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

Profile: sufall
About
User Name: sufall
Forum Rank: Newbie
Gender: None Specified
Statistics
Joined: Friday, August 14, 2015
Last Visit: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 10:09:43 AM
Number of Posts: 13
[0.00% of all post / 0.01 posts per day]
Avatar
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: Public Example of Misogyny that Affects All Women
Posted: Monday, January 27, 2020 4:50:41 AM
Lotje1000 wrote:
Epiphileon wrote:
Stripped of all other attributes, (please pardon the crassness but it serves to make the point) men and women are basically egg layers and sperm squirters. From an evolutionary perspective, it is women who have the real power they are the ones who determine whose genes get passed on.


I think it's an interesting point you and sufall are making, especially in light of how pregnancy and sex are treated today. There seems to be a sense of entitlement attached to it all, where some men feel entitled to have sex with woman, and where the result of that act should be theirs. (Not counting, obviously, the very valid concern that in a committed relationship, ideally you'd want your spouse not to cheat.)

Sex, a woman's body, a woman's choice are all treated as inferior to a man's needs. Evolutionarily, this can be the continuation of the man's genes, but I don't think that matters that much anymore. I think this genetic need grew into a cultural expectation.

In this day and age, it all boils down to power. The idea of a woman saying no or saying yes are both historically so stigmatised, you have to wonder why. A woman saying no is dismissed, almost like a child. Her opinion doesn't matter, she doesn't know what she's saying, she wants it really and is just playing hard to get. All of that presumably to preserve a man's pride/power. A woman saying yes is even more threatening. It puts her at the level of a man, making decisions enthusiastically. She must be villified for having desires. And if she has the power to say yes, it automatically means she has the power to say no and that's dangerous.

(Mandatory disclaimer that, obviously, this kind of abuse is not solely perpetrated by men. Women are guilty of it too.)

This is not new. This power play is everywhere. People's desires and autonomy are ignored in dogmatised religion, in racism, in politics because a person without a voice is a person without power. And when this gets institutionalised, people start to internalise and perpetuate it themselves. Besides, it's easier to ignore a person than to listen to them and try to change something.

And this all applies very neatly to Romany's mention of the Ohio bill. Those in power impose a ridiculous bill that means everyone loses, no matter what they do. Why? Because it's easier to stick to your guns and morality than it is to empathize with victims (and that means everyone, women, their doctors and their families) and tackle the difficult issues.



"the very valid concern that in a committed relationship, ideally you'd want your spouse not to cheat"

Yes, and it is always the woman who loses in case of cheating:

The woman cheats, the man finds out (maybe in the past there were instances where the man couldn't be sure, but today the man can know for sure thanks to paternity testing), and the woman loses whatever the man used to provide for their offspring, she loses access to the man's resources.

The man cheats, has offspring with other women, and all of these women lose somewhat, because the man will now have to provide for a larger number of offspring who will all have diminished shares of the man's resources.

You are right, it really is power play...

As for women having their own voice and power, that is never forgiven.

"...a person without a voice is a person without power. And when this gets institutionalised, people start to internalise and perpetuate it themselves."

But regardless of the power play and the internalised cultural expectations and all the brainwashing, the bill about ectopic pregnancies is still increadably ignorant. How come some lawmakers ignore such a clear medical fact?

Cultural expectations can and do change, albeit slowly (and not always in a positive/constructive direction).

And with Epiphileon's post above, proper education seems to be the only way forward...


Topic: Public Example of Misogyny that Affects All Women
Posted: Monday, January 27, 2020 4:45:40 AM
[quote]
Epiphileon wrote:

...not only would that portion of the population have to fully acknowledge that evolution occurred, but that modern human behavior at both the individual and cultural level are the result of evolutionary forces. Unfortunately, that information is not widespread, nor part of any regular primary education system's curriculum that I am aware of.


Yes, sadly so... No proper education on evolution (and many other subjects unfortunately). In today's world of antibiotic resistant bacteria and ever-mutating viruses I really cannot understand how people fail to see evolution happening right before their eyes...
I know about the book "Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins, but I haven't read it. (I did read "The God Delusion" and much enjoyed it.) Thank you for the recommendation about the second edition; it certainly went on my must-read list.

[quote]
Epiphileon wrote:

...a significant portion of the population coming to an understanding of the true nature of homo sapiens and use that understanding to overcome behavioral strategies that are no longer adaptive; whereas, it appears that there are forces at work which are informed by this understanding and are using it for the manipulation of the population for the benefit of a minority.


Such manipulation is sad and dangerous - our species may never reach maturity? I was so surprised to learn that "sapiens" actually meant intelligent, wise. We like to think we are smart, but are we really?
Topic: Public Example of Misogyny that Affects All Women
Posted: Monday, January 27, 2020 3:01:52 AM
Lotje1000 wrote:

Romany wrote:
...The particular example which I gave got trampled into the dust of misdirection - but I would still like to have heard how you & Lotje felt about hearing of that Bill?


Hi Romany
....As for your example of the bill, I hadn't heard of that one yet. It's ridiculous. I googled it and the reasoning seems to be that if they just discard the ectopic pregnancy, doctors face being charged with abortion murder and can be jailed for life. Which just makes the whole thing even more ridiculous! If they don't remove the ectopic pregnancy, the woman will likely die. And if they remove it, they risk getting sent to jail because reimplanting is impossible.

