TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Women's Issues

Go To

Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#1001: Mar 7th 2014 at 4:36:40 AM

Also, second wavers are kinda dicks to trans people.

Schild und Schwert der Partei
KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#1002: Mar 7th 2014 at 5:12:31 AM

Black women, too. As Iaculus said, middle-class white women was their sole focus.

Gabrael from My musings Since: Nov, 2011 Relationship Status: Is that a kind of food?
#1003: Mar 7th 2014 at 5:46:33 AM

It takes waves to peel at bigotry, including internalized versions. It is a good sign to see a movement reacting against itself. It promotes keeping your priorities healthy and productive. It also helps shed light on problems and issues that arise when humans try and change personal issues.

If only the tea party could get hit by another wave...

"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
Iaculus Pronounced YAK-you-luss from England Since: May, 2010
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
#1004: Mar 7th 2014 at 6:13:11 AM

[up]Well, hurricane season is on its way, but regrettably I don't recall many of their strongholds being in coastal areas... tongue

Mind you, sex-pos and sex-neg is a bit more of a case of Grey-and-Grey Morality than just a new, fresh movement taking on the blinkered old prudes. There's a nasty tendency in it and its related sections to assume that any action a woman takes is automatically feminist (which can get into really strange territory with stuff like declaring Twilight and Fifty Shades 'feminist literature'), and the pro/anti-porn/sex-work debate is muddied by the ludicrous amount of human trafficking and other unethical business practices within those industries - 'ethical porn', for instance, generally isn't, and frequently involves worse pay and work conditions for the actors.

edited 7th Mar '14 6:19:00 AM by Iaculus

What's precedent ever done for us?
KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#1005: Mar 7th 2014 at 6:37:32 AM

I can agree, but there's almost always some nasty implications that become exposed. For example, I understand the condemnation of Twilight and 50 Shades, but people are also right in that the hatred for these two series is waaaaaaaay overblown by the Complaining About Shows You Don't Watch crowd to the point that the hatred is often interpreted to be sexist in itself.

I don't particularly like Twilight. It isn't made with a person like me in mind. Nor do I like the number of teenage girls I've seen within the college I work in that judge their standards on life on emulating the fantasy.note  However, I think that much of the hatred is incredibly out of proportion.

I don't like the fact that stories which reduce women to sheer objects of fantasy and men to mindless lustful brutes were once normalized (and currently tolerated and excused), but the same stories told from the perspective of a female is met with such vehement hatred. I understand the hatred for how "un-feminist" it is and how "vapid" the characters are, but Jesus Christ.

edited 7th Mar '14 6:40:10 AM by KingZeal

Gabrael from My musings Since: Nov, 2011 Relationship Status: Is that a kind of food?
#1006: Mar 7th 2014 at 6:51:04 AM

I made myself read Twilight for class (Religion and Pop Culture, great class)...

I hate it because it sets the standard of quality reading material back before I do the feminist issues.

For every girl that says they want the Edward Cullen/Werewolf/Whatever douche boyfriend I ask if they have seen the movie Drive.

Overall I don't think that Twilight and 50 Shades are individually responsible for setting feminism back, but I do think these series get so much heat because they are the proverbial straws breaking so many backs.

It's not a problem that this literature exists, it's a problem that such vapid material is satisfying so many women of varying ages emotional and mental needs.

As I explained to a friend, to a divorced single mom treated like a social pryiah or a girl growing up in an abusive home, someone like Edward Cullen, rich, loyal, powerful, and with a cookie cutter just as rich, beautiful, and devoted family coming to rescue you and keep you happy and beautiful is damned appealing.

"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
Iaculus Pronounced YAK-you-luss from England Since: May, 2010
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
#1007: Mar 7th 2014 at 7:14:48 AM

And then there's the argument that Twilight not only idealises an abusive relationship, but serves as an instruction manual for predators.

So turn it around. What if Edward wasn’t a vampire at all? Aside from all the actual supernatural stuff (like the running through the trees and the whole baseball thing) what if he was just stringing her along? Always holding out the promise that someday she’ll be something amazing and special and important. Meanwhile, he’s slowly isolating her from her friends, all the while pretending to encourage her to spend more time with them. He is more and more open that being with him will involve massive sacrifice on her part. But as long as she believes he is a vampire, she will obey, choosing him above all others, because he is above all others.

I know I’m not the only one who’s been hurt by this kind of predator. I’ve already met several women who were victimized by predators similar to mine. More than one has been actively based on Twilight. This kind of abuse is usually only recognized when it is based on religion. But our cultural mythology is more wide-reaching than just orthodox worship, and it’s the unorthodox nature of these sorts of relationships often is their specific appeal. That, and being a part of something secret, special and bigger than you.

edited 7th Mar '14 7:19:18 AM by Iaculus

What's precedent ever done for us?
KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#1008: Mar 7th 2014 at 7:16:48 AM

Those problems make a lot more sense.

AnotherDuck No, the other one. from Stockholm Since: Jul, 2012 Relationship Status: Mu
No, the other one.
#1009: Mar 7th 2014 at 8:03:33 AM

I tend to look at those things less from a sexist perspective, and more from a people-being-dicks perspective. If you're sexist but reasonably respectful of people, you can be reasoned with if need be. If you're a dick you just need to stop being one, whether you have one or not.

