US elections: aiding an' Abedin

[James Arryn]

40 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

What tends to always be conveniently left out when discussing the big bad evil mysogynist USA is how men are treated so much harsher by the criminal justice system than women are. Ridiculously higher incarceration rates, much stiffer sentencing handed out to men than women for the same crimes.

It's always an ignorance of context, it just goes straight to -women make less money so everything is sexist against them. And I'm completely entitled to be a rude jerk to anyone who claims otherwise- 

I doubt either of these candidates give a shit about any sort of gender equality when it comes to equality that isn't a voting issue.

Do you accept the fact that, even given the existence of systemic discrimination against men re: jail sentences, child custody, armed forces standards etc., that still doesn't in any way preclude or excuse the continued and long-standing discriminations against women? Do you think that the former cancels out the latter somehow? Does the fact that the former is probably under reported somehow mean that the latter should be discussed less? Does the fact that atrocities were committed against Nazi soldiers and citizens and isn't talked about much somehow mitigate Nazi atrocities in your mind? Does it make everything equal?

In other words, these are two separate issues. Address them separately. The fact that woman A has a huge advantage when the court rules on child custody does not in any way reduce the sexism women B, C, D, E and probably A face regularly in other aspects of day-to-day life. Acting like a jerk because other people fail to make separate and unequal issues cancel each other out isn't really a stance to crow about.

 

***************that separate issue I mentioned*****************

I do think the issues can be linked when we discuss how to 'fix' systemic bigotry overall, but that isn't what you're arguing about. I personally feel that things like quotas and affirmative action treat the symptoms but may potentially aggravate the disease, but I don't have any better solutions to offer. I think the fact that we're now in this place is partially due to decades of officially categorizing people according to sub-sets as a means of trying to achieve equality; I think it's been somewhat counter-productive in terms of how people think even while it was helping correct how people act.

And, there's the whole idea that if you do the latter long enough the former will gradually diminish. That's possible, but I think right now we're seeing something of the manifestation of the downside to constantly categorizing people with emphasis on their differences in an effort to increase their commonalities. Hopefully this is just part of the cycle.

 

[DunderMifflin]

4 minutes ago, Ariadne23 said:

1 minute ago, James Arryn said:

Do you accept the fact that, even given the existence of systemic discrimination against men re: jail sentences, child custody, armed forces standards etc., that still doesn't in any way preclude or excuse the continued and long-standing discriminations against women? 

Sure, I realize that neither one excuse or preclude the other. They are all bad.

When you highlight only issues that effect one gender in a vacuum of thought, it becomes very easy to say - oh the country is sexist against gender X while gender Y is just cruising along.

 

[Ariadne23]

You know, why isn't Donald Trump running on a men's rights platform? Seems an odd thing to leave out given his other positions.

I'm gonna add that while I am sure his intentions are good, there's not a lot James Arryn said there on behalf on women that I, strictly speaking, agree with. But don't let me get in the way of your discussion about women's rights.

[DunderMifflin]

4 minutes ago, Ariadne23 said:

You know, why isn't Donald Trump running on a men's rights platform? 

Why doesnt anyone ever do it? I have opinions on this that would probably be best delved into in a different thread.

To sum it up as best I can for this post I'll just say it has to do with men don't cry logic.

[James Arryn]

22 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

Sure, I realize that neither one excuse or preclude the other. They are all bad.

When you highlight only issues that effect one gender in a vacuum of thought, it becomes very easy to say - oh the country is sexist against gender X while gender Y is just cruising along.

 

But the last statement can be entirely true even with sexism against men being a thing. Think of my Nazi example. Or go back to like the 50's and find examples of African Americans engaging in racial violence against whites. Or point out Muslim bigotry and violence during the Crusades. Native tribes occasionally violated the treaties with the Colonials/Americans. The existence of some active prejudice in one direction doesn't preclude the possibility that the overall picture goes strongly in the other. I'm not sure what can be gained by trying to act as though it does. You can become aware of reverse discrimination, dismayed by it's existence, disappointed by it's usage and frustrated by it's lack of profile without somehow engaging in block thinking and therefore seeing it as an Us vs. Them thing where They are getting some hidden advantage. To me, all people who think in this adversarial way...and that includes women who feel that any advantage they can seize over men is justified because of historical wrongs the other way...are all guilty of the wrong that lies at the heart of all of this. 

