Everyday sexism

[paddoboy]

Black people put up with being called "boy" for DECADES. Does that make it OK to do it today?

I don't particularly call Black people boy, but often when arranging a school reunion I refer to the old boys. Is that OK?

Not my problem at all. It was theirs - then and now.

And not the problem of the two female Ambulance staff that attended my Mrs either.
It's called making an Olympus Mons out of a pimple on my arse!!

 

[DaveC426913]

This is an excellent read, for anyone in doubt about the pervasive nature and pernicious effect of sexism. It's pretty tongue-in-cheek so it's entertaining too.

https://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans/cs655/readings/purity.html

What conceivable harm is there in such beloved phrases as "No white is an island," "Dog is white's best friend," or "White's inhumanity to white"? Who would revise such classic book titles as Bronob Jacowski's The Ascent of White or Eric Steeple Bell's Whites of Mathematics?
...
There is nothing denigrating to black people in being subsumed under the rubric "white"-no more than under the rubric "person." After all, white is a mixture of all the colors of the rainbow, including black. Used inclusively, the word "white" has no connotations whatsoever of race.

 

[billvon]

I don't particularly call Black people boy

I didn't ask you that. I asked if it was OK to call them that today.

You keep saying over and over that calling people "love" is just fine. That's the comparison I am asking about.

And not the problem of the two female Ambulance staff that attended my Mrs either.

As far as you - a very unaware male - know. That does not mean they do not have a problem with it. It is far more likely that they are putting up with it - as Wegs described.

 

[paddoboy]

I didn't ask you that. I asked if it was OK to call them that today.

You know my answer to that.

You keep saying over and over that calling people "love" is just fine. That's the comparison I am asking about.

No comparison at all...one is obviously meant to be insulting, the other, a natural reflex action when addressing a person one does not know [although also a good friend] and practised and used by both sexes.

As far as you - a very unaware male - know. That does not mean they do not have a problem with it. It is far more likely that they are putting up with it - as Wegs described.

Did you read what I said? It was the two female officers [one young the other older in her 40's] that addressed my Mrs as Darling, and me as Love.
If anyone was going to have a problem with it, it was me and the Mrs. We don't neither of us. In fact like with the two bar attendants at the club, I wrote to the Ambulance association here, and praised their efforts.
Please billvon, try and get it right. OK?

 

[billvon]

You know my answer to that.

No, I don't. You keep saying "it's OK if everyone does it" and "it's OK if they don't seem to take offense." So does that apply to 'boy' too? Or does that only apply to things you usually say?

No comparison at all...one is obviously meant to be insulting

Not at all. Some people in the South have gone their whole lives using it. They don't mean anything by it. They're not racist. No one has ever told them it's offensive (at least not in their insular community.)

So why is it OK for you do take that approach, but not OK for them?

If anyone was going to have a problem with it, it was me and the Mrs. We don't neither of us. In fact like with the two bar attendants at the club, I wrote to the Ambulance association here, and praised their efforts.
Please billvon, try and get it right. OK?

Again, you're doing the "if black people can call each other n****r why can't I?" thing.

 

[James R]

paddoboy:

Funny that..it's what q-reeus wanted me to do also.

Why should I care what Q-reeus wants you to do?

Not true...You made a false remark according to your own silly bias and so called standards.

Excuse me?

You wrote:

"Must be a female Alien...can't make up her bloody mind!"
​

There's nothing false or silly in pointing out that this is a sexist comment. It clearly applies the false stereotype that women are bad at making up their minds. In the process, it seeks to belittle women. The implication is that you - a man - aren't burdened with the deficits that mere women have.

Don't you dare accuse me of making false remarks, when I directly quote you. I have made nothing up. What you wrote is on the record for all to see.

I note, also, that you consider my preference that women be treated with respect to be a "silly bias" that does not burden your conscience in the least. That's just further evidence of your oblivious self-entitlement, right there, if any more was needed.

Are you threatening to ban me James because of the insults you have thrown my way?

Excuse me?

Rather than getting all hoity toity about how terribly insulted you feel, why don't you apologise to the women who were insulted by your throw-away mindlessly sexist comment?

You mean yourself and Bells?

I was quite clear. I wrote "other moderators". Work it out for yourself.

And with regards to flying off the handle, its you scraping the bottom of the barrel and unjustly accusing me of sexism when you know SFA about it, other then what I have told you.

All I have to do is to look at what you choose to write here. You put it all on the record. What else is needed to draw a reasonable conclusion?

