Objectifying Women?

[Avon Barksdale]

The point was if you have a theory which paints men as an immutable oppressor class and women as the oppressed it clearly falls apart in many instances when confronted with the real world.

No, I don't believe everything is hunky dory no more than I believe radical feminist theory is the solution to actual issues women face in the UK.

Now, the system you were referring to in your previous post. What is it? Is it the patriarchy / capitalism / something else? It seems to be if you want to fix a problem you have to identify what it specifically is, how it occurs in real world and how it can be changed (if indeed it should.)

I've had a think about this radical feminism thing, it's bollocks, God knows why you even brought it up.
We've never had it here in Britain. No one advocating female superiority over males has ever got any traction here. Or anywhere else I can think of.
You've been watching too much Amazonian porn.

You don't know why I bought it up in a thread which involves objectification and the male gaze? No one ever brings up concepts like the patriarchy or toxic masculinity when discussing these types of issues in the UK?

Do you think Simone de Beavoir falls within the liberal tradition of feminism?

You must be trolling me.

You're the one who's trolling, bringing up something that very few women want or fight for in this country.
The concept is a smokescreen to undermine discussions on feminism.

Talking about a feminist perspective (radical feminism) is a smokescreen to undermine feminism even though it's part of feminism? That doesn't make sense.

Concepts like patriarchy, the male gaze or mansplaining don't fall out of the sky into the public consciousness do they? They are most closely linked with a strand of feminism which is very influential nowadays and which many people, both men and women, support. It isn't liberal feminism though.

This is from that link I provided before:

Radical feminists locate the root cause of women's oppression in patriarchal gender relations, as opposed to legal systems (as in liberal feminism) or class conflict (as in anarchist feminism, socialist feminism, and Marxist feminism). Gail Dines, an English radical feminist, spoke in 2011 about the appeal of radical feminism to young women: "After teaching women for 20-odd years, if I go in and I teach liberal feminism, I get looked [at] blank ... I go in and teach radical feminism, bang, the room explodes."

[Lady Murasaki]

Bullseye!

More like Bullshit!
Rat in a dress backing someone up has just confirmed my suspicions.

[Avon Barksdale]

You can call me "Rat in a Dress" and "Misogynist Cunt" all you like, but I'll still be taking issue with that BIB.

You've come out with some spectacularly stupid, pig-ignorant crap in your time, but to say Avon is a troll is staggering even by your standards.

Avon B, a troll?? Seriously??? The guy could effortlessly and knowledgeably out-debate you right into the next millennium.

You've now removed all doubt that you're a fool. I'll take Avon's rationale and measured points of view over your temperamental, ill-informed waffle any day of the week, thanks.

Lolz - thanks Vam.

It doesn't bother me if people call me a troll though. I wouldn't have lasted long here if I did. I'll let my arguments stand or fall on their own merits as the case may be.

[Lady Murasaki]

The point was if you have a theory which paints men as an immutable oppressor class and women as the oppressed it clearly falls apart in many instances when confronted with the real world.

No, I don't believe everything is hunky dory no more than I believe radical feminist theory is the solution to actual issues women face in the UK.

Now, the system you were referring to in your previous post. What is it? Is it the patriarchy / capitalism / something else? It seems to be if you want to fix a problem you have to identify what it specifically is, how it occurs in real world and how it can be changed (if indeed it should.)

I've had a think about this radical feminism thing, it's bollocks, God knows why you even brought it up.
We've never had it here in Britain. No one advocating female superiority over males has ever got any traction here. Or anywhere else I can think of.
You've been watching too much Amazonian porn.

You don't know why I bought it up in a thread which involves objectification and the male gaze? No one ever brings up concepts like the patriarchy or toxic masculinity when discussing these types of issues in the UK?

Do you think Simone de Beavoir falls within the liberal tradition of feminism?

You must be trolling me.

You're the one who's trolling, bringing up something that very few women want or fight for in this country.
The concept is a smokescreen to undermine discussions on feminism.

Talking about a feminist perspective (radical feminism) is a smokescreen to undermine feminism even though it's part of feminism? That doesn't make sense.

Concepts like patriarchy, the male gaze or mansplaining don't fall out of the sky into the public consciousness do they? They are most closely linked with a strand of feminism which is very influential nowadays and which many people, both men and women, support. It isn't liberal feminism though.

This is from that link I provided before:

Radical feminists locate the root cause of women's oppression in patriarchal gender relations, as opposed to legal systems (as in liberal feminism) or class conflict (as in anarchist feminism, socialist feminism, and Marxist feminism). Gail Dines, an English radical feminist, spoke in 2011 about the appeal of radical feminism to young women: "After teaching women for 20-odd years, if I go in and I teach liberal feminism, I get looked [at] blank ... I go in and teach radical feminism, bang, the room explodes."

It's scaremongering. Typical of online trolls to take a discussion to the extreme in order to overplay their feeble arguments.
It betrays your oh so liberal stance. Never mind, you have the forum misogynists supporting you, so result!

[Fletch]

Nice too see that the English contingent on the Crystal Palace board are falling down on the side of the 'Crystals' - Palace's dance group/cheerleaders.

They were doing their routines as usual yesterday after it was reported on Friday that the American main shareholders preferred them to stop with immediate effect.

What went on behind the scenes and for how long it might continue is not clear but it looks as though for the moment anyway they can do the job they love for a bit longer.

This particular dance group have been a regular sight at Selhurst Park for the past 7 years and have raised tens of thousands for local charities and good causes and some teach dance, ballet and physical education to local children and also for The Palace for Life Foundation.