People deciding this sort of thing - in the face of being told it's impossible to do - are so wrapped up in their own morality that they ignore reality.



It seems to be one case of ignorance leading to another one...
1 Charging doctors with jail for life for removing ectopic pregnancy. Jail someone for life for this? True ignorance.
2 Requiring doctors to reimplant ectopic pregnancy in uterus. Unbelievable ignorance.
Topic: Public Example of Misogyny that Affects All Women
Posted: Monday, January 27, 2020 2:38:43 AM
Hi Epiphileon,
Thank you for the clarification.

And what I understand is that the idea that the invention of paternity testing could (maybe in time) help in getting rid of the need of men to subjugate women is void. If the main idea is to make women reliant on men so that men can force a choice of gene selection on women is still relevant and will not go away... This is sad...

There still is some hope, of course, because as you noted "nothing in individual human behavior let alone cultural behavior is this simple" - cooperation is always better and more efficient than suppression, and cooperation is a key feature in human evolution, right?
Topic: Public Example of Misogyny that Affects All Women
Posted: Saturday, January 25, 2020 6:06:00 AM
Epiphileon wrote:

...From an evolutionary perspective, it is women who have the real power they are the ones who determine whose genes get passed on. I am fully aware that it has not always been that way and in some cultures still largely is not today, but this is what I wonder. Has the subjugation of women been because of this very fact?
...


Correct me if this is not what you want to discuss:
Subjugation of women has been somehow caused by women determining (at least for most of the time) whose genes get passed on? And this does not make evolutionary sense because women's choices ended up being unfavourable for them - that is, ended up in their subjugation?

Well, if I understood your point correctly, here is one thing to keep in mind:
Assuming women do get to choose whose genes get passed on, the survival of the resulting offspring in the wild (i.e. in those times when we were cave-dwellers as well as today when the competition for well-paid secure jobs is no less fierce) requires not just the women's but also the men's coordinated efforts - i.e. the men should help raising their offspring if they want to make sure of their survival. For that to happen, one can safely assume that the men would need to be sure that the offspring they help raise are actually theirs. And this is how you end up with subjugation of women by men who need to be sure that the offspring they look after is really theirs. But luckily today we have paternity tests and therefore there is no more need for women being subjugated by men merely for paternity concerns. Men may still have have other concerns though...

Topic: Trump and Syria: looking back
Posted: Saturday, October 19, 2019 3:14:20 AM
Bloodybeef, you missed the Iraq intervention in 2003 by the US, joined by the UK (and others if I'm not mistaken). Not so calm in the '00s either.
Topic: Advice for learning English Vocabulary
Posted: Tuesday, August 27, 2019 5:39:46 AM
An English teacher of mine once had given us this piece of advice on how to choose books to read: Do not read a book which has more than five words you don't know per page. Well, this was for choosing books to read on summer holidays when I was at pre-intermediate level. (And one could set a different limit for new words per page.)
Now I simply read the book twice - the first time without looking up the words I don't know, trying to guess their meaning from the context; and the second time using a dictionary. This strategy works best with non-fiction; it is not fun reading a crime novel, or any novel, a second time in the same week/month.
Interestingly, I am usually able to guess the meaning of words easily when I am reading a modern novel, but not so much when I am reading a biography or a book on WWII.
Hope this helps...
Topic: A funny quote about English spelling
Posted: Friday, March 22, 2019 12:10:54 PM
thank you Jyrkkä. for me, the fun part in learning a language is proverbs, idioms and phrases. maybe someday I give Finnish a try :)
and thank you too, lazarius. I do play the spelling-bee, though directly on the dictionary page - and it really helps.
Topic: A funny quote about English spelling
Posted: Friday, March 22, 2019 9:43:22 AM
it turns out it is not Finnish; the cue is from the Latin script above the jaunty one:
"International Chalu Union (ICU) is the largest Malayalam comedy platform, founded in 2007."
from their website http://chaluunion.com/aboutus

and back to English spelling, regardless having all those inconsistencies is fair or not, it certainly made things difficult for me and I guess for other foreign students alike - especially those whose native languages have completely different sets of influences than that of English.

this is frustrating at times and seldom funny, but what can you do, you sweat when in sauna!

adapted from the saying "hamama giren terler" in Turkish (hamam is Turkish bath) - I wonder if there is a similar saying in Finnish...
Topic: A funny quote about English spelling
Posted: Wednesday, March 20, 2019 9:10:09 AM
Romany wrote:

What amused me was the quote by Merriam-Webster - whom many people look to as being knowledgable about the English language.

"That quote, ascribed to Andrew Jackson, might have been the motto of early English spelling."

I actually did let go a great bark of laughter at that statement - its funny on about three different levels! (Though rather sad that Merriam-Webster let it go through!)


Dear Romany,

Can you please explain what exactly amused you? Being a non-native speaker, I fail to see what is incorrect in the quote - even after 40 years of learning and using English...

Thank you in advance.

P.S. Maybe I should have started a new topic in the grammar section, but I'm new in posting on the forum and have no idea how to use a quote from one topic to start a new one, and also not sure if that is even possible.