NationStates Jolt Archive

I always wondered why more muslim men don't have their genitals cut off while they sleep. :p

Edit: This thread is mine! *charges rent*

men in arab society dominate woman, and make them cover themselves head to toe right?
question, if men could make woman wear bikinis all the time, wouldnt they, instead of head to toe in black, therefore this proves that arab society is not domnated by men :p
this is a semi serious post

men in arab society dominate woman, and make them cover themselves head to toe right?
question, if men could make woman wear bikinis all the time, wouldnt they, instead of head to toe in black, therefore this proves that arab society is not domnated by men :p
this is a semi serious postIf the women wore bikinis, the men wouldn't have dominance for long...after all, a lot of times when a man sees something nice in a bikini he immediately starts thinking with the little head (unless he's gay), and quickly forgets that not everything the hottie wants him to do is in his best interests...

A less-serious consideration is that not all women look good in a bikini :p

Perhaps these arab men of which you speak have been raised from birth to think that women should be dressed in burqas, while men from other cultures, such as your own presumably, have been raised from birth to be attracted to women in bikinis.

You make the mistake of assuming sexism in one culture displays itself the same way in other cultures.

Fergi America;13361069']
A less-serious consideration is that not all women look good in a bikini :p

Why is that less serious? ;)

Perhaps these arab men of which you speak have been raised from birth to think that women should be dressed in burqas, (...)

So, do you think Arabs find women in Burqas attractive? Because I have satelite tv and about 400 arab tv channels with only scantily clad women advertizing phone sex to Arabs the world over, but mostly in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, United Emirates, etc.

It's cos they value modesty over partial nudity. I don't claim to understand it, myself, but there you go.

this thread fails.

men in arab society dominate woman, and make them cover themselves head to toe right?
question, if men could make woman wear bikinis all the time, wouldnt they, instead of head to toe in black, therefore this proves that arab society is not domnated by men :p
this is a semi serious post

no

men forcing women to dress in a certain way, ANY way, proves that men are dominating women.

most moslem women are happy to dress in a modest manner. their husbands are not forcing them to dress in a certain way; their religion is.

So, do you think Arabs find women in Burqas attractive? Because I have satelite tv and about 400 arab tv channels with only scantily clad women advertizing phone sex to Arabs the world over, but mostly in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, United Emirates, etc.

1. Are the men who are the target market for phone sex ads the same ones who impose burqas on arab women? I doubt it, nor did I imply that they were.

2. If you read my post more carefully, you would see that I said "these arab men...think that women should be dressed in burqas, while men from other cultures...have been raised from birth to be attracted to women in bikinis,". Do you see the difference?

I was pointing out that just because women in these particular arab cultures are oppressed differently than their western sisters, does not mean that they are not oppressed in another rmanner.

Making people do something = forcing them to do it. Forcing people to do something = dominating them.

Whether you are forcing women to stay covered or get uncovered, you are still forcing them, i.e. dominating them.

So your semi-serious suggestion fails, seriously.

Perhaps these arab men of which you speak have been raised from birth to think that women should be dressed in burqas, while men from other cultures, such as your own presumably, have been raised from birth to be attracted to women in bikinis.

You make the mistake of assuming sexism in one culture displays itself the same way in other cultures.

um, hi i am an arab *waves*

I always wondered why more muslim men don't have their genitals cut off while they sleep. :p

Edit: This thread is mine! *charges rent*

*enters lengthy suing with LG* over my dead body

most moslem women are happy to dress in a modest manner. their husbands are not forcing them to dress in a certain way; their religion is.

no where in the koran does it say woman have to cover themselves from head to toe, i think it was just the hair

Fergi America;13361069']
A less-serious consideration is that not all women look good in a bikini :p

most countries that enforce the burqa, are oil rich and can afford plastic surgery

most countries that enforce the burqa, are oil rich and can afford plastic surgery

State sponsored plastic surgery?

