A Crash Course in Feminism Mk. II (or, why everyone should be a feminist)

[Nabterayl]

I think it's spot on to observe that this is fundamentally a young person's problem. Of course, adult men sometimes still fall into this trap, but I am willing to bet that's mostly adults who never got over it as teenagers.

To relate this back to patriarchy - a teenage guy receives plenty of signals that one of the key indicators of his transition from boy to man is his ability to attract women. If one accepts this premise, then it follows if he is unable to attract women:

1. Not a good man.
2. A good man, surrounded by better men.
3. A good man, surrounded by bad women.

Most guys aren't very ready to admit that there's something wrong with them, especially in the teenage years when there's so much identity-building going on to begin with. So identifying the problem as #1 is rare. #2 is equally unpalatable, unless you twist it to say that those manlier men aren't really better than you, because they're clearly scum - even if only you can see it. That would work, and bonus identity points that you're such a better judge of character than everyone else! And #3 is also an easy out.

[Kaptain Badrukk]

#2 is equally unpalatable, unless you twist it to say that those manlier men aren't really better than you, because they're clearly scum - even if only you can see it. That would work, and bonus identity points that you're such a better judge of character than everyone else! And #3 is also an easy out.

I assume we're using the misogynistic + patriarchal definition of manlier?
Seriously though, Women are attracted to "what the individual is attracted to" and so are men.
It's just that when a man dates a woman who cheats on him, or treats him like dirt he's a "nice bloke" and she's "a (insert slur here)".
When a woman is attracted to a jackass it's because "women are attracted to *******s" which is a nicely sexist way of saying "women are idiots".
It's a sexist double standard there for all to see.

Wolfie
Me and EG had the statistics debate a long while ago, and I used a lot of evidence and derived statistics from that evidence to argue my point. EG's statistic is also a US one and it's worth noting (as the US has a shockingly high violent crime rate), where I used UK statistics (who still have an unacceptably high violent crime rate, but it's lower).
We argued for a good long while, but ultimately as you also pointed out, it doesn't matter if someone uses a slightly dodgy statistic because ultimately 1 person going through it is too many.

[eldargal]

I thought the number one cause of death was heart disease...

For men, yes. Guess how many media outlets are willing to come and say 'the leading cause of death for men is heart disease, the leading cause of death for women is men?'. Plus women don't count as people anyway so obviously heart disease is the important one...

I've seen women date people that I would label as scumbags. And I've seen women who dated people who turned out to be scumbags (whereupon they were generally dropped). I think, honestly, the the vast majority of "women only want scumbags" perceptions come from guys who are unable to understand that (i) the fact that you think another guy is scum does not make him so, and (ii) the fact that women sometimes date scumbags before figuring out that they're scum doesn't mean that women want scumbags.

Basically this. You also get superficial women going out with superficial men (nothing wrong with being superficial) and then boys who wouldn't appeal to those women on account of not being superficial assuming that 'all women' like that sort of man. It really comes back to this idea that women are some sort of hive mind, that we all like the same things and think the same things because we aren't proper humans like men.
Also a lot of men who are scumbags can do a really good job of pretending not to be a scumbag while courting.

[Kaptain Badrukk]

For men, yes. Guess how many media outlets are willing to come and say 'the leading cause of death for men is heart disease, the leading cause of death for women is men?'. Plus women don't count as people anyway so obviously heart disease is the important one...

Source please EG, I'm curious but can't find one.
All the statistics out there put the leading causes of all of non-age related deaths (leading cause regardless of gender) as heart disease, followed by other diseases, with violent deaths WAY WAY WAY down the list even in many of the VERY nasty places. But they're all also published by people like the W.H.O etc, who aren't that great at being reliable outside of their specific fields.
Now the leading VIOLENT cause of death for women globally, that is men no matter where you look.
It's also the leading cause of violent death for men though, so there's that.......

EDIT;
Correction, dementia and alzheimers are pretty much a draw with heart disease in women (in fact they were higher in 2012!).

