another **** page.

[Alceste]

Because some random people on the internet demean women, that means people who work in bars and restaurants must be misogynists?

I don't get how they're related.

They're not random people. You can use facebook's graphsearch to see exactly who the misogynists are, including where they live and work and who their friends and family are.

 

[Alceste]

I was just perusing facebook and came across a really ironic post by an old enemy. She said "If **** shaming worked, it would have worked by now". Not an unintelligent comment by any stretch of the imagination. The funny thing is that many years ago she went on a hardcore public **** shaming rampage - in verse - against yours truly after I hooked up with her boyfriend. (Didn't work).

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

I was just perusing facebook and came across a really ironic post by an old enemy. She said "If **** shaming worked, it would have worked by now". Not an unintelligent comment by any stretch of the imagination. The funny thing is that many years ago she went on a hardcore public **** shaming rampage - in verse - against yours truly after I hooked up with her boyfriend. (Didn't work).

You hooked up with another woman's boyfriend, sisters before misters, no?

 

[Father Heathen]

Is it as tacky as making generalizations about women based on their attire?

There is a big difference between making a generalization about someone based solely on attire (or their job), and assessing someone's character based upon their behavior and conduct. If someone wants respect from others they must first respect themselves, and if someone treats and presents their own body like an object, naturally others will perceive it as such. And when people decide to be sexually provocative for the sake of attention, they should except that not all of the attention will be favorable. Actions tend to get reactions of similar class and caliber.
No girl deserves to be mistreated and degraded, but obviously behavior that's considered irresponsible and risky will increase the changes of being exposed to that sort of thing. When people make choices, they should accept the potential consequences that come with them. Again, that doesn't excuse or justify the words and actions of misogynists, so don't try to stretch or twist what I'm saying to make be out to be an apologist for them. Let's say, for example, I wandered into an inner-city, crime ridden ghetto flailing around clearly visible bags of money in my hands, and then was robbed and murdered because of it. They would still be in the wrong for robbing and killing me even though my actions would be considered extremely foolish. It's not either/or.
Obviously what some of these guys are saying is wholly ignorant and completely inappropriate, but as long as they aren't harassing, stalking, assaulting, or violating anyone's rights in any other way, then it falls under free speech. Therefore the best way to combat such language is to simply not visit the site.
Illegally obtaining photos, however, is a serious violation of privacy.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

There is a big difference between making a generalization about someone based solely on attire (or their job), and assessing someone's character based upon their behavior and conduct. If someone wants respect from others they must first respect themselves, and if someone treats and presents their own body like an object, naturally others will perceive it as such. And when people decide to be sexually provocative for the sake of attention, they should except that not all of the attention will be favorable. Actions tend to get reactions of similar class and caliber.
No girl deserves to be mistreated and degraded, but obviously behavior that's considered irresponsible and risky will increase the changes of being exposed to that sort of thing. When people make choices, they should accept the potential consequences that come with them. Again, that doesn't excuse or justify the words and actions of misogynists, so don't try to stretch or twist what I'm saying to make be out to be an apologist for them. Let's say, for example, I wandered into an inner-city, crime ridden ghetto flailing around clearly visible bags of money in my hands, and then was robbed and murdered because of it. They would still be in the wrong for robbing and killing me even though my actions would be considered extremely foolish. It's not either/or.
Obviously what some of these guys are saying is wholly ignorant and completely inappropriate, but as long as they aren't harassing, stalking, assaulting, or violating anyone's rights in any other way, then it falls under free speech. Therefore the best way to combat such language is to simply not visit the site.
Illegally obtaining photos, however, is a serious violation of privacy.

Is there an assumption that misogynists are everywhere, given your example of foolish behavior based largely on location and geography? If it's safe to walk around a public neighborhood that isn't a ghetto with your money hanging out, then is there a safe place for women to present themselves provocatively in public?

 

[Alceste]

You hooked up with another woman's boyfriend, sisters before misters, no?

He was her EX boyfriend. I should have been clearer. Also, we were not on friendly terms. She hated me on sight and was continually nasty to me at every opportunity. Kind of a queen bee character.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

He was her EX boyfriend. I should have been clearer. Also, we were not on friendly terms. She hated me on sight and was continually nasty to me at every opportunity. Kind of a queen bee character.

It is very sad that some women feel the need to be in constant competition with other women.

 

[Alceste]

It is very sad that some women feel the need to be in constant competition with other women.

Yeah, it is sad.

 

[Alceste]

There is a big difference between making a generalization about someone based solely on attire (or their job), and assessing someone's character based upon their behavior and conduct. If someone wants respect from others they must first respect themselves, and if someone treats and presents their own body like an object, naturally others will perceive it as such. And when people decide to be sexually provocative for the sake of attention, they should except that not all of the attention will be favorable. Actions tend to get reactions of similar class and caliber.
No girl deserves to be mistreated and degraded, but obviously behavior that's considered irresponsible and risky will increase the changes of being exposed to that sort of thing. When people make choices, they should accept the potential consequences that come with them. Again, that doesn't excuse or justify the words and actions of misogynists, so don't try to stretch or twist what I'm saying to make be out to be an apologist for them. Let's say, for example, I wandered into an inner-city, crime ridden ghetto flailing around clearly visible bags of money in my hands, and then was robbed and murdered because of it. They would still be in the wrong for robbing and killing me even though my actions would be considered extremely foolish. It's not either/or.
Obviously what some of these guys are saying is wholly ignorant and completely inappropriate, but as long as they aren't harassing, stalking, assaulting, or violating anyone's rights in any other way, then it falls under free speech. Therefore the best way to combat such language is to simply not visit the site.
Illegally obtaining photos, however, is a serious violation of privacy.

