YLYL Thread Sexism Discussion (split from Gay Teen thread).

[photon]

In this case the thank was shorthand for "You made me laugh thank you, the reasons for which are varied and deep and as inscrutable as the night."

[jayswin]

I want to be a mod for a week, photon. What do i have to do to make this happen? Help a guy out here!

[SportsJunky]

You cannot make Flys in Sweatpants a mod. He's doing a great job unofficially moderating the whole place already.

[photon]

Step 1: Break into Cerebro.

[jayswin]

Okay, you conduct a poll with the other mods in your secret forum, then I'll tell you why the mods who voted no are wrong and then I get my mod trial. Deal?

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by SportsJunky

You cannot make Flys in Sweatpants a mod. He's doing a great job unofficially moderating the whole place already.

That's a great Point, sportsjunky; already moderates the forum, doesn't require training. Thank you.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

It would be interesting to get the POV from all our female posters on that thread

In general I just stray away from that thread, and often have to eventually extract myself from any thread that discusses sexism/misogyny/etc, because there are a choice few on this board whose views on women are so incredibly infuriating that I just have to step back rather than continue arguing in circles with someone whose opinion is never going to change.

The issue for me isn't the simple appreciation of an attractive woman--for example, my best friend is a huge WWE fan, and I'm most certainly not, but believe you me, when Seth Rollins takes his shirt off, I sit up and take notice. The issue is the way that objectification of women goes far beyond just appreciating the aesthetic.

Studies have shown that when men look at women in bikinis, the brain activity is not that of dealing with an entity capable of critical thinking, but instead that of an object, a tool. That's not overt sexism in these men, necessarily, but it's the way society has trained men to view women. Possessions, trophies, objects to be attained.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...n-objects.html

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by Itse

I don't want to go into it that deeply, but I don't think you have to be a feminist at all to think that there is something disturbing about pictures where women are presented effectively as trophies, decorations or even just furniture.

Yes it's the objectification that veers into misogyny (presenting a woman as a trophy, decoration, or otherwise removing the more "human" characteristics of a woman, such as her face, and presenting them only as a sex object). I believe that falls within the definition of misogyny but I'm no means an expert.

Honestly I went into that thread a few times early in it's inception and now I never go in it. It makes me upset so I avoid it.

And yes, my avatar is most definitely tongue in cheek. And some of the posters on CP have and do lose their minds if any attractive men are posted or discussed. It's happened to some of the other female posters who have tried to post attractive men.

[Arya Stark]

Just remember what posts you thanked here, Peanut.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...ight=lundqvist

Edit: Also

Originally Posted by Peanut

Did you watch the part where the guitar starts really strumming and he's walking with his shirt off? That's why.

You are doing the same thing you are complaining about.

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

Just remember what posts you thanked here, Peanut.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...ight=lundqvist

Lol, I remember. Part of my excitement was a little bit of "just desserts". One guy being ogled here!! As opposed to the thread with hundreds and hundreds of posts. And I thought I was clear - I don't think there is anything wrong with appreciating an attractive man or woman. Reducing a woman to only a sex object is considered part of misogyny (as far as I know anyways). This ad is a classic example of what I mean:

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

Just remember what posts you thanked here, Peanut.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...ight=lundqvist

Given that on the very first page of that, you have guys needing a 'thumbs down' button, and another needlessly pointing out 'he's a man, would not bang,' and then at the end of that first page you have another guy saying how unattractive Lundqvist's wife is--well, that thread pretty much proves the point of the last page and a half of this thread.

[Arya Stark]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

Given that on the very first page of that, you have guys needing a 'thumbs down' button, and another needlessly pointing out 'he's a man, would not bang,' and then at the end of that first page you have another guy saying how unattractive Lundqvist's wife is--well, that thread pretty much proves the point of the last page and a half of this thread.

No, it doesn't. It just proves how ridiculous the claims of some misogyny is.

I'm not saying there isn't any, but it is very minimal and 99.9% of the guys just like the chick in the bikini and are not Misogynists.

Saying someone is unattractive does not equate to misogyny.

[djsFlames]

I think I'd trust about 1% of the CP population with mod privileges. Too many oversensitive hot heads in here. Even if someone says something that could be perceived as crossing a line, often times it's never meant that way. Reading text vs someone telling you something face to face are vastly different. Body language and emotion do not play into words on a screen, thus making certain statements more prone to (very) negative interpretation. So you gotta be careful how you react to that as well. You can call them out on it, but don't make it personal. On a forum board it really does just look childish.

For example most things I say here are without any malintent, and especially are never aimed at any particular person here (I may be critical about something, but never making a direct personal insult), and yet people get off on telling me I'm a horrible person, and whatever other variety of insulting thing. I'm thankful for the forum's existence but sometimes can be a damn lava pit.

