The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Profile: Hope123
About
User Name: Hope123
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Gender: Female
Statistics
Joined: Monday, March 23, 2015
Last Visit: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 11:59:28 AM
Number of Posts: 8,983
[0.92% of all post / 5.08 posts per day]
Avatar
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: Capitalism Draws Fire, Despite Strong Global Economy
Posted: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 11:59:27 AM
https://www.pressreader.com/canada/toronto-star/20200121/282256667455827 Authors are from the Wall Street Journal.

Article says income inequality, environment sustainability, corruption, and automation are all causing distrust in capitalism, even though the world economy is doing well. Another article I saw said it is supposed to be even better in 2020. Trust in institutions is crumbling (has crumbled I would say).

Not only is capitalism being questioned, but along with it so is democracy, according to this article. Eight issues are discussed in this opinion piece.

Does capitalism need to be curbed somewhat? Are world democracies in danger of losing democracy? If so, why?

Thoughts?
Topic: Public Example of Misogyny that Affects All Women
Posted: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 10:47:31 AM
Lotje1000 wrote:
Women have long been erased from history. Feminism is called that because it's a movement that wants to make women visible again. (Similarly, that's why it's "Black lives matter" and not "All lives matter".) Focusing on one issue does not make other issues cease to matter. Supporting women does not mean erasing men. Yet when someone brings up the subject of women, it's not long before the attention is drawn back to men. That's not because it's called "feminism". That's because it's a knee-jerk defensive mechanism. Just calling it another name isn't going to magically fix the discomfort those in power have when a group starts to stand up for itself.

Does the word "feminism" make people uncomfortable? Good. Sit with that discomfort and ask yourself why it makes you uncomfortable. Ask yourself why some men are uncomfortable because they feel "I am feminist" sounds like "I am feminine". Ask yourself why being feminine is a bad thing. Ask yourself why every essay, article, post, interview, forum thread about women's rights has to include a long-winded disclaimer "of course not all men" or why we have to keep explaining what feminism means. It's not because it's called "feminism". It's because it's easier to blame a word, fall back on defensiveness and outrage than it is to actually listen to what is being said.

If only we all took half the time we spent dissecting and explaining the term and instead applied it to:
- listening to and acknowledging women's experiences
- acknowledging the existence of our outdated gender expectations
- working together to get rid of said expectations
- or, if all else fails, stop making life difficult for other people who are just trying to exist.

I swear it's like arguing if the titanic is a boat or a ship while we really should be getting people into life boats.



Drool Applause Applause

Well said, Lotje. You are correct that even if the name were changed to a more descriptive one, nothing else probably would. (Your analogy “ I swear it's like arguing if the titanic is a boat or a ship while we really should be getting people into life boats“ made me think that could also be applied to the still ongoing climate change arguments by those who benefit and want to keep the status quo.)

I never really thought of it and had no idea that my life views were considered to be feminist until I joined this forum several years ago.I did know that I was an atheist who agrees she could be wrong about it, but I still never speak of it except on the Forum. Now I just found out from Romany that my views are also those of a Humanist. Humans are responsible for themselves but help for those in need is always the way to go.

Humanism- an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs, and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems.

:::

Has anybody seen the movie “Bombshell”? It was released last year and is about Fox News women, Barbied-up with lip gloss, false eyelashes and tight short skirts, who were victimized and then eventually fought back against the disgusting sexual harassment of them by the late Fox News CEO Roger Ailes, who was finally fired and paid millions more than they were to go away. He did it not just because of sexual appetite but because he had the power and he could. He liked the fear he created in them as they knew he had their careers in his hands.

I have not seen it nor plan to, but from reports from women whose views I've used in this bit, who have seen the movie (don't think it is doing well at the box office?) they come out madder than ever. And really mad at privileged right wing women who won’t even call themselves feminists.

Topic: JOKE OF THE DAY
Posted: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 9:56:44 AM
Good pic, Drago.

Here are some more “Words of Wisdom”. Whistle

When one door closes and another door opens, you are probably in prison.

I remember being able to get up without making sound effects.

I hate when a couple argues in public, and I missed the beginning and don’t know whose side I’m on.

When I ask for directions, please don’t use words like “east.”

That moment when you walk into a spider web suddenly turns you into a karate master.

The older I get, the earlier it gets late.

My luck is like a bald guy who just won a comb.
Topic: Public Example of Misogyny that Affects All Women
Posted: Monday, January 20, 2020 11:32:55 PM
Y111 and Drago are correct about the word Feminism itself.

Yes, Egalitarians would be a better term. Should we try to change it? Whistle They change all kinds of words and meanings these days.

