sexism on here, as far as I've observed, is in small assumptions evident in countless posts that aren't on the face of it offensive at all, but which incrementally build an image of cycling as a somehow profoundly 'male' activity. Which is obviously baws :-)

Minor point, but didn't Tracey Emin say in the Guardian that 'I don't think about feminism' is what she said when she was asked about it in a college interview and that things have changed since then?

edit: yes.

"Yes, I am a feminist. I haven't always been; when I had my interview for Maidstone Art College they asked, "What do you think of feminism?" I said, "I don't think about it." I have a strong voice and I'm quite feisty but there are a lot of women who aren't and they need to have laws [protecting them] and rights too."

A quick re-read says you're right, but why bother? The point was that different people have different interpretations of feminism, and take it to varying extremes. Some people are more sensitive to sexism, while some will speak out at times when others won't.

Some people mocked Ken Livingstone when he wore that t-shirt, but I think it was a brave statement on behalf of more enlightened men...

Whoever tagged "balki wants greasy love" is perceptive

That photo is scary, it looks like a younger Myrtle wearing a padded bra.......

Google ratings require "chaste" words being used, and I'm sure this web site would like its rating higher, but without losing the heckling etc. though.

I do wish the author of the thread would just come out and specify cases, maybe I could understand the reasoning behind this. My own view is women are respected as much as men (and who can tell who is what behind the Avatars of some), and some women are as good as the blokes at giving out.

Some words are offensive to some men & women, and maybe there ought to be a small code of conduct- the F & C words bring the Google rating crashing down, and I don't think SJS would be that pleased with it, I'm perfectly aware its language for life, and I have my own moments too....

Anyway, do please specify cases, and lets look positively at those, and see what will improve matters.

scratches balls

Here you go GA2G

you are well beyond the use of a spade

Oh i tagged the one about McMcarthy loving spuns.. the irish are still fair game right

I have Casanova fingers, so your stereotypes can't touch me*

*except for the stereotype about females with testosterone markers from early brain development being more likely to enjoy sports, have better spatial reasoning, and to have certain susceptibilities to autistic spectrum disorders and alcohol and drug use, that is :-D

i think you mean 'casanova pattern'... i thought casanova fingers was a bit like midas fingers where everything you touch you screw.

me too by the way. doesn't seem work though, i'm good at maths and still get lost everywhere i go.

most interesting thread by the way. two hours later i've just finished reading it. haven't managed a sentence of work today.