The adds on TV are generally a reflection of reasonable behaviour along with humour if you are able to recognise it.

You should stop taking your behavioural cues from sexist advertisers. Who made them your role models?

If there are sexist advertisements - and there still are, though thankfully advertisers are gradually waking up, although change for the better is slow - that doesn't excuse your behaviour.

I think you tried to put up the "stupid man" advertisement genre as an excuse. If there are sexist ads targetting men, then women are fair game for your sexist comments. Is that how your argument goes? What the hell is wrong with you to think that is a good excuse?

Frigid...never used it ever!
A few times actually and every time it has been taken in good humour.

I bet the women you insulted with it were thrilled

Are you serious? Why would I address a man as Love? Why would I address a women as matey?

Okay. Let me get this right. You feel free to address women who are strangers as "love" and men as "matey". Does it strike you at all as overly familiar to address a woman who you have just met as "love"? Never mind whether it's overly-familiar to address a man you've just met as "mate".

In the case of the man, you're implying that he ought to be your friend, even though he doesn't know you. But in the case of the woman, you're implying that she should either be your lover, or perhaps subordinate to you - similar to the position of parent and dependent child.

Since I doubt you've ever thought consciously about what those forms of address imply, it has probably never occurred to you that they might be unwelcome or inappropriate. Probably, if somebody were to call you out on them, you'd tell them to lighten up, love.

I'm here to tell you that addressing women you've just met as "love" is presumptuous. It can even be creepy. That is not to say that every woman will take it that way. Like you, the people you interact with have grown up in a culture. Maybe they are habituated to such forms of address and the implicit power-plays at work in them. Maybe they have learned just to suck it up and accept that this is how things are. None of that excuses your choices, especially now that you know what's wrong with them.

 

[James R]

The title of the thread is of course an attempt by James to create an impression that casual everyday banter with strangers generally is a form of sexism, according to his standards and bias.

That is a strawman, as any intelligent reader will immediately see. I have not generalised to "casual everyday banter". I have been very specific about my objections to your sexist comments and attitudes.

What is wrong with you?

You ought to be apologising to women in general for your sexist attitudes. Instead, you're going out of your way to tell lies about me, while doubling down on your sexism. Again.

 

[James R]

As a high school teen, I had a job working for an electrician(nights and weekends).
The foreman habitually referred to his wife as "the old ball and chain".
Was that misogynistic?

Possibly. It would depend on their relationship, to some degree.

Did he refer to her as such while she was present, or only while she was absent? Did he call her that to her face, or only use the term behind her back? The answers to those questions might give you a hint as to his attitudes.

 

[James R]

Are women more indecisive than men?

What do you think?

 

[James R]

It was the two female officers [one young the other older in her 40's] that addressed my Mrs as Darling, and me as Love. If anyone was going to have a problem with it, it was me and the Mrs. We don't neither of us.

You asked your wife about that, did you? Or are you just assuming, and presuming to speak for her?

The same problem is still there. If the women who addressed you in that way were being inappropriate, that in no way justifies your inappropriate behaviour, whatever it might have been.

If you like being called "love" by women, that's up to you. If it doesn't bother you in any way to be addressed that way, again that's up to you. It doesn't make it right for them to make the assumption that you'll be fine with it, though. Nor does it make it right for you to assume that just about every woman you meet will be fine with your overly-familiar style of address.

People who know each other can agree to address each other how ever they like. If you like your wife to call you Twiddly-Snookums and she likes calling you that, it's nobody's place to take issue with that. The problem comes if you assume that nobody you meet is going to mind if you address them as "my little dumpling" or "lovey" or "cutey" or "girly" or "woman" or "wench" or whatever.

 

[James R]

That's OK Dave. But my point stands that the casual banter between people generally, is not in any way shape or form sexist, in the true meaning of the word.

Obviously, it depends entirely on the content of the "banter". There's no possible way you can say that no banter is ever sexist.

I probably agree that sexism is still somewhat ingrained in certain aspects of society, and actually probably ironically, more among the younger generation then my generation.

I don't think you're qualified to spot sexism. You've given no signs you can recognise it.

And of course while by a good majority women are the victims of such sexism, it also goes both ways.

Does that make it okay, then, if men are sometimes the victims of sexism?

We in Sydney have had two separate cases of first grade NRL players being tried for rape. Both juries in both cases have been now dismissed for not being able to reach a verdict, with two retrials now being processed. I havn't a clue who is right or who is wrong, or whether both players are actually guilty, or whether there is doubt as far as consent goes, and neither does anyone else...other then the two players, and the women involved.

