Why Aren't We Shocked?
Comments
-
PJPOWER wrote:I just started reading this forum, so let me know if someone has brought up this point about that particular shooting incident..........They were Amish and purposely made it a point not to start a big stir about it! They even publicly stated that they forgive the man who did it and want to move on. I don't think that the aftermath has anything to do with the fact that they were women, but moreso everything else surrounding the incident. It would almost be a crime against their families and their culture to start a lot of media crap out of something that they want to put behind them.
Excellent point.I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire0 -
hippiemom wrote:Saying that most boys would be bored in a remedial class is insulting to boys? I think it shows respect for boys' intelligence. The boys I know have fine verbal skills and would indeed be bored to tears by rote learning.
implying that a more analytical, rote memorization, black and white based education style that is more in line with male aptitudes is only good enough to be considered remedial education is kinda sexist.0 -
Not to mention that I think it's a little fucked up to say that the country wasn't shocked when this happened..............although maybe a little emotionally numb from other things that this country has witnessed in recent history........0
-
It's starting to offend me too, although I'm pretty sure it's for quite different reasons.Ahnimus wrote:Yea, almost none. If they were boys no one would even raise an eyebrow, unless they were black.
Women don't do all that stuff because they have to. I know plenty of women that don't do that stuff and get a long just fine. Women do it because of their own insecurities. My ex would spend 3 or more hours getting ready just to go to work. I kept telling her she was beautiful without it, but my opinion didn't mean shit because she was a psycho bitch..
It's not mens' fault you get caught up in the marketing of sex, and feel you need to do yourselve's up.
Anyway, this thread is really starting to offend me.
I find it interesting how few men in this thread have been willing to focus on the issues presented in the initial post without veering off into all these issues about MEN. No one is stopping you from posting a thread about how boys learn, or how violent women are, or unfair insurance practices, or your psycho ex-girlfriend, but none of those things are terribly relevant here. If we could conclusively prove that boys would do well in different classrooms and that women are sometimes violent and that insurance companies discriminate unfairly and that your ex is indeed insane, how would that have ANY bearing at all on the central issue, which was that violence against women is so deeply ingrained in our culture that we don't even notice it? You may agree or disagree with that statement, but none of these side issues have anything to do with it, and I really don't know why you've brought them up."Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 19630 -
hippiemom wrote:It's starting to offend me too, although I'm pretty sure it's for quite different reasons.
I find it interesting how few men in this thread have been willing to focus on the issues presented in the initial post without veering off into all these issues about MEN. No one is stopping you from posting a thread about how boys learn, or how violent women are, or unfair insurance practices, or your psycho ex-girlfriend, but none of those things are terribly relevant here. If we could conclusively prove that boys would do well in different classrooms and that women are sometimes violent and that insurance companies discriminate unfairly and that your ex is indeed insane, how would that have ANY bearing at all on the central issue, which was that violence against women is so deeply ingrained in our culture that we don't even notice it? You may agree or disagree with that statement, but none of these side issues have anything to do with it, and I really don't know why you've brought them up.
I don't see how this particular incident has any bearing on women's rights.
This is a freak random occurance. My point is there is sexism all over the place and it's not just directed at women. But you automatically assume that this guy was motivated by some underlying sexist sociocultural nonsense. Could it just be that this guy was nuts? If it were boys murdered, you would the same response from the media, but we'd never have seen a post like the OP. I don't consider that media discrimination, but it is your discrimination to assume that if a girl dies it's an act of sexism. That's because you have been ingrained with animosity towards men and every act of hostility towards women is sexist in oppressive, in your mind. While others just aren't programmed that way.I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire0 -
Well, for your viewing, I disagree and stayed on topic in my post above. I still don't understand how you can say that it wasn't noticed, though. It got a reaction from me, from everyone I know actually! What kind of reaction were you looking for, and would that kind of reaction have been better or worse in the long run? More media attention in the past has only resulted in more violence of this nature................think about that......hippiemom wrote:It's starting to offend me too, although I'm pretty sure it's for quite different reasons.