Check out my fanfiction!
Gabrael from My musings Since: Nov, 2011 Relationship Status: Is that a kind of food?
#1010: Mar 7th 2014 at 8:26:49 AM

Just being a bigot of any kind is automatically disrespectful.

A douchebag who keeps their bigotry to themselves is still a bigot and that's a problem.

Just because you don't advertise it doesnt menit doesnt effect your surroundings.

"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
AnotherDuck No, the other one. from Stockholm Since: Jul, 2012 Relationship Status: Mu
No, the other one.
#1011: Mar 7th 2014 at 8:47:20 AM

Well, that's what I said. If you're being a dick you need to stop it.

Check out my fanfiction!
KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#1012: Mar 7th 2014 at 8:49:21 AM

But she was saying that being a sexist is pretty much the same as being a dick. At the very least, she's implying that a genuine Noble Bigot is rare.

Gabrael from My musings Since: Nov, 2011 Relationship Status: Is that a kind of food?
#1013: Mar 7th 2014 at 9:21:33 AM

Not quite.

I don't use tropes in real life. I find them misleading and annoying.

Someone can sit there and go through life being a complete sexist idiot. Now they may not say anything or be outwordly hostile, but their sexism can still be expressed with how they vote on elections, how they build or refuse to build relationships, who they do business with etc

Bigotry doesnt exist in a vacuum.

"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#1014: Mar 7th 2014 at 9:36:09 AM

Apples to oranges. Sexism is a cause. Dipshit is an effect. They are not mutually exclusive.

People don't go, "Time to go act like a dipshit, whoo!" A sexist person might go, "Wait, she said what? Bitch needs to learn her place!" and then dipshit behavior follows, and to the sexist person, it seems entirely justified because the bitch needs to learn her place. To him, he's not being a dipshit, he's the only one being reasonable, and he can believe this because sexism.

The guy in the example probably doesn't even believe he's sexist; prejudice is rarely an active motivator, and is more commonly a passive influence we don't notice.

edited 7th Mar '14 9:37:54 AM by TobiasDrake

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
AnotherDuck No, the other one. from Stockholm Since: Jul, 2012 Relationship Status: Mu
No, the other one.
#1015: Mar 7th 2014 at 10:08:51 AM

There needs to be an And That's Terrible somewhere in here.

Check out my fanfiction!
KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#1016: Mar 7th 2014 at 10:47:05 AM

Not quite.

I don't use tropes in real life. I find them misleading and annoying.

Truthfully, that was kind of my point.

You don't believe in such things, but other people do. People will flat out say, "(I'm/He's/She's) not so bad, (I'm/they're) a Noble Bigot, like Clint Eastwood in that one flick or Archie Bunker." They'll base their assessment on the fact that other people have defined it as such, and that some people view it as heroic.

edited 7th Mar '14 10:47:59 AM by KingZeal

Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#1019: Mar 7th 2014 at 10:54:02 AM

It disturbs me that it wasn't illegal until now. Shouldn't this be a common sense thing?

KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#1020: Mar 7th 2014 at 10:57:56 AM

I'm going to give Massachusetts the benefit of the doubt and say it was more like Loophole Abuse, rather than something that was legal.

The reason it's been changed so quickly was because of an incident that slipped through the cracks.

shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#1021: Mar 7th 2014 at 11:02:45 AM

Yeah, from the sounds of it, a lawyer found a loophole and when news of it came out, they patched it.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#1022: Mar 7th 2014 at 11:07:26 AM

@Kostya

A man tried to fight his charge saying that taking upskirt photos of women did not violate Mass. peeping Tom laws, because one of the participants was not partially or fully naked. The Mass. court said that the wording of the statute required partial or full nudity, that a woman wearing a skirt was patently not partially or fully naked, and they were not prepared to go outside the four corners of the statute in order to find the conduct illegal, although they did not that There Should Be a Law and urged lawmakers to pass one. It's a very literal ruling; personally I would say that they could - should - have rules-lawyered it into saying that an upskirt photo effectively bypasses the outer layer of clothing, and so the female victim is "partially naked" from the perspective of the camera. However, the Mass. court evidently took a different view from me.

At uni, we learned about a similar case in the UK, where "common prostitutes" tried to evade a law against soliciting in the street by shouting from balconies. The UK judges, unlike the Mass. ones, applied the mischief rule rather than the literal rule.

edited 7th Mar '14 11:12:51 AM by Achaemenid

Schild und Schwert der Partei
Mandemo Since: Apr, 2010
#1023: Mar 7th 2014 at 11:11:01 AM

I first read that it became legal and went WTF. Then I reread and found it was made illegal, which is good thing.

Yeah, from the description it was Loophole Abuse and they merely made a patch to law.

KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#1024: Mar 7th 2014 at 11:18:03 AM

[up][up]I'm against that sort of thing generally, though.

I want creeps like that to get their comeuppance, but I don't like stretching the interpretation of laws to make stuff illegal. Seeing how that sort of thing has been used against minorities for crimes that other people have gotten away with scot-free, that sort of thing rubs me the wrong way.

Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#1025: Mar 7th 2014 at 11:19:39 AM

That makes it better I guess. It still annoys me that they had to make a law specifically for that since they probably have laws against taking photos of a person in their underwear without their consent.


Total posts: 11,818
Top