The Al Jazeera English show I’m appearing on starts in about 10 minutes, at 3:30 PM
You can watch a live stream of the show (TheStream) on the Al Jazeera website here.
Categories
We Hunted The MammothBucking the Backlash
Women were flawless according to women. The only time they weren’t flawless was when they didn’t herd properly.
Come on Owly, these setences weren’t even separated by anything. You need to separate your contradictions a bit so we have to work to see them.
..Imagine there’s an “n” in there, and that I don’t suck at checking spellings before I post.
On misandry v misogyny:
Yep, in the experiment I conducted, in Central London’s Leicester Square, 62% of women replied with a misandric utterance about men, whilst 29% of men replied misogynistically about women.
I then took the same experiment to LSE’s campus, where zero percent of the elite male student passers by responded misogynistically about women, and 22% of elite female students responded misandrically about men.
So, it looks like a top university education teaches us to speak absolutely positively about women, but does not seem to encourage quite so much positivity about men.
Bare in mind that I, a male camera operator/interviewer, was asking the questions, so I would expect an even higher misandry level from the females when responding to a lone female camera operator/interviewer.
I did another experiment, also asking the Leicester Square passing females to pass comment on men, and asking their attitudes about what percentage of a first date a man should pay, and how many month’s salary a man should spend on an engagement ring, and found gold-diggers were on average 20% more misandric than non gold diggers (which isn’t surprising given gold-diggers’ lower average IQ).
Feminists used the least amount of misandry, with the exception of rare strident victim-feminists who talked of men as ‘the privileged sex’ for instance (an attitude which can and does justify misandry along with a host of other inequitable treatment).
I just got an email back from a professor in the fied of gender and humour who thinks my documentary experiment on whether gold-digging environments make women less funny is something experts do not know the answer to, so I will be focusing my attentions on producing this instead.
Any stand up feminists who are funny and would like to help me produce this, can email me:
[email protected]
You don’t need to post twice Tommy, we ignored you the first time.
@Sara
“NWO Slave’s comments about the hosts only value being her hotness and describing those women as clucking hens comes to mind as something that should not be tolerated.”
Why? That’s all she is. She is a clucking hen parrotting nothingness from the ruling party. Stating a fact isn’t misogyny. This is where you seem to get confused. A totalitarian regime is one where only one side is even allowed a voice. She clucked the party line, that’s all.
@ Tom Martin:
Cool story, bro.
Do feminists really think they are doing something true by rejecting everything that was said more than a decade ago?
I fear that anyone with a sense of humour who gets involved with any of your projects is unlikely to be working with you in entirely good faith…
>>>>Do feminists really think they are doing something true by rejecting everything that was said more than a decade ago?
Almost certainly. #traditionfails
So how do you qualify whether a reply is “misandric” or “misogynistic” or neither?
@David Futrelle
“I thought the discussion went well, though as Cliff says it wasn’t anything we haven’t heard already.”
Ad naseum for the last 40 years at least. Victimology 101. By the way, Dave. The supposed systemic hatred of women seemed to be a few sentences online where, “a” woman felt slighted. Does that equal worldwide societal misogyny? Only to idiots.
Nwoslave,
I’ll give this a shot, but I’m not holding my breath:
“Misogyny is not only societal wide but world wide? The proof was words falling from a womans/feminists mouth. Is that it?”
It is world wide because of the global venue of the world wide web. The misogyny and harrassment online, therefore, is world wide.
“An all womans view of what’s wrong with the men in the world? Hmmmm, sounds fair.”
These were women AND men discussing what’s wrong with misogyny and harrassment online – NOT what’s wrong with men. You may recall the professor stating that often women can perpetuate sexism and can be the “gatekeepers”. You however, have glossed over their qualifications and just see them as women, nothing more.
“Countless statements were given backed by nothing. More fairness.
Women were flawless according to women. The only time they weren’t flawless was when they didn’t herd properly. More equality, apparently.”
How are you backing your statements? Where and when was it ever stated that women see each other as flawless?
“Perhaps the reason why women are treated like they offer nothing but baseless yammerings in a henhouse, is because that’s all women, as a monolithic block are offering.”
Um, your clucking henhouse, hot host, women offer nothing, and are whiners comments are actually all baseless yammerings and PROVES the very points that were made in this discussion.
Nice try, though!
Seeing as how feminist thought is centuries old, I don’t think you have an accurate picture of what we’re doing.
A professor in the fied (sic) of gender and humour? That’s a whole field now? Seems legit.
Test. I can’t figure out what time this has gone on, if I just now missed it, or this was hours ago, going to check and see what time WPress puts on my comment here. So I assume if it was eons ago there would be a YT link at this point.