Charles Fourier, a utopian socialist and French philosopher, is credited with having coined the word "féminisme" in 1837. The words "féminisme" ("feminism") and "féministe" ("feminist") first appeared in France and the Netherlands in 1872, Great Britain in the 1890s, and the United States in 1910.

Stephen Murphy, Published poet, performed playwright & songwriter:
Feminism. Masculism. Misogyny. Misandry:

If Feminism seeks to promote the rights and equality of women and see them equal with men, the opposite of this would be Misogyny, which is the disrespect and oppression of women through word and action.

The comparative word for Feminism is Masculism, which has its place in some niches (male workplace paternity rights etc.) but isn’t quite the same as the age-long struggled for women to have equal rights and status as humans and not be perceived and treated as lesser beings. Anyone who feels the need to safeguard the rights of a strongly established hegemony (men) is probably barking up the wrong tree.

Misandry (the disrespect and ill-treatment of men on ideological grounds) is the counterpart of Misogyny and should be avoided as it is equally discrimination and there is no need for more negativity in an already negative world.

Topic: Our Extremely Royall Highnesses - Official Statement,
Posted: Monday, January 20, 2020 10:57:47 PM
Excellent article, Drago. Another reason why the UK press is behaving that way now and will not change. Brought on by themselves in the first place by printing “stuff” that is litigation worthy or by hacking.

I also read an article about the pettiness and jealousy coming out of the palace to the UK media as the investigator in your piece mentioned. The article I read said that Meghan was labelled a diva when she said the smell of the old church had to be camouflaged for the wedding. I laughed when I heard that because last summer I went with my brother one afternoon to see his Trinity Anglican church because it was celebrating its 150th year. I smelled mold as soon as I walked in and after five minutes I was coughing and sneezing and left quickly. Old buildings ARE moldy and smelly for anybody.

::::

Anyhow, and so it begins in Canada. First opinion writers and then the Toronto Star editorial speculated about how Canada might have to pay for security (I doubt it but even so only 3 cents a day per person was the determined figure. I have no idea how they arrived at that figure.)

Then today I was surprised the Toronto Star printed an article by a free lance writer out of Vancouver, BC. She compared Harry to Charles II, Edward VII and Meghan to actress Nell Gwyn. She made Gwyn's commercialism unsavoury in great detail, making sure to spell it out that she considered Gwyn to be a gold digger. Title - “For a Modern Prince, Harry operates like kings of old”. All because apparently Harry told a Disney exec Meghan would love to do voice overs.

Of course the article omitted the part where the money Meghan earns goes to charity!

She also accused Harry of trying to control a critical press. lol She said it was just as they stifled criticism of Nell Gwyn, the king's main mistress.

I was surprised because The Toronto Star is probably one of the few sensible Canadian papers left. (not owned by Republican American hedge funds as many are and thus are told what to say) I considered writing a letter to the editor but didn't.

The Star actually still does investigative journalism and does try to make sure they keep to their ethics daily.

Then CTV News shared the statement by Meghan's father about it being a shame she walked away from every girl's dream. There were tweets condemning this action by CTV and comments saying we don’t want UK type tabloids to start in Canada.

I hope at least our press leaves them alone once the drama calms down. I doubt the move will stop the UK press.
Topic: JOKE OF THE DAY
Posted: Monday, January 20, 2020 7:39:29 PM
If you’re sitting in public and a stranger takes the seat next to you, just stare straight ahead and say “Did you bring the money?”
Topic: Public Example of Misogyny that Affects All Women
Posted: Sunday, January 19, 2020 4:11:57 PM
Y111 wrote:
Hope123 wrote:
It is not misogyny or hatred to try to influence others, but if they try to shame others into being anything other than they wish to be, then that is controlling.

I don't quite understand what hatred has to do with seeing someone as inferior and wanting to control them. We see cats and dogs as inferior but that doesn't mean we hate them.

Hatred is probably more likely to be found in women for men if they see them as their oppressors throughout history.


That statement is probably logical.

But feminists are not usually misandrists. That is a common misconception.

People who hate men are called Misandrists. Sort of different from Feminists. :)

This article is written by a man.

https://www.itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/12/reasons-people-believe-feminism-hates-men/

Yes, there are a minority of women who hate all men just as there are a minority of men who hate all woman. The man who mowed down 14 people because they were women at the Polytech University in Montreal, Canada, in 1989 is an example of misogyny carried to the extreme. His suicide note blamed feminists for ruining his life. These days there is a group who call themselves Incels, who attack women because they can't connect with a woman and get them to like them so they blame the women instead of themselves.

I'm not aware of the opposite where women hate men so much they attack them but it could happen. If there are examples, I'd be interested to know about them.