[Wildeybeast]

Basically this. You also get superficial women going out with superficial men (nothing wrong with being superficial) and then boys who wouldn't appeal to those women on account of not being superficial assuming that 'all women' like that sort of man. It really comes back to this idea that women are some sort of hive mind, that we all like the same things and think the same things because we aren't proper humans like men.
Also a lot of men who are scumbags can do a really good job of pretending not to be a scumbag while courting.
]

I think it also ignores the fact that women are just as capable of being thoroughly unpleasant people as men are by reinforcing the stereotype that all women are virtuous creatures who need saving from nasty men so they can end up with Prince Charming.

[Gotthammer]

I think it also ignores the fact that women are just as capable of being thoroughly unpleasant people as men are by reinforcing the stereotype that all women are virtuous creatures who need saving from nasty men so they can end up with Prince Charming.

On that subject:

[Mr Mystery]

Currently enjoying my new surround sound by watching the Star Wars Bluray collection.

And it's got me thinking about the forthcoming new films.

You see, the original trilogy was fairly important for actresses. Consider Leia. Princess in peril. The era it was filmed in, normally she would have been all feak and weeble. Instead, we got a something of a badass, who was just as capable of fighting her way of of a difficult situation as her male compadres.

Yet from there, it seems to take something of a backwards leap.

Deleted scenes for the battle of Endor show two female pilots. Yet only one made it into the final cut, and her lines were redubbed to be a bloke (she's the one who stacks it into the super star destroyers bridge). There were also various alien pilots (Mon Cal and a Sulustan) who were never seen on screen.

Then fast forward 16 years, and The Phantom Menace. Padme. Oh. Oh dear. Bit of a wet lettuce really. She has her moments, but throughout the prequel trilogy just seems to get weedier and weedier (though Clone Wars somewhat redeems her character). TPM? Breaking into her own palace, and leading the charge. Nice! Attack of the Clones - Yeah. Bit of dakkka, but mostly there to make Anakin all angsty. Revenge of the Sith? Wow. I get that she's pregnant, but what a wuss.

Which is a shame, on account of the early promise of the saga.

So, is there a petition or campaign or some such to have this suitably redressed in the next Trilogy?

[eldargal]

I think it also ignores the fact that women are just as capable of being thoroughly unpleasant people as men are by reinforcing the stereotype that all women are virtuous creatures who need saving from nasty men so they can end up with Prince Charming.

This is part of the 'women aren't proper human things'. Women aren't supposed to have their own taste in men or specific desires or even character flaws which lead them to choose men which other men may deem undesirable.

With JJ Abrams and his record with Star Trek if we see non-white males with stubble doing anything of note in the films I would be pleasantly surprised. He turned Star Trek into a white man love fest for ****s sake.

Deleted scenes for the battle of Endor show two female pilots. Yet only one made it into the final cut, and her lines were redubbed to be a bloke (she's the one who stacks it into the super star destroyers bridge). There were also various alien pilots (Mon Cal and a Sulustan) who were never seen on screen.

Honestly kind of relieved, having the token females killed off is almost as bad as not having them in the first place in my opinion. You have a zillion male pilots, kill one more of them off and let the women ****ing survive for once. There were three women with speaking roles in ROTJ, Leia, Mon Mothma and Oola (who spoke Huttese but still...) and she gets killed. They killed off one third of the female speaking presence in the film and off the top of my head I can't hink of many non-speaking women in the film either. The bloody comics did the same thing, killed off the first and only female Stormtrooper while allowing two completely bland and uninteresting stubbly white broody male characters survive.

[YorkNecromancer]

Browsing the Statuesque Miniatures website, and just found these:



[url]http://statuesqueminiatures.shop033.com/p/8774376/sma012-heroic-scale-female-heads.html[/url]

Here's the size comparison:



Totally getting some come payday.

[Necron2.0]

Deleted scenes for the battle of Endor show two female pilots. Yet only one made it into the final cut, and her lines were redubbed to be a bloke (she's the one who stacks it into the super star destroyers bridge).

Actually ... not quite. There were scenes of female pilots cut, and the one A-Wing scene kept was dubbed over, but the pilot crashing into the Star Destroyer was not the female pilot. There were two A-Wing pilots shown in the film, one male and one female. The male pilot was played by the actor Hilton McRae, and it was his A-Wing seen crashing into the Star Destroyer.