I’m also disturbed by how NWO and TMartin can just drone on after being proved wrong. Same old same old. I mean “women are flawless”? LOL. How many times do we have to speak to that one? Who says this? How much time has passed and this dood is still at it? I was thinking that if these guys don’t believe what they say they are pretty brilliant, and I know others would argue and say no, fail troll. But I’m thinking of what it would take to come back and back and back and do this day after day, never breaking character. That’s pretty outstanding. I really can’t wrap my mind around what type of people these are irl.
And on another thread, Tom Martin said that we don’t challenge Futrelle, or something along those lines. We don’t criticize him. Well, I’ve got news. Neither does Tom. Where are his posts where he quotes part of a post and speaks to it directly? Him or NWO, they just get on here with weird straw feminist talking points completely oblivious to the OP. So, Tom waiting for some critique on what David writes from you, actually. (One the edge of my padded chair. I can actually sit like this for quite some time, so comfortable!)
I really really REALLY want to hear verbatim quotes of the “misandrist” responses and know what questions he asked.
@scrapmind
“Do feminists really think they are doing something true by rejecting everything that was said more than a decade ago?”
Is this like “Who’s line is it anyway” where you have to answer a question with a question?
And I don’t know what you mean by “rejecting everything that was said more than a decade ago.”
I think someone decades ago, maybe even a couple people said “Feminism BOO! FAIL NEXT!”
So what are we all doing here?
NWO:
“Why? That’s all she is. She is a clucking hen parrotting nothingness from the ruling party. Stating a fact isn’t misogyny. This is where you seem to get confused. A totalitarian regime is one where only one side is even allowed a voice. She clucked the party line, that’s all.”
You are not stating a fact, you are stating your opinion. Saying the host’s only value is her looks and then calling her a clucking parrott/hen, whatever is classic misogyny, abusive language, don’t hear any facts. This is where you seem to get confused…
whataboutthemoonz said:
So how do you qualify whether a reply is “misandric” or “misogynistic” or neither?
I considered whether the comment is a negative statement about the other sex, or neutral/positive.
Women tended to say men were (in rough order):
Idiots, stupid, pigs, a pain, necessary, wonderful, smelly, great, weird, animals, dogs, clever, interesting, funny…
Men tended to say women were (in rough order):
Beautiful, hot, wonderful, nice, gorgeous, kind, crazy, bitches, whores, cunts.
Not a single man said women were intelligent, interesting, or funny.
Girls were a lot more sexist about boys than boys about girls, but the sample was too small:
Weird, smelly, idiots the favourite answers, where as boys said girls were, nice etc.
It seems to be particularly hip for girls to call boys ‘weird’ at the moment.
Part of the reason I don’t want to edit it all, is the lack of humour in the answers. The closest they got to a laugh, is where I asked a couple, starting with the woman on the left:
“Men are… ?” She quick as a flash replied “… a pain.” And to her boyfriend I asked “Women are… ?” and even quicker he replied “… even more of a pain.”
Females don’t appear to have an internal alarm bell, they just blurt it out.
Sara, the only “facts” NWO accepts are his own inane babblings. Citations are misandry.
Until we get the tape or at least the precise methodology, here is how I will assume it happens:
Tom:
– Hey, wh*re, do think men are worthless?
RandomWoman72261:
– Fuck off creep. *she goes away*
Tom:
– I’ll take that as a yes. One more misandrist
Tom:
– Sorry to bother you sir, I would like to know if you think non-prostitute women can have a sense of humor?
RandomMan156186:
*confused* – What are you talking about? Of course women can make or laugh at jokes. You’re weird dude.
Tom:
– And do you think women are worthless?
RandomMan156186:
– What the fuck? Of course not. I have a wife and a daughter and I love them both.
I missed the show because I had a dinner, so I’ll watch it tomorrow is there is a video.
My favorite part about Owly’s “Women are flawless” shtick is that he was here just a day or two ago defending that other christian troll from us. Dude has a mind like a sieve
Wetherby said:
I fear that any [feminist stand up] with a sense of humour who gets involved with any of your [documentary] projects is unlikely to be working with you in entirely good faith…
That’s up to them, Wetherby.
The important thing is, first and foremost, that they’re funny and want to do it.
Secondly, misandric jokes are easier to think of than non misandric jokes on gender issues, as with misogynistic humour being easier than non misogynistic – but they are cheap, easy laughs – and it will ultimately be about finding humour on gender in non-sexist ways.
Sexist humour is incidentally the way that prejudice is transmitted (so sexist jokes in particular are the problem):
http://psp.sagepub.com/content/26/9/1094.short