| THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016). |
|---|
1) Are morals subjective? |
|
Of these factors, which do you feel play the largest part? Why? |
Your heritage, your upbringing, your environment, things you are exposed too, etc. And the puppet dances |
I'm just like my Mom. Now that I have a house I realize how much like my Mother and Grandmother I am but that's a good thing. |
I don't think morals/ethics are ingrained or inherited for the most part. I think that genetics helps to shape ethics, but doesn't supply them. Culture is the biggest factor in ethics, of course. What other creature spends so much time worrying over right or wrong? |
It is interesting to think about morality/values in the same way - as something which is the persuit of the leisure class rather than something which is neccessary to life on Earth. |
Im sure there is some validity to her point, and out modern media i think fuels our drive to screw... they way i see it, if im poor and hungry...fucking seems like a great way to pass the time. |
Your point about AIDS is well taken tho. Hmmm... I think the concept behind her diatribe (well in the rest of the article anyhoo) was that we are spoon fed these 'truths' about male needs for promiscuity/infidelity being 'natural' and yet her experience pointed to that maybe these 'truths' are in place to foster our patriarchal society rather than because they are implicitly true. And that the idea that 'sex sells' may not be as much of a truth as a marketing idea. I am not bound to her views as true or false but I do think what she brings up is an interesting idea. |
nevermind. this thread is gone. trace redeemed himself in my eyes on another thread. let's talk about 3rd wave feminists. particularly Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards. everytime i hear them speak i want to kill. they sound like uneducated mall rats. Maleism. First wave. Starts here. men are getting jacked. |
who are these women you speak of? are they columnsist somewhere on the web? |
now they're leaders of the feminist third wave. they wrote a book. search amazon. i heard them on NPR last night. "uhm, ok, like, you know?" jesus. |
im gonna puke there should be a fourth wave aimed at destroying the third wave before it gets too obnoxious and sponsored by the gap. |
Excerpt from Chapter 3-- Feminists Want to Know: Is the Media Dead? 6. Only über-Victims Need Apply Women's magazines often run and even win awards for investigative stories featuring real women, and for highlighting issues pioneered by feminists: custody battles, domestic abuse, HIV, workplace discrimination, and sexual assault. Underneath this good journalistic cause lies a litany of rules dispensed to the writer to ensure the correct victim. She must be good-looking in order to be photographed and appear in the magazine without scaring off advertisers or otherwise lowering the beauty quotient, and the victim's story must meet certain requirements of hideousness. This, then, is the über-victim, a woman, (or man) who has truly been victimized, but whose story has been cosmetically enhanced for the magazine, or selected for maximum shock value with the idea that readers are unable to identify with cases that are too grubby or too complex; in other words, too real. The problem with the demand for über-victims is that it doesn't let readers relate to the real victim. Marie Claire, a women's magazine owned by Hearst, for example, recently asked Jennifer to write a story about middle-class women and domestic violence. The original assignment was simply to find a woman to profile who had her own career while she was with her abuser, so that financial fears could be removed from the list of her reasons for staying. Soon, however, new requirements were added: One woman I tracked down was too old at age fifty. Two women in their late twenties weren't married to their abusers, so the editors feared that readers wouldn't take the relationships as seriously. They maintained this even thought one woman lived with her abusive beau for five years, the other had a child with hers, and this magazine targets readers who are single. One married victim, who remained with her abuser for nineteen years, worried the editors, too¾she seemed ``too pathetic'' and, therefore, not ``relateable.'' Many of the women were taken out of the running because they never called the police or went to the hospital, even though, as one woman put it, she was always too terrified to dial 911 when he had a knife to her throat. It seemed that not one of these real women was the right type of victim. After the appropriate über-victim has been discovered, she can't just be photographed as herself, whether she favors Lycra or Lands' End. Instead, she must be made into a neutrally stylish Condé Nast drone who resembles the women modeling clothes in the pages of its magazine. This Calvin Klein/J. Crew transmogrification obscures the real-life human being the magazine professes to profile. For example, Lisa Tiger, a Native American AIDS activist, was photographed for a 1999 article in Glamour about women with HIV. Wearing a sleek gray sweater and demure skirt with pumps and shiny manicured nails, Tiger was made to look exactly like the half-dozen other women with whom she was photographed. Normally, Tiger wears running shoes and jeans. The editors could argue that they were simply dressing everyone formally and using a stylist so that the pictures looked beautiful. But there is a difference between enhancing a subject in order to bring out her personality and organic beauty and making over a subject in order to assimilate her into the culture of the magazine. The implication of the Lisa Tiger makeover seems to be that a more casual-looking Indian girl with HIV wouldn't be taken as seriously or deserve our sympathy as much as the Ann Taylor version. In fact, what's probably behind the scenario is the advertisers, who don't want to be near (or even in the same issue as) anything depressing or political. |