I find it interesting how few men in this thread have been willing to focus on the issues presented in the initial post without veering off into all these issues about MEN. No one is stopping you from posting a thread about how boys learn, or how violent women are, or unfair insurance practices, or your psycho ex-girlfriend, but none of those things are terribly relevant here. If we could conclusively prove that boys would do well in different classrooms and that women are sometimes violent and that insurance companies discriminate unfairly and that your ex is indeed insane, how would that have ANY bearing at all on the central issue, which was that violence against women is so deeply ingrained in our culture that we don't even notice it? You may agree or disagree with that statement, but none of these side issues have anything to do with it, and I really don't know why you've brought them up.0 -
I think you're reading an intent into this that the authors didn't have. They are not saying that boys require a remedial environment. They're saying that what is sometimes described as a boy-friendly environment is pretty much what exists now in remedial classrooms (which is true). They obviously don't agree that this type of class is boy-friendly, since they think most boys would be bored in it. Based on the boys I know, I'd have to agree with them.surferdude wrote:Sorry but the two female authors view a "boy-friendly" class to be equivalent to a remedial class. If that doesn't show a complete and utter disrespect and general contempt for boys and their intelligence I'm not sure what does."Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 19630 -
hippiemom wrote:It's starting to offend me too, although I'm pretty sure it's for quite different reasons.
I find it interesting how few men in this thread have been willing to focus on the issues presented in the initial post without veering off into all these issues about MEN. No one is stopping you from posting a thread about how boys learn, or how violent women are, or unfair insurance practices, or your psycho ex-girlfriend, but none of those things are terribly relevant here. If we could conclusively prove that boys would do well in different classrooms and that women are sometimes violent and that insurance companies discriminate unfairly and that your ex is indeed insane, how would that have ANY bearing at all on the central issue, which was that violence against women is so deeply ingrained in our culture that we don't even notice it? You may agree or disagree with that statement, but none of these side issues have anything to do with it, and I really don't know why you've brought them up.
I agree with you here. There is alot of violence towards women. Our culture not only condones it, we promote it. We subliminaly teach it. What is alarming to me, however, is that women are just as guilty as men in promoting this culture. It's all about money and self-pleasure.
Women care waaaaaay too much about their appearance. Honestly, it's a turn-off for me. It's always about comparing themselves to other women. When I've tried to tell a girlfriend, or just any girl how that behavior isn't right - I get a quick lecture about how I just don't understand and I'm clueless....
Girls who excel in this type of society don't care about the ones who don't. It's all about pleasing ourselves and not looking out for others. Terrible...
Just want to add one more thing here. Whenever I've confronted a girl about caring soo damn much about her appearance, ex. when she stresses over her hair, clothes, skin, you name - I've heard it.... the typical response is "i'm not that bad compared to most girls"... I think that says alot right there about how women percieve other women.0 -
NCfan wrote:I agree with you here. There is alot of violence towards women. Our culture not only condones it, we promote it. We subliminaly teach it. What is alarming to me, however, is that women are just as guilty as men in promoting this culture. It's all about money and self-pleasure.
Women care waaaaaay too much about their appearance. Honestly, it's a turn-off for me. It's always about comparing themselves to other women. When I've tried to tell a girlfriend, or just any girl how that behavior isn't right - I get a quick lecture about how I just don't understand and I'm clueless....
Girls who excel in this type of society don't care about the ones who don't. It's all about pleasing ourselves and not looking out for others. Terrible...
Yea, we stopped promoting violence against women like 40 years ago.I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire0 -
hippiemom wrote:It's starting to offend me too, although I'm pretty sure it's for quite different reasons.
I find it interesting how few men in this thread have been willing to focus on the issues presented in the initial post without veering off into all these issues about MEN. No one is stopping you from posting a thread about how boys learn, or how violent women are, or unfair insurance practices, or your psycho ex-girlfriend, but none of those things are terribly relevant here. If we could conclusively prove that boys would do well in different classrooms and that women are sometimes violent and that insurance companies discriminate unfairly and that your ex is indeed insane, how would that have ANY bearing at all on the central issue, which was that violence against women is so deeply ingrained in our culture that we don't even notice it? You may agree or disagree with that statement, but none of these side issues have anything to do with it, and I really don't know why you've brought them up.
EXACTLY.
this article, this thread...is about this particular issue, an important one...amongst many important issues. i personally do not understand why even one little thread here is not allowed to remain focused on the topic/subject...but is veered off. sure, threads oftentimes veer into related issues, but i don't even think the subject here has even been given it's proper due.
and yes, this particular incident HAS shocked the country, the media, etc.....but NONE of that 'shock'...or lines of inquiry, have at all been based on why females were specifically targeted. i think it is an important distinction to at the VERY least, consider.Stay with me...
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow0 -
NCfan wrote:Is that sarcastic? I don't follow...
No it's the truth. Remember the 60's? The burning of the bra? Women's liberation?
Look I was born in the early 80s and the first thing I was taught is that women are equal to men, except in the following catagories "parenting, driving, compassion, intelligence and tolerance."