Which is the struggle for power between those who benefit from the status quo vs. those who do not. Those who do not and pursue power in order to achieve equality tread a very dangerous road towards thinking adversarially and therefore continuing the pattern itself, but obviously they have to fight the problem. Just don't make the problem Them or best case scenario is a gender version of Planet of the Apes.

I think the only solution is for people to opt out of that struggle. That's what I've tried to do. Neither take nor seek advantages over others. I'm sure I have benefited from being white, male, straight and educated, but in any and every way possible I have sought to not actively or consciously pursue such benefit, and am factually ignorant of any examples in my life (with one exception) where I did benefit as such. This is aided by my almost complete lack of ambition and little if any desire to fulfill male stereotypes, do I'm aware that my personal solution has limited appeal and effect. 

[Altherion]

52 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

I doubt either of these candidates give a shit about any sort of gender equality when it comes to equality that isn't a voting issue.

I would not go that far. Given Clinton's background, I would guess that she does in fact care about this issue -- but she is way too far from ordinary women to understand their most important concerns.

9 minutes ago, Ariadne23 said:

You know, why isn't Donald Trump running on a men's rights platform?

Because, just as with white rights, men's rights are currently a complete political non-starter. Given the increasing need for a college degree for practically anything and the increasing college asymmetry in favor of women (it was 57-43 in 2013 with predictable results and is expected to be 60-40 in 2023), I expect this to eventually change, but it will take a long time.

[James Arryn]

23 minutes ago, Ariadne23 said:

You know, why isn't Donald Trump running on a men's rights platform? Seems an odd thing to leave out given his other positions.

I'm gonna add that while I am sure his intentions are good, there's not a lot James Arryn said there on behalf on women that I, strictly speaking, agree with. But don't let me get in the way of your discussion about women's rights.

I'm interested in where you feel I went wrong, and sincerely hope you weren't being ironic about the merits of 2 men discussing women's rights.

[The Marquis de Leech]

What is it about the American Left and getting hysterically nervous about poll results?

[Altherion]

2 minutes ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

What is it about the American Left and getting hysterically nervous about poll results?

They've built up Trump into something with more than a passing resemblance to Evil Incarnate so now even a small chance of him winning looks terrifying.

[The Marquis de Leech]

6 minutes ago, Altherion said:

They've built up Trump into something with more than a passing resemblance to Evil Incarnate so now even a small chance of him winning looks terrifying.

Trump *does* have more than a passing resemblance to Evil Incarnate. What puzzles me is people freaking out over a potential narrowing in the polls - a narrowing that probably needs a few more days to actually become clear. At the moment, it's jumping at shadows.

Until there is evidence that Clinton's 272 EV firewall (the 2004 Kerry states, plus Virginia and Colorado, minus ME-2) is under threat, I wouldn't sweat it.

[DunderMifflin]

27 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

But the last statement can be entirely true even with sexism against men being a thing. Think of my Nazi example. Or go back to like the 50's and find examples of African Americans engaging in racial violence against whites. Or point out Muslim bigotry and violence during the Crusades. Native tribes occasionally violated the treaties with the Colonials/Americans. The existence of some active prejudice in one direction doesn't preclude the possibility that the overall picture goes strongly in the other. I'm not sure what can be gained by trying to act as though it does. You can become aware of reverse discrimination, dismayed by it's existence, disappointed by it's usage and frustrated by it's lack of profile without somehow engaging in block thinking and therefore seeing it as an Us vs. Them thing where They are getting some hidden advantage. To me, all people who think in this adversarial way...and that includes women who feel that any advantage they can seize over men is justified because of historical wrongs the other way...are all guilty of the wrong that lies at the heart of all of this. 