The girls turn up three hours before kick off and interact with fans mostly in their own clothes and change into their costumes before performing.

A Crystal Palace FC spokesman said we have never recieved a single complaint from either the girls or anyone attending the games before.

Worth pointing out that F1 is now owned by an American media company, Liberty Media. They have some pretty daft ideas as anyone watching the US grand prix will have seen.

Other point to note, F1 is an international sport and the grid girls are from the host country. They are not scantily clad in any way and sometimes dress in traditional dress for their region. They even have them for Middle East countries. Given the demand for F1 race tickets and even more hard to obtain paddock passes, it's an honour for anyone to be on the grid at an event. You'll see plenty of stars and influential business people as well as politicians on the grid. It's a place to be seen. Monaco being the prime example of it.

Claire Williams runs Williams F1 and plenty of women are involved/employed by the teams and the commercial side that goes with it. This isn't about young women being objectified, being exploited or there just for men, it's a knee jerk reaction through fear brought about by a militant section of society who try to force their own ideas on everyone else. In the process they have deprived young women of the opportunity to further their modelling career or having the chance to mix with the rich and famous.

[Avon Barksdale]

It's scaremongering. Typical of online trolls to take a discussion to the extreme in order to overplay their feeble arguments.
It betrays your oh so liberal stance. Never mind, you have the forum misogynists supporting you, so result!

No, it is a debate to find where the truth lies in a given situation. What other people do is their business, not mine.

An attempted smear or guilt by association isn't an argument.

[Lady Murasaki]

It's scaremongering. Typical of online trolls to take a discussion to the extreme in order to overplay their feeble arguments.
It betrays your oh so liberal stance. Never mind, you have the forum misogynists supporting you, so result!

No, it is a debate to find where the truth lies in a given situation. What other people do is their business, not mine.

An attempted smear or guilt by association isn't an argument.

Then why bring up radical feminism when it has nothing to do with anything?
Then accuse me of trolling you for asking that very question?
And don't play the victim because ratty is babying you.

[Avon Barksdale]

It's scaremongering. Typical of online trolls to take a discussion to the extreme in order to overplay their feeble arguments.
It betrays your oh so liberal stance. Never mind, you have the forum misogynists supporting you, so result!

No, it is a debate to find where the truth lies in a given situation. What other people do is their business, not mine.

An attempted smear or guilt by association isn't an argument.

Then why bring up radical feminism when it has nothing to do with anything?
Then accuse me of trolling you for asking that very question?
And don't play the victim because ratty is babying you.

Because, as I have stated on multiple occasions before, ideas like the male gaze, sexual objectification and the patriarchy are more closely linked with radical feminism and their influence on the movement / thinking as a whole. That's hardly a controversial position and well known. Therefore I assumed you had to be trolling because if you are a supporter of feminism or a feminist then that would be known to you. The other explanation was ignorance.

I'm not playing the victim by pointing out that you aren't making any arguments but rather have moved on to my character.

Finally, calling another women "ratty" is hardly in the spirit of sisterhood is it? Perhaps you could stop dehumanising Vam and see her as a human being.

But I'll leave the floor to you now to discuss feminism without interruption and without speaking about a single feminist author, thinker or campaigner.

[Good Grief !]

It's scaremongering. Typical of online trolls to take a discussion to the extreme in order to overplay their feeble arguments.
It betrays your oh so liberal stance. Never mind, you have the forum misogynists supporting you, so result!

No, it is a debate to find where the truth lies in a given situation. What other people do is their business, not mine.

An attempted smear or guilt by association isn't an argument.

Then why bring up radical feminism when it has nothing to do with anything?
Then accuse me of trolling you for asking that very question?
And don't play the victim because ratty is babying you.

Good grief woman have you head yourself? Seriously?

I fully agree with Avon Barksadale's contribution as a valid point to the debate, it offers a point to ponder and question.

Once you resort to the silly name calling and insults as you have done, it presents you as a hysterical woman of little importance opinionwise.

In fact watching your behaviour makes me ashamed to be associated with you as a woman. You're being rather silly.

[Lady Murasaki]

Then why bring up radical feminism when it has nothing to do with anything?
Then accuse me of trolling you for asking that very question?
And don't play the victim because ratty is babying you.

Because, as I have stated on multiple occasions before, ideas like the male gaze, sexual objectification and the patriarchy are more closely linked with radical feminism and their influence on the movement / thinking as a whole. That's hardly a controversial position and well known. Therefore I assumed you had to be trolling because if you are a supporter of feminism or a feminist then that would be known to you. The other explanation was ignorance.

And as I have pointed out numerous times, there is no traction in a movement that wants to subjugate men, ie. Radical feminism. Fucks sake, feminism isn't about making any gender inferior and you bringing it into the ring was disingenuous for a so called liberal

I'm not playing the victim by pointing out that you aren't making any arguments but rather have moved on to my character.

Finally, calling another women "ratty" is hardly in the spirit of sisterhood is it? Perhaps you could stop dehumanising Vam and see her as a human being.

Ratty knows why I see her as a disloyal misogynistic rat, that individual tries too hard to be an uber bitch and constantly gossips and undermines women at every available opportunity so is a complete fail for any sistah hood that I may want to belong to, so don't tell me what to call her

But I'll leave the floor to you now to discuss feminism without interruption and without speaking about a single feminist author, thinker or campaigner.

..
Well if you'd talked about feminists and not radical feminists in the first place you wouldn't have to leave with your tail between your legs.