The thing is, I don't think it's "illegal" to raid women's facebook pages for pictures of them goofing around with their friends, taken by their friends, in what they probably assumed was a generally friendly and open environment, in a sexually provocative way. The fact that Facebook hasn't taken down any of the photos that were reported except one or two shows they're totally OK with that.

Sure, I could say that they could have protected their photos from being harvested by misogynists by establishing better privacy settings on facebook, and maybe they're kind of silly for not doing that, but I don't think it's reasonable to say we (women) should all just assume we're inevitably going to be called sluts and hoes, smelly and dirty, disease infested, walking dick holes, yada yada if we share a photo of us with our top off, or in a skimpy summer outfit, or whatever.

The whole point of sexual liberation is to gain the freedom for women to be openly sexually expressive beings without being attacked, disparaged or harassed. You have to admit, that's a good deal for everybody. Women who want to wear a bikini top to a summer festival AND men who want to see women in bikini tops.

Knuckle-dragging, backward idiots like the fans of Festival Sluts kind of ruin it for everybody. The more women have to worry about being harassed for showing some skin, the less skin there will be for heterosexual men to look at in public.

I'm not prepared to say "that's just how it is, suck it up". If that's how it is, we might as well all move to Afghanistan and wear a bag over our heads, since the arguments for that kind of attire are the same as your arguments above: Men are pigs and can't look at a scantily-dressed woman without verbally or physically assaulting her.

The situation is constantly evolving. A hundred years ago, it was a massive scandal for a woman to wear pants instead of a full length skirt. Where will we be a hundred years from now? Do you want to be on the forward edge of progress, or stuck in the past?

 

[DallasApple]

Knuckle-dragging, backward idiots like the fans of Festival Sluts kind of ruin it for everybody.

Yes...it encourages inhibition by means of fear.As has been pointed out if the "expectation" is she will be spoken of in terms of filth and sleaze and slime..the size of her "hole' mocked?Only a sadomasochist would stick their neck out for that.Turtles head goes back in shell.Anyone who is not interested or lets say would like to avoid emotional humiliation by means of degrading /defaming putrified remarks about their body and their person hood best keep it covered up...otherwise you asked for it you got it.No "sympathy" here.

It disgust me that some people here pretty much say ..don't expect sympathy from me.

The situation is constantly evolving. A hundred years ago, it was a massive scandal for a woman to wear pants instead of a full length skirt. Where will we be a hundred years from now? Do you want to be on the forward edge of progress, or stuck in the past?

To me it feels like its going backwards.Breastfeeding should be done in a bathroom.Girls (women) in a state of undress and or being flirty and trying to have "fun" with her sexy girl self are skanky whore sluts who deserve whatever they get.

 

[DallasApple]

Evil prevails.

 

[dawny0826]

Is there an assumption that misogynists are everywhere, given your example of foolish behavior based largely on location and geography? If it's safe to walk around a public neighborhood that isn't a ghetto with your money hanging out, then is there a safe place for women to present themselves provocatively in public?

Sure. Misogynists are everywhere. As are people who falsely accuse others of misogyny.

Women aren't entitled to a safe place, free of opinion and possible ridicule from others.

If anyone values freedom and expression, they get that. There's a marked difference between genuine misogyny and labeling a woman a **** because she chooses to dress provacatively or act in a manner that is characteristic of the stereotypical "slutty" girl.

If women have a problem with these types of stereotypes, we have the responsibility of looking internally and adjusting our behavior to eradicate such stereotypes.

People are free to say what they want. Holding a negate opinion doesn't translate to hatred.

 

[DallasApple]

Sure. Misogynists are everywhere. As are people who falsely accuse others of misogyny.

Classic deflection.

 

[DallasApple]

Women aren't entitled to a safe place, free of opinion and possible ridicule from others.

There is a difference to being entitled to a place "free of opinion" and being afforded a "safe place" from degrading hate speech and being told they deserve it if they get it..

By the way are you a self identified feminist?

 

[DallasApple]

People are free to say what they want. Holding a negate opinion doesn't translate to hatred.

NO they are not..and hate speech is one that is not a freedom.I can sue you for liable and WIN if you say what you want about me and it causes me harm if its a lie.If I put a sign up in my yard with your name up on it that says "Dawny0826 is a whore who's probably screwed several hundred men just today and is probably spreading aides "..Your saying its my right to say that about you?

 

[Rakhel]

I never understood the questioning of motives within the feminist movement.
"Are you a feminist?"
As if that question alone is an argument in itself.

 

[DallasApple]

If women have a problem with these types of stereotypes, we have the responsibility of looking internally and adjusting our behavior to eradicate such stereotypes.

So if women don't like being referred to as a silly **** that's not a "dick' "we" need to be responsible and adjust our behavior?

 

[DallasApple]

I never understood the questioning of motives within the feminist movement.
"Are you a feminist?"
As if that question alone is an argument in itself.

Because a feminist is usually not a misogynist.So its best to get that upfront.Its not that hard to understand.

 

[DallasApple]

I never understood the questioning of motives within the feminist movement.
"Are you a feminist?"
As if that question alone is an argument in itself.

Also this is a protected area..to my understanding ..where women can have a reprieve from the normal onslaught of lopsided views where women are blamed for wrongs committed upon them..

And by the way are you a self proclaimed feminist?

 

[Rakhel]

Who said Dawn is being Misogynistic? She made some valid points and your attempt to shoot them down is by asking "are you a feminist?"
By doing that you are turning the word Feminism into logical fallacy rather than what feminism is