Secondly I was taught men are assholes, white people kill and oppress other people. Women and Natives are always right and don't talk back to your parents.
Never have I been encouraged to harm a lady. In fact, my dad said he'd bust my nose if I even hurt a girl in self-defense. Just like his dad did to him when he got into a fight with a girl. My dad was born in like '59, so it would have been around '69 when his dad broke his nose for punching a girl.I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire0 -
It was two "freak random occurances," and the author of the article put it in context of other things that exist in our culture. The article was not about one occurance in particular.Ahnimus wrote:I don't see how this particular incident has any bearing on women's rights.
This is a freak random occurance. My point is there is sexism all over the place and it's not just directed at women. But you automatically assume that this guy was motivated by some underlying sexist sociocultural nonsense. Could it just be that this guy was nuts? If it were boys murdered, you would the same response from the media, but we'd never have seen a post like the OP. I don't consider that media discrimination, but it is your discrimination to assume that if a girl dies it's an act of sexism. That's because you have been ingrained with animosity towards men and every act of hostility towards women is sexist in oppressive, in your mind. While others just aren't programmed that way.
I could be wrong, but I suspect that if a woman stormed a school, rounded up boys, molested and shot them, it would generate a good bit of discussion. And yes, it would indeed be sexist.
I can assure you that I don't have any "ingrained animosity" towards men, lol. Sorry, but that's just funny. I adore men. I've been married to one for 23 years, and my closest friends are men. I took a few minutes to think of all the women I know, and the ones with the most animosity, the ones who have the worst relationships with men, are the ones most like the women you've described ... they've bought into the lie that men and women are at odds with one another, that they need to look or behave a certain way in order to con some poor sap into marrying them, that relationships are some sort of contest with a winner and a loser. Women with a healthy dose of self-respect don't see the world that way, they don't think or behave that way, and they get along with men just fine. I know this is only anecdotal since I'm of course only thinking about the women I know personally, but that's a fairly large number of women, and the rule holds without exception. This leads me to believe that the images of women presented in the media are indeed toxic, not only to women but to men as well, who have to deal with the women who have soaked up all those unhealthy messages."Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 19630 -
hippiemom wrote:It was two "freak random occurances," and the author of the article put it in context of other things that exist in our culture. The article was not about one occurance in particular.
I could be wrong, but I suspect that if a woman stormed a school, rounded up boys, molested and shot them, it would generate a good bit of discussion. And yes, it would indeed be sexist.
I can assure you that I don't have any "ingrained animosity" towards men, lol. Sorry, but that's just funny. I adore men. I've been married to one for 23 years, and my closest friends are men. I took a few minutes to think of all the women I know, and the ones with the most animosity, the ones who have the worst relationships with men, are the ones most like the women you've described ... they've bought into the lie that men and women are at odds with one another, that they need to look or behave a certain way in order to con some poor sap into marrying them, that relationships are some sort of contest with a winner and a loser. Women with a healthy dose of self-respect don't see the world that way, they don't think or behave that way, and they get along with men just fine. I know this is only anecdotal since I'm of course only thinking about the women I know personally, but that's a fairly large number of women, and the rule holds without exception. This leads me to believe that the images of women presented in the media are indeed toxic, not only to women but to men as well, who have to deal with the women who have soaked up all those unhealthy messages.
You know, after reading this thread I'm starting to think that women just might be smarter (and I'm not one to play that way)! The ones in this thread seem to have that reading comprehension thing down.
And newspapers are written at such a lower level, too.
Anyway, I fear any effort is just wasted. If people can't get that the author wrote about some current events in a way to explore deeper pre-existing issues, I just give up. Girls were targeted and killed ---> why aren't people more upset about it?
> oh, maybe it's because this society still has issues about women, quite possibly manifesting themselves in misogyny or sexism.if you wanna be a friend of mine
cross the river to the eastside0 -
hippiemom wrote:It was two "freak random occurances," and the author of the article put it in context of other things that exist in our culture. The article was not about one occurance in particular.
I could be wrong, but I suspect that if a woman stormed a school, rounded up boys, molested and shot them, it would generate a good bit of discussion. And yes, it would indeed be sexist.
I can assure you that I don't have any "ingrained animosity" towards men, lol. Sorry, but that's just funny. I adore men. I've been married to one for 23 years, and my closest friends are men. I took a few minutes to think of all the women I know, and the ones with the most animosity, the ones who have the worst relationships with men, are the ones most like the women you've described ... they've bought into the lie that men and women are at odds with one another, that they need to look or behave a certain way in order to con some poor sap into marrying them, that relationships are some sort of contest with a winner and a loser. Women with a healthy dose of self-respect don't see the world that way, they don't think or behave that way, and they get along with men just fine. I know this is only anecdotal since I'm of course only thinking about the women I know personally, but that's a fairly large number of women, and the rule holds without exception. This leads me to believe that the images of women presented in the media are indeed toxic, not only to women but to men as well, who have to deal with the women who have soaked up all those unhealthy messages.