[Arya Stark]

FTR nothing wrong with liking Lundqvist. He's a sexy beast.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

In general I just stray away from that thread, and often have to eventually extract myself from any thread that discusses sexism/misogyny/etc, because there are a choice few on this board whose views on women are so incredibly infuriating that I just have to step back rather than continue arguing in circles with someone whose opinion is never going to change.

The issue for me isn't the simple appreciation of an attractive woman--for example, my best friend is a huge WWE fan, and I'm most certainly not, but believe you me, when Seth Rollins takes his shirt off, I sit up and take notice. The issue is the way that objectification of women goes far beyond just appreciating the aesthetic.

Studies have shown that when men look at women in bikinis, the brain activity is not that of dealing with an entity capable of critical thinking, but instead that of an object, a tool. That's not overt sexism in these men, necessarily, but it's the way society has trained men to view women. Possessions, trophies, objects to be attained.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...n-objects.html

I wonder if it is evolutionary coding rather than the environment. Essentially from an envolutionary standpoint women were tools to pass on genetic material to the next generation. Attaining more women allowed more genetic material to be passed on.

Rewiring these genetically coded views coded views is much more challanging than if it is just a societal or religious precept.

Do you have links to other similar research, It would be interesting to see how the varriance amoung different populations appears and if its nature or nurture.

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

Just remember what posts you thanked here, Peanut.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...ight=lundqvist

Edit: Also



You are doing the same thing you are complaining about.

Am I though? Henrik is clearly not being reduced to a trophy or an object just for sex. He's very handsome and the water, the yachts, the music, his hair, his hockey prowess... It all adds up to an attractive package for lots of women. That's why they are using him to sell underwear.

It's not like I was endorsing the music playing and a graphic close up of his bulge and just his bulge for the entire ad. That's not what the ad is about and I'd argue that just an objectifying bulge close up (as in my avatar) doesn't really do anything for most women anyways. The whole thing with that ad was the music, the mood, the handsome and highly skilled NHL player. Hopefully I'm explaining myself half-decently but I'm sure someone will come in here and tell me how wrong and hypocritical I am.

Anyways. This is all getting way off topic. I'm not saying the whole hot women thread is misogynistic. I'm sure it's not, and I don't go in there to bother confirming it. I'm also sure that some of it is questionable.

My whole point was that I thought Jiri said there was not very much misogyny on CP. I disagree, there is quite a lot. But it's all sort of moot anyways because I misunderstood Jiri, I think. I think he was saying there is not very much homophobia on CP.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

*sigh* I remember when this thread was about a gay kid overcoming bigotry and hatred of his own family…

First of all, stop saying "bulge".

You all know there are several other threads about misogyny and other similar subjects already on this site right?

[Chill Cosby]

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

Just remember what posts you thanked here, Peanut.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...ight=lundqvist

You are doing the same thing you are complaining about.

I don't want to speak for Peanut, but I don't think she's complaining about "Wow! That's a hot woman!" but rather comments in that thread that objectify and demean women, of which there appear to be plenty:

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

That's just a butt. Not a woman, just a faceless part of a woman. Much like Peanut's avatar which is a tongue in cheek take on an avatar like Shawnski's I imagine, which is just breasts. Perfect example of objectification.

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Too much discussion and not enough T&A

No room for conversation gents, the focus must be T&A. Women are more than that, I believe.

Originally Posted by Barbecue

Lets be realistic here. It's a selfie. A head to shoulders pic where it doesnt flatter her appearance (tied up hair, no make up)

Are you honestly telling me that this selfie fits in a thread full of photos with women who are in lingerie and bikinis?

So because it's not a photoshopped professional picture of a hardly clothed woman in plenty of makeup, it cannot belong in a thread dedicated to "hot" women?

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

Ladies and gents, say hello to the most beautiful woman from Edmonton

NSFW!

Speaks for itself.

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Well, step one would be prying their attention away from the distant sounds of cash registers that are constantly filling their ears...

Ah, the classy "attractive Asian girl is money hungry" comment.

As you can see, the comments go a lot deeper than "wow! She's attractive! She looks great in that bikini!" which is in line with what Peanut said about Lundqvist. That's what she's complaining about.

P.S. I realise this is far off topic, I'd support splitting the posts off into their own thread.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by photon

Ugh, I don't know if I have the energy for a dedicated thread about it lol. I mostly wanted Peanut's view. But if enough ppl want the posts split off to their own thread to discuss I can do it.

You may not have the energy, but flameswin clearly does. He's the moderator we need AND deserve for this specific topic, for a specific length of time.

flameswin 2014 - What's the worst that could happen
This message has been approved by flameswin (hopefully)

[Peanut]

Bulge!!