Which is the struggle for power between those who benefit from the status quo vs. those who do not. Those who do not and pursue power in order to achieve equality tread a very dangerous road towards thinking adversarially and therefore continuing the pattern itself, but obviously they have to fight the problem. Just don't make the problem Them or best case scenario is a gender version of Planet of the Apes.

I think the only solution is for people to opt out of that struggle. That's what I've tried to do. Neither take nor seek advantages over others. I'm sure I have benefited from being white, male, straight and educated, but in any and every way possible I have sought to not actively or consciously pursue such benefit, and am factually ignorant of any examples in my life (with one exception) where I did benefit as such. This is aided by my almost complete lack of ambition and little if any desire to fulfill male stereotypes, do I'm aware that my personal solution has limited appeal and effect. 

Im not trying to excuse anyones suffering. I think equal pay is a great idea, I'd extend it even beyond gender if I had my way. I think most of the issues that fall under womens rights are completely valid and I totally support them.

I just don't agree with the common sentiment that because these issues exist then it's proof enough to label the country mysogynistic.

[Dr. Pepper]

 

4 minutes ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

Trump *does* have more than a passing resemblance to Evil Incarnate. What puzzles me is people freaking out over a potential narrowing in the polls - a narrowing that probably needs a few more days to actually become clear. At the moment, it's jumping at shadows.

Until there is evidence that Clinton's 272 EV firewall (the 2004 Kerry states, plus Virginia and Colorado, minus ME-2) is under threat, I wouldn't sweat it.

The 2000 election has taught me to sweat it.  2010 and 2014 have taught me to sweat it.  The KKK and other white supremacist groups and ideals becoming mainstream makes me sweat it.  A man joking about sexually assaulting women and not really suffering in the polls makes me sweat it.  Sexism makes me sweat it.

It's terrifying to normal decent people that someone like Trump is even over the 40% threshold nationwide, let alone close in certain states that Hillary needs.  I will certainly be spending the next 6 days in a state of agonized anxiety.  

[James Arryn]

5 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

Im not trying to excuse anyones suffering. I think equal pay is a great idea, I'd extend it even beyond gender if I had my way. I think most of the issues that fall under womens rights are completely valid and I totally support them.

I just don't agree with the common sentiment that because these issues exist then it's proof enough to label the country mysogynistic.

Okay, fair enough. How about saying this: it's a country where mysogeny is a wide-spread and active element to such a degree that most women are significantly affected by it even if many men aren't actively/consciously perpetuating it. Does that work for you?

[DunderMifflin]

9 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

Okay, fair enough. How about saying this: it's a country where mysogeny is a wide-spread and active element to such a degree that most women are significantly affected by it even if many men aren't actively/consciously perpetuating it. Does that work for you?

I'd prefer just staying with the issues honestly. More women in politics, good thing. More women in high paying careers, good thing. 

As far as my opinion on the mysogyny of the entire country and society. I don't think anyone really knows for sure what gender is suffering most under our current society. Some issues effect men more, some effect women more.

And then there's the added factor of individuals and their own preferences about how their gender effects their life positively or negatively.

 

[James Arryn]

14 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

 

The 2000 election has taught me to sweat it.  2010 and 2014 have taught me to sweat it.  The KKK and other white supremacist groups and ideals becoming mainstream makes me sweat it.  A man joking about sexually assaulting women and not really suffering in the polls makes me sweat it.  Sexism makes me sweat it.

It's terrifying to normal decent people that someone like Trump is even over the 40% threshold nationwide, let alone close in certain states that Hillary needs.  I will certainly be spending the next 6 days in a state of agonized anxiety.  

I agree.