I don't get any messages like that from media. Need I remind you I don't subscribe to cable. The only news I read is related to wars and stuff. I don't normally read the crap about women vs men. I encounter it in my life.
If a woman busted into a school and shot 5 boys and then herself. I would leave at that, end of story, that's what happened. I don't need there to be an underlying sexist message to understand it.I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire0 -
VictoryGin wrote:You know, after reading this thread I'm starting to think that women just might be smarter (and I'm not one to play that way)! The ones in this thread seem to have that reading comprehension thing down. And newspapers are written at such a lower level, too.
Anyway, I fear any effort is just wasted. If people can't get that the author wrote about some current events in a way to explore deeper pre-existing issues, I just give up. Girls were targeted and killed ---> why aren't people more upset about it?
> oh, maybe it's because this society still has issues about women, quite possibly manifesting themselves in misogyny or sexism.
You just don't give up. You make a sexist remark and then go on to say everyone else is sexist. Wake up and look in the mirror.I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire0 -
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but this thread isn't about YOU. There are sociological trends, believe it or not, that may not involve YOU directly. This may come as a shocker, but most people in the western world are exposed to an awful lot of media messages. For real, I'm not making this up! I don't watch television either, but I had no trouble at all grasping the concept that the article wasn't about me personally.Ahnimus wrote:I don't get any messages like that from media. Need I remind you I don't subscribe to cable. The only news I read is related to wars and stuff. I don't normally read the crap about women vs men. I encounter it in my life."Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 19630 -
decides2dream wrote:EXACTLY.
this article, this thread...is about this particular issue, an important one...amongst many important issues. i personally do not understand why even one little thread here is not allowed to remain focused on the topic/subject...but is veered off. sure, threads oftentimes veer into related issues, but i don't even think the subject here has even been given it's proper due.
and yes, this particular incident HAS shocked the country, the media, etc.....but NONE of that 'shock'...or lines of inquiry, have at all been based on why females were specifically targeted. i think it is an important distinction to at the VERY least, consider.
I think the fact that the 'female only targets' hasn't caused a huge stir is because women have made great strides to seperate themselves from being viewed as victims. We no longer need to wear that badge. So in other words, I think people view these incidents as simply insane and don't feel the need to address it only involving females because it's by far not an everyday occurence for women.If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde0 -
Ahnimus wrote:You just don't give up. You make a sexist remark and then go on to say everyone else is sexist. Wake up and look in the mirror.
Show me exactly where I said "everyone else is sexist." Oh, you can't! Because I didn't!if you wanna be a friend of mine
cross the river to the eastside0 -
We all put far too much focus on appearance. And you're right, it is often about one-upping other women, or snagging a man, but it's also sometimes about snagging a job. No white-collar woman in her right mind would go on a job interview without make-up and freshly manicured fingernails. That's interpreted by HR as "inattention to detail" or "lack of initiative." A man is expected to be neat and clean, but a woman is expected to be neat and clean and freshly painted and clad in garments (skirt, heels) that render her relatively helpless.NCfan wrote:I agree with you here. There is alot of violence towards women. Our culture not only condones it, we promote it. We subliminaly teach it. What is alarming to me, however, is that women are just as guilty as men in promoting this culture. It's all about money and self-pleasure.
Women care waaaaaay too much about their appearance. Honestly, it's a turn-off for me. It's always about comparing themselves to other women. When I've tried to tell a girlfriend, or just any girl how that behavior isn't right - I get a quick lecture about how I just don't understand and I'm clueless....
Girls who excel in this type of society don't care about the ones who don't. It's all about pleasing ourselves and not looking out for others. Terrible...
Just want to add one more thing here. Whenever I've confronted a girl about caring soo damn much about her appearance, ex. when she stresses over her hair, clothes, skin, you name - I've heard it.... the typical response is "i'm not that bad compared to most girls"... I think that says alot right there about how women percieve other women.
Of course many women help to promote it ... they've been taught subliminally all their lives. I see a lot of women who honestly have no idea how to interact with a man as just another person, much as some of the men in this thread clearly see relations with women as being adversarial.
Anyway, time for me to go home now, and thank you for an intelligent and relevant response, it was refreshing
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 19630
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.7K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help