Though women who are 'typical of their generation's enthusiasm shown through a love alternative music, vintage hip-huggers, and late night bonding sessions with their friends over drinks' make me want to puke as well. Now who's commodified? Or is that what the media says when describing these women to make them less intelligent and more able to be understood as 'pretty'? I don't know, I've never heard of them so I'm honestly asking. I did hear Kathleen Hanna on NPR who quickly convinced me she was tedious. I do not know what wave of feminism she is but am almost positive she enjoys alternative music, vintage clothes and late nite bonding. |
the average media man can't even feed himself. |
The excerpt from the book was good. Very valid points and probably could be used equally as well as an argument for what's wrong with journalism. The only feminists I have a problem with are the ones without a sense of humor. |
If they were dealing with a more journalistically credible publication like The New Yorker, Utne Reader, The Advocate, or hell Ms. then they might make more of a point here. But shit, Marie Claire? Give me a fucking break, that magazine is DESIGNED to give readers minimal seriousness and maximum lipstick advice. |
i've been using this phrase more and more often "Just because you're a woman doesn't mean you don't have to act like an adult" this pisses most women off. but then, i only say it when women are acting like children. pouting, whining, refusing responsibility because it is icky or involves lifting something. |
|
i used to do performance art w/ a feminist collective. it was strictly victim city. all they could talk about was how women were so downtrodden. women would never be able to accomplish anything on their own, because men were evil & wouldn't "let" them. as long as men are on the planet, women won't be "allowed" to make any worthwhile achievements. these feminists were all mothers, too, & treated their sons very brutally. one simply referred to her young son as "the perpetrator" because that's all men are--perpetrators of rape. they often talked about how they wished they could trade in their sons for daughters. one woman wept & apologized publicly for having brought another man into the world. i did some other projects w/ a different feminist group. they were such weenies. all they did was whine about how they "didn't feel safe". they didn't feel safe if a man was in the audience. they didn't feel safe if a man looked at them. they didn't feel safe if the air conditioning wasn't running correctly, or if the microphone was malfunctioning. they didn't feel safe on the street, but they didn't feel safe inside their homes, either. & they were pro-censorship. nobody was permitted to come out & speak plainly. for instance, these women didn't have periods...they were being "sisters of the moon lodge" instead. one day, i was getting a little raunchy in my speech, & somebody whirled around & accused me of bringing "testosterone" into the room because i dared to talk about sex. they also thought it was awful that i sometimes used to help break down bands...road crew type of work. they thought it was awful that i loaded heavy equipment. why should a woman have to do that when there were strong men standing all around to help her? these so-called feminists never once saw the irony of their statements. the latest trend seems to involve all these lipstick chicks who call themselves "feminists" while still being soccer moms & housewives & all that groovy shit that hardline '60s feminism threw in the trash decades ago. these women want to be "feminists" because it's oh-so-modern...but they want to make it clear that they can act like ladies, too (no need to scare off the menfolk, after all). the message seems to be that they can "have it all"--i.e., they can suck dick on demand, be domestic slaves, play unpaid nursemaid to a bunch of whining brats & then go out & work a bullshit secretary job for less than any man in the office makes. let's hear it for progress! as for academic feminism, it seems worthless. the dignified bleatings of a bunch of ivory tower feminists don't mean a damn thing to the woman on the street. another feminist critique of a virginia woolf novel contributes nothing to the cause except dead air. the real feminist revolution, as i see it, hasn't even happened yet. it won't involve a bunch of smart-talking university Ph.Ds babbling on about the horrors of the patriarchy. it's going to be ugly & it's probably going to involve weaponry. for instance, wouldn't the middle east be a much nicer place if all those veiled women got up on the same day, walked in & cut their men's throats? supposing every battered redneck woman did the same? the best way to dispose of a tyrant is to KILL him. until women become capable of dismantling their attackers in the most brutal & efficient way possible, they'll keep right on being victims. but no. plenty of women will let a man batter her...