What on earth is the relevance of two rape cases to this thread? Rape is not on a par with everyday sexism. Rape is sexual penetration without consent. (On the other hand, we could discuss "rape culture", but given where you're at I don't think you're equipped for that discussion.)

The cases you mention have been widely reported in the press. One would hope that the juries had the best possible access to the relevant evidence for and against guilt in both cases. You and I have, at best, read some media reports of the trials. While we might have vague opinions on the likely guilt or innocence of the accused men, neither of us has access to all the evidence that was presented in both trials. Clearly the juries in those cases couldn't reach verdicts, which suggests either that the evidence was controversial or perhaps that certain members of those juries were unable to look at the evidence objectively. The standard of proof in a criminal trial is also very high: proof has to be "beyond reasonable doubt".

Whatever the case, I have no idea why you brought up these cases in the context of this thread about your sexism. Was there a point, or is this just useless distraction off the topic?

In saying all that I can again vouch that in no way am I sexist as James is trying to paint me and the depths he has sunk to in attempting that.

Do you think you're the best person to judge whether you're sexist? Do you think it's up to you to decide?

I'm an old bastard but still pretty fit for my age, and recently on a bus trip into the city, for one of my reunions, a middle aged women got on the bus which was full, and I stood up and offered her my seat, despite young people around me of both genders not being too concerned. The woman was staggered by this and motioned me to sit down again, which I refused until she took the seat. We had a limited conversation in which she expressed pleasant surprise that such courtesy still existed.

Is that anecdote supposed to demonstrate that you're not sexist? How?

I love Irish jokes, mainly from my best mate, yes he's Irish Aussie and tells them whenever we get together.

Do you tell your Irish jokes to Irish strangers you meet, assuming they will find them as hilarious as you and your mate do?

I also had another mate who has since passed away, who was diagnosed with bone cancer and had lost his hair due to chemotherapy. Irrespective he attended one of our reunions when another of us pulled out a scurvy old red wig for him. he laughed his arse off and put the wig on, wearing it for the rest of the night. He was also off the piss due to liver problems 10 years earlier, and finally was given 2 months to live. First thing he did was down to the local for a few beers and breaking his 10 year abstinence. He was dead in 7 weeks.

I don't see any relevance of that anecdote.

Why am I telling you all this? Besides being all relevant in that we should all be able to laugh at ourselves, you are certainly one of the members who does maintain a position of decency and decorum, unlike others including mods and someone I do respect.

I see.

"Oh, did I really just say that all women are incapable of making up their minds? What a silly old duffer I am. Obviously I meant nothing by it. Lighten up, everyone, while I think of another sexist joke to entertain you all with!"

I would change if I were to be convinced Dave. I'm not convinced though. To use an analogy, its like banning all motor vehicles because a few hoons display recklessness and the accidents they can and do cause.

You're not convinced that any woman could be offended when you say that women can't make up their minds. Therefore, you're going to continue to say that to and about women. You might cause some minor accidents (somebody might take offense now and then), but that's an acceptable price to pay for the good laughs you'll get out of your sexist jokes.

After all, it's not like you're a rugby player who raped somebody. A little sexist joke or three is nothing for anybody to worry about.

Is that how it works?

 

[James R]

Sorry billvon, arse up...It was an Ambulance Office that addressed me as Love. But yes I also often use the phrase and will continue.

"I'll bloody well do what I like. Take that an stuff it up your arse! I don't care what any of you (women) think."

 

[James R]

wegs:

Women over the centuries, have largely been taught to laugh off comments from men, whether strangers or otherwise. We’re supposed to just let men call us whatever they like, lest we appear rude or prudish.

That said, I’ve “known” you from our conversations on here for a few years paddoboy, and while you don’t offend me per se, I can see where a stranger might take your “love” comments as sexist. Why use any term at all when talking to strangers of the opposite sex?

Just curious.

Good questions, wegs. I wonder if paddoboy will deign to answer a woman who asks him questions? Or will he ignore you?

It is clear that he has no intention of changing his behaviour, so he must think he has good reasons to continue.

As an aside, I think that the term misogyny often gets interchanged with sexism. When I think of the term misogyny, I think of Jeffrey Epstein or Harvey Weinstein, men who were intimidated by women and felt disdain towards them. Misogynists have a desire to hurt women - all women - they have a difficult time seeing women as being good for anything other than baby making and serving them. Sexists may see women as the “weaker sex,” but they don’t have a disdain or hatred of women. If they do, I would classify them as misogynists. Although, sexist men can discriminate against women for jobs etc and so the damage can be just as bad.