Canada's Horrible Massacre of Women


Even Romany who has experienced terrible brutality by one man, who had to move out of the country to get away from him, does not hate men. She has brought up two great sons. She has many male and female friends. She does hate it when either sex acts in ways to support misogyny or those who support it and even act upon it.
Topic: Public Example of Misogyny that Affects All Women
Posted: Saturday, January 18, 2020 9:54:17 PM
FounDit wrote:
Hope123 wrote:
Let's be clear. This thread is not meant as hostility towards individual men! Or ALL men. It was an attack on the media for policing “correct” female behaviour to keep women in their place.
And yet your answer was: MEN - governments, corporations, media and churches run by men. Even though you added women in your OP, when I asked you about it, you only said "MEN", as if women had absolutely no say in how women behave.

Taking one word out of context is how you twisted it to try to say I meant ALL men. There was a whole paragraph explaining WHICH men.

You completely overlook the fact that throughout history, so many of the significant things done were done to either please or impress a woman, or women. Both sides have to be acknowledged. Oh, sorry. That's how I think. Feminists don't seem to see anything but victim-hood.


Baloney on your victimhood. Feminism means equality, NOT special treatment.


It is just a fact that it's a man's world. There's even a song with that title. It is not always laws or rules that make it so, but opinions spread by media and just accepted. Often it is subtle, and handed down from generation to generation. This thread was meant to be a discussion by both men and women so that women readers from around the world can see how past traditions from a "man's world" can be changed by a change in attitudes of individual women. How individual awareness can make society as a whole have a more impartial-to-gender outlook or status. One voice at a time.
I have no argument with that.

FD's moral outrage that men could not possibly want to control women in spite of most cultures today being patriarchal, all the history of women fighting for equality that has not happened completely yet, and the few - of many - examples I mentioned of current practices doing just that is definitely the opposite to those facts. My personal TFD example goes on the list with all those other examples I mentioned - it is not a one off. Sorry to ruin your favourite objection to a single individual as it was just given as a further example. I guess you missed all the other examples?
Yes, along with all of the examples you omitted of the influence women have had in history on the men in their societies.

Falsely interpreting what I said so that the words mean what you want and not what I said seems to be a habit you can't break, FD. I said "Men" while going on to mention and explain which men - those with a voice in the media, those in power in general, and governments in general run mostly by men - not ALL governments and ALL men. You added the word “all”. Simply because when I asked you who "policies" women, you said all of them in that one word: MEN.


It is just a fact that with a few exceptions, it is mostly men in power around the world. (In the States - old white men. Just look around the table in photos and see how many women and diverse ethnicities you see.) I also later mentioned women who just accept the status quo.

Color is irrelevant,

that's why it is in brackets.

although I know those of you on the Left see the world through race-colored glasses.


This is new for you. Lefties, according to you, are too fearful to see with rose coloured glasses. Whistle

BTW - “Is it misogynistic to ask women to behave correctly?” assumes what behaving “ correctly” is and who it is that is doing the asking. So thus the question answers itself.
No it doesn't. Women have a tremendous influence on other women, so if influencing other women is done by women, does that count as misogyny, since misogyny is the hatred of women?


To be perfectly clear - Misogyny by either men or women saddens me.

So if a women seeks to influence the behavior of another woman, that saddens you? Is that only when the influence is something you disagree with? Would it be misogyny if she influenced another woman to be good to her husband, children, society, by following the norms of that society? What if they are deemed to be good norms?


Women do indeed compete with, may not support other women, even attack them or shame them to validate their own choices. If you have any more facts to support why this might be mostly to control them, I'd be happy to hear them. But the consensus usually is that it is more competition, jealousy, a wish to validate their own opinions, and pettiness than hatred of their own sex. It is not misogyny or hatred to try to influence others, but if they try to shame others into being anything other than they wish to be, then that is controlling. Some women don't want to marry, or have children or be good moms, and that is their decision and none of anyone else's business.



Therefore I incorporated the answer with the next question of the idea of it being men and women in society who for whatever reason just go with the status quo of men being stronger and thus in charge. From Adam and Eve forward.

People do have choices about following religion, but it is the pervasive subtle concepts from those and many sources that unaware people absorb - especially when the media shapes it that way.
[color=blue]So everything is the fault of the media? Women and men in society have nothing to say about it? Or is it only the men in media that are guilty?



Again the word “ everything” similar to “all”. No. Complicated issues are not black and white or boiled down to one reason. The topic was that the media shape opinions to help create misogyny by controlling women. Policing correct female behaviour to keep all women in their place - the difference between treatments here just made a good example.