I have such strong but conflicted opinions about America that I'm always trying not to cross the line into plain-old anti-Americanism, but yeah; the fact that this has happened and kept happening is much more than a black eye on the American image. It's frightening to me in the way that being alive for the 30's must have been frightening to many. Those movements, too, were bolstered by many people who would otherwise count as 'normal, decent' folk but whose frustrations with their situation allowed them to stand shoulder to shoulder with others who preached and believed in horribly dehumanizing ideas.

And, to be fair, THOSE 'normal decent' folk had a lot more to be frustrated with than the people baking Trump do. I'm honestly scared. Some say that even if Trump gets in, the system will limit his effect, but firstly wasn't that same system supposed to stop him from even getting to where we are now? And second, it's not even him that's the real problem, it's the fact that somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 of the country can reconcile themselves with absolute and overt bigotry if doing do somehow suits their interests. 

 

[James Arryn]

35 minutes ago, Altherion said:

They've built up Trump into something with more than a passing resemblance to Evil Incarnate so now even a small chance of him winning looks terrifying.

It's not artifice! Man, the guy wants people officially classified and treated differently according to their religion. He thinks someone's race should preclude them from judging a racial issue, except of course he has no qualms in that direction with whites. He feels entitled to sexually harass (at the very least) women because of his wealth and status. He thinks bringing back nuclear brinkmanship is a good idea. He's just fine with torture, and even torture by assosciation. Etc.

He's doing the building up, man. He needs no help with that at all. He's a fucking horror, and you honestly need to look at your support trending towards ambivalence about this shit more. Mussolini made the trains run on time; even evil people have good sides,mbut good sides don't change what they are. 

[James Arryn]

16 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

I'd prefer just staying with the issues honestly. More women in politics, good thing. More women in high paying careers, good thing. 

As far as my opinion on the mysogyny of the entire country and society. I don't think anyone really knows for sure what gender is suffering most under our current society. Some issues effect men more, some effect women more.

And then there's the added factor of individuals and their own preferences about how their gender effects their life positively or negatively.

 

Well, there goes the common ground I was trying for. Out of curiosity, do you feel that way about other strata? Like who knows who's more oppressed, black people or white people? Maybe Christians are treated worse than Muslims? Maybe heterosexuals face more hostility for their sexuality than homosexuals? 

[DunderMifflin]

12 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

Well, there goes the common ground I was trying for. Out of curiosity, do you feel that way about other strata? Like who knows who's more oppressed, black people or white people? Maybe Christians are treated worse than Muslims? Maybe heterosexuals face more hostility for their sexuality than homosexuals? 

Definately think black people are treated worse than white people in our society.

Definately think non heterosexuals are treated with more hostility by our society.

Religion is a tricky one, one might assume I'm a Christian based on my profile and give me some sort of advantage based on that assumption so idk, that probably falls under the racism category more than religious bigotry.

 

A small positive note on that is that we are at least to a point where ones that openly are racist are treated with hostility for the most part.

We seem to be headed that way in terms of open and blatant homophobia as well. And I repeat these are tiny victories that are taking way too long to happen so I'm not claiming any of their struggles are close to being over.

[Ordos]

I asked several threads back what the days between election day and inauguration day will look like if Drumpf wins. 

I'm going to re-visit that question here because I want to point out how painful it will be to see Obama force himself to say nice things about Drumpf in his speech of congratulations and his farewell speech. Then he will be forced to sit there on Inauguration day listening to that foul creature boast about how great he is and how great, whatever that means, he will make America.

And worse Obama will do that stupid dance of inviting Drumpf to the Oval office for a photo.

If Drumpf however starts going on the offensive and makes threats against Obama, that would give Obama the out excuse from going through the motions of a transition period.

[Lyanna Stark]

4 hours ago, Ariadne23 said:

Indeed. Women complaining about paid leave and equal pay are just prudes out to play the victim for reduced jail sentences, child support, and free birth control. You've cracked the code to unraveling the truth of the universe. Btw, how was the new Bakker book? Pretty good?

OMG I think I love you. I feel the return of the Feminism-thread approaching, don't you?