I agree. A misogynist has a conscious or unconscious hatred of women, or of women's power. It's usually all about power and entitlement for those men. Sexism, on the other hand, doesn't have to come from a place of hatred. It can just be an ingrained, unthinking attitude that somebody (usually a man) has as a result of his upbringing and/or acculturation.

In other words, all misogynists are sexist, but not all sexists are misogynist.

 

[James R]

Michael345:

From memory it was common and from one lady I know, for ladies to call men love

It used to be common for white people to call black men "boy". Common means it's fine to do it, does it?

I still get called love. Am I now required to act offended because some twat has reclassified language to suit their whatever?

Your reaction to other people's behaviour directed at you is entirely up to you. What ought to concern you more is how other people react to your behaviour.

If it is your habit to address women as "love", would it bother you at all if a woman you'd just met and addressed in that way acted offended? Would you, like paddoboy, tell the little woman to "lighten up" and get over it, because you'll bloody well address her however you like?

I guess if you want to use this thread to out yourself as a sexist pig, in solidarity with paddoboy, you've come to the right place. But are you sure that's what you want to do?

 

[paddoboy]

"I'll bloody well do what I like. Take that an stuff it up your arse!

That's exactly what I'm doing James. Just as most in the real world.

 

[paddoboy]

I guess if you want to use this thread to out yourself as a sexist pig, in solidarity with paddoboy, you've come to the right place. But are you sure that's what you want to do?

Trying to provoke James?
I see through your methodology and another. Shame on you.

 

[paddoboy]

If it is your habit to address women as "love", would it bother you at all if a woman you'd just met and addressed in that way acted offended? Would you, like paddoboy, tell the little women to "lighten up" and get over it, because you'll bloody well address her however you like?

Not true James. I have already informed you that if anyone did object [and no one ever has] I would cease. OK?
conspiracies that you dream up not withstanding.

 

[paddoboy]

My last reply to your accusations James.......
I made you an offer in post 13....here it is again...

I see those two bar assistants every week, and get on well with both as well as all at the club. You doubt that? Easts Leagues at Bondi Junction James, Spring street. I'll be there in the Legends bar around 1800 Friday night.

Where are you James? Perhaps we should have a beer in my Man cave in Maroubra[women always allowed] and talk to my Mrs, my friendly next door neighbour, then we'll go up to Easts, and you can explain to all why you believe I am a sexist pig as you would like to portray to the forum.
I'm quite serious James...I'll even pay half your fare. Consider it, if as you so pretentiously say, you are interested in truth, justice and fairness, and reality.​

 

[James R]

paddoboy:

That's exactly what I'm doing James. Just as most in the real world.

Trying to provoke James?
I see through your methodology and another. Shame on you.

Not true James. I have already informed you that if anyone did object [and no one ever has] I would cease. OK?
conspiracies that you dream up not withstanding.

Did you even bother reading posts #46, #47, #48, #50 and #51?

What's wrong with you that you can't bring yourself to address any of what I wrote there, instead restricting yourself to responding to a post that I addressed to somebody else?

You need to face up to your own behaviour, not make apologies for michael.

My last reply to your accusations James.......
I made you an offer in post 13....here it is again...

I see those two bar assistants every week, and get on well with both as well as all at the club.

So what?

Your sexism is okay because you're friendly with two workers at your local club?

Why do you keep bringing up all these irrelevancies, while ignoring almost all of the substantive points I've put up for your consideration?

Stop trying to distract and address the matters that have been raised. You started off getting all huffy over my initial one-line comment pointing out your sexism, but now you apparently won't touch any of the reasons I have put to you with a barge pole. Why is that?

Why don't you respond to wegs' question?

Where are you James?

I'm in Victoria. Are you telling me you're going to shout me an interstate flight etc. just to prove that people at your club think you're a good bloke? You'd do better to apologise to all the women you may have offended in the past, and promise to try to be better in future.

 

[James R]

I missed this:

Not true James. I have already informed you that if anyone did object [and no one ever has] I would cease. OK?

Why should they need to have to object? Why wouldn't you just act in a way that removes the possibility that they could object? In other words, why not just do the right thing in the first place?

Do you have any understanding of why a woman might not object to strange man calling her "love", even if if it makes her uncomfortable?

I don't think you are capable of putting yourself in somebody else's shoes. You're way too self-absorbed. If a woman went out of her way to avoid you, I don't think you've even notice.