Topic: Public Example of Misogyny that Affects All Women
Posted: Saturday, January 18, 2020 9:23:27 PM
FounDit wrote:
Lotje1000 wrote:
Hope123 wrote:
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/meghan-markle-kate-middleton-royals-culture-war/604981/

Interesting points.

"Policing correct female behavior keeps all women in their place"

When you watch for it, yes, this happens all the time and women are sometimes as much to blame as men.


Thanks for the article, Hope. It's very telling how society and the media leap on public figures like that, painting a target on them and using them to make statements on how (not) to behave. Policing the behaviour of women this way, limiting their lives like that, is toxic.
Megan is a member of the Royal family, so British society has developed a code of behavior for them that applies to no one else. That is just a fact. It has nothing to do with society in general. You all are taking one extreme example and applying it to everyone. It doesn't fit everyone. But is seems to help in playing the victim game.


Not a logical argument.

So adult women not wanting to be told what to do and how to do it, is just a “victim game” to you. Bet if it were men being told how to behave - as in Lotje's story example - it would be a different story from you. (LOL, Just got to the end - it WAS a different story.)




We need more articles like this one, asking questions and shining a light on how society polices women, forcing them into a corset of expectations and pretending it's meant to offer them support.
All societies have rules, laws, customs, traditions, and religious guidelines for behavior. They do not apply just to women but to everyone in the society. The idea that only women are "policed" is silly.


Not silly.


I recommend reading the essay "Grandmother Spider" by Rebecca Solnit. It has telling insights, such as:
Quote:
When I was young, women were raped on the campus of a great university and the authorities responded by telling all the women students not to go out alone after dark or not to be out at all. [...] Some pranksters put up a poster announcing another remedy, that all men be excluded from campus after dark. It was an equally logical solution, but men were shocked at being asked to disappear, to lose their freedom to move and participate, all because of the violence of one man.

As well they should. Just as it would be silly and illogical to ask all women to obey some rule simply because one woman behaves badly. But logic seems to have become an orphan in this movement.


You missed the whole point on purpose - Women WERE asked to behave differently because one man behaved badly. Women ARE told to dress differently and how to behave because some men can't resist temptation - which is ridiculous.

Ever read about rape trials and what prosecutors do to the victims?
Topic: Public Example of Misogyny that Affects All Women
Posted: Saturday, January 18, 2020 9:06:58 PM
FounDit wrote:
Lotje1000 wrote:
Amazing. Such a short thread and we already have victim blaming and the "not all men" diversion.
Just for my own amusement, I'll attempt a rational dialogue.
No one here has blamed the victim, and it is certainly true that "not all men" engage in the behavior described as "policing" women, so it certainly isn't a diversion. It's a fact.


Guess you missed this re it often being the behaviour/fault of the abused, not the abuser:

Taurine wrote: “As to the husbands beating their wives, the domestic abuse has often its source in women's behaviour, as it is often woman who shares with strangers and with all possible family members alike, rumours and accusations against their husband in order to get leverage in the expected ensuing court battle.”

Nobody said “all men and only men” try to control women. Some men do make laws to control women and do try to control their partners, but most men in their private lives in the “west” don't. The problem is in the attitudes in general accepted by both sexes that men are stronger, superior, more intelligent, and SHOULD automatically have control over women. And that women's lives should be subjugated to his - but that is gradually being changed by BOTH men and women in many countries.



I only need the following to complete my anti-feminists argument bingo and win another toaster. Please provide:

- "We no longer need feminism, women already have equal rights" and its subset "I'm a woman and I don't need feminism"
To be treated as equal is right. To demand special treatment for being female or a victim is not.


Correct re demanding special treatment for females, if they did indeed demand special treatment. Women don't demand special treatment. Asking to control their own lives is just what men take for granted. In fact many of them demand to pay their own way and open their own doors. What they want is to make their own decisions without being shamed for not being the traditional woman of yesteryear.

Don't know what you mean that victims shouldn't demand “special” treatment. How should victims be treated, exactly? If you are a rape victim, male or female, how should you be treated?


- "You shouldn't complain, the women of X country have it far worse"
You should complain about treatment that isn't right, but it is also true that women in other countries have it far worse.

- "Feminist just hate men"
Some certainly appear to do so, but that can't be said as a blanket statement for all women who want to be treated fairly.
- "Men get abused too"
This, too, is a fact.


BTW - Kate is being smart in accepting the life she bargained for and in making sure she gives the same appearance as the rest of the royal family. I rather suspect William is just her husband in private! But she has a different personality than Meghan and is not being treated the same way by the media as, for whatever reason, they are treating Meghan. Meghan might have done the same if the treatment had been fair. I don't blame her and Harry for getting out.