& then she'll fucking go BACK to him, time & time again (in which case, she's worth about as much to the feminist cause as he is). i know of a woman whose man fried her face in hot grease because she talked back to him. she forgave him because she had "deserved" it. i know of a woman who was being beaten up on a public street. a local man tried to help her. she ended up attacking him because he was interfering w/ "her love life". it's a fucking epidemic around here. as long as women allow this to happen, they're fully responsible for their own goddamn misery. the patricarchy may suck, but women are just as bad. there's a world of vacant bovine bitches who expect favors just because they have a cunt. men expect lifelong & unconditional use of that cunt just because they gave it a wedding ring. women want to blather on about feminism, but by god, they want ROMANCE & their man had damn well better cough up the flowers & diamonds, or else. whatever. people of all genders need to jettison the stereotypes & start over. |
Oh, I know. It's because men are stupid. |
dont be such a hard ass margret so like um....are you uhh married yet or what? |
|
|
|
It has always been her choice. If she says she wants to go back to work, then so be it. Until then, the financial responsibility is on my shoulders, which is fine. I help out a lot around the house because all day when I am at work, she is taking care of our 17 month old who weighs in at 15 pounds, but is running around the house destroying everthing. There is no way I would ever take that job. But, I know Erin is the best person to take care of Micki, and I would not trust anyone else to take care of her because of the special needs her prematurity dictates. |
look at all the dorks in the software industry with great-looking wives. would they ever land women like that if they were working at hollywood video? |
|
|
baby i got what you need well you know i got it all i'm asking is for a little respect when you get home |
|
i shower the woman who washes my underwear.... wait! i don't wear underwear WAIT!! i do the wash!!!! shit can you use the flat shoes please |
|
um, what about me? |
|
|
|
|
http://www.about-face.org/ I found the add on the bottom funny |
I don't know what i think about that. Some of the conclusions they are drawing are stretching the matter. Some are seemingly valid, but i wonder if they aren't bringing them more to light...by simply pointing out what most would have never thought of. i think what the photographers shoot and the companies use the ads for are often two different things. |
|
|
|
|
Is it immature to believe in soulmates? Patrick, Trace: are you married to your "one and only"s? I just got through reading Preacher book 2, in titled "Until the end of time." as in, "I will love you until the end of time." There's an honest question for Trace. Now that I think about it, I really am curious. being of college-age, and a liberal artist (whatever that means), I hear women (occasionally men, but mostly women) swooning oh-so-often about how "he/she/it is the one I've always wanted/needed/dreamed of/waited for." And as I'm sure many (most) of you will point out, that's hormones, pop culture, society, the media talking. So do we just dismiss the concept out of hand? I don't especially believe in Fate, or Destiny, so I can't believe that there is one person I'm "meant" for. But is there one person with whom I "click" perfectly, according to our personal and private definitions of "click?" How do you tell? Personality is dictated by genetics, upbringing, and situation. Hell. that line of attack won't work. This, of course, has nothing to do with Gee, and I hope she won't take it that way. Current status: me: 1, soulmates: 0. I guess that's the point of dating, though? I don't do so very often. Still rather traumatized with paternity and my near brush with marriage. Is it possible to be scientific with regards to the question "does (person x) have a soulmate?" is it better not to be? I may be in love with someone right now. Is there a line between being in love and "being *soulmates*?" a more perfect love? The person in question: I don't know. Is there a time when you just know? *bang* that's it? I'd love to hear Nate theories on love, but I don't think he'll be forthcoming. *shrug* Well, that was one pointless spew. Thanks, J. Over to you, Gee. |
|
As far as being with your soul mate, it is just something you feel |
There are too many people on this earth to fool yourselves into thinking the one you are with, such as myself, Trace, agatha, dave, nate etc is the one and only one you could ever love in such a way. |
You're full of faeces. |
My one and only WHAT, I'm not sure... |
love bunny? hootchie cootchie poo? |
slippery sphincter technician? Grace Kelly impersonator? |
|
I feel like such a boob. |
|
And I resent being called smooth-lettered. I'm a sharp serifed sunofabyatch! |
|
|
|
And you don't have to wear the mask. Just talk dirty politics to me. Say words like "bush," "dick army," and "barney frank" and I'm all yours... |
1800-fuckaroo 1800-catogasm |
|
|
everyone should call 1-800-big-beef at some point. |
|
It was quite sweet really. You would have made a lovely couple. Antigone's nice and tall, you could have worn heels. |
|
|
|
I am not photogenic, though. And I have no comment to the previous question, moonit |
(I'm going to start charging a translation fee soon - English into Trace and Trace back to English a specialty) |
|
Get home safely. Clock the trip: you'll be needing to make it again you know. |