Fergi America;13361069']A less-serious consideration is that not all women look good in a bikini :p

I have never really seen the appeal, its mostly just single 40 somethings trying to relive someones youth

a woman in uniform on the other hand...*thumps leg*

most countries that enforce the burqa, are oil rich and can afford plastic surgery

and Hollywood has shown this to be a good thing?

I have never really seen the appeal, its mostly just single 40 somethings trying to relive someones youth

a woman in uniform on the other hand...*thumps leg*



and Hollywood has shown this to be a good thing?

oh so it's you i saw in that jail cell?:D

State sponsored plastic surgery?

no personal PS, since they make good money in Saudi, my aunt make like double what she earns back home

Perhaps these arab men of which you speak have been raised from birth to think that women should be dressed in burqas, while men from other cultures, such as your own presumably, have been raised from birth to be attracted to women in bikinis.

You make the mistake of assuming sexism in one culture displays itself the same way in other cultures.


Not exactly. Arab men ARE attracted to women in Bikinis, naked women, provocative women, Victoria's Secret Ads, the works... which the folks at Google know very well from tracking the most popular Web searches from Arab lands. In fact, they are more pre-occupied with porn on the web than westerners- presumably because that's the only way they see it.

BUT, it is a culture which assumes that any woman who appears that way desires sex, immediately, from whichever men happen to be available, and their culture is built around sexual jealousy- a holdover from the desert nomadic tribal days, when tribes were all assumed mutally hostile, and of all the resources a man had to guard carefully, the reproductive capability of his tribe's women was the most important. (Male reproductive capability, on the other hand, can be replenished indefinitely, there is no possible shortage.)

So, the logic goes, to carefully protect your tribe's reproductive capability, you must guard against any sign of promiscuity on the part of the women. At all costs, NEVER let them attract a man, especially a stranger, unless it is part of a carefully arranged exchange that YOU control. At the same time, if a strange man makes any advance towards your women, you must react swiftly and violently, not only against the man, but against the woman, because she disobeyed you by flaunting herself without your permission. An example must be set, or the others may be tempted as well.

The burka is part of the control. Hide your women, so strange men will not be tempted to take them from you. That is the cultural origin.

This may seem, well, barbaric. And it is. But nomadic herd animals adopt the same pattern, generally. And the fact is, a nomadic human tribe that uses this breeding strategy will quickly dominate or destroy competing tribes that do not.

men in arab society dominate woman, and make them cover themselves head to toe right?
question, if men could make woman wear bikinis all the time, wouldnt they, instead of head to toe in black, therefore this proves that arab society is not domnated by men :p
this is a semi serious post

I think I know what you mean ...

um, hi i am an arab *waves*

So by the generalization you used in the OP, you dominate women and make them cover themselves head to toe. Right?

no where in the koran does it say woman have to cover themselves from head to toe, i think it was just the hair

Right, so "arab society" has nothing to do with what it says in the Koran. :rolleyes:

What you've done is characterise Islamic countries as Arab (Indonesia, Pakistan and Bangladesh, the three countries which have the highest populations of muslims, are not Arab countries). Then you've defined hijab as the full burqha, in order to show how it's "oppressive" but not "religious."

Ashmoria's post was the first to address seriously your OP, and you respond to a suggestion that organized religion is behind the burqha by demanding verses from the Koran? :rolleyes:

most countries that enforce the burqa, are oil rich and can afford plastic surgery

And now you're happy to jump on the hijack bandwagon. Still hanging onto the "enforcing the burqa" idea ... why not just say "Saudi Arabia" and be done with it, since Afghanistan or Nigeria "enforce" the burqa too, while most people (and particularly women) there are ... well, poor.

no personal PS, since they make good money in Saudi, my aunt make like double what she earns back home

Your aunt lives in Saudi Arabia? Does she feel oppressed, do you think?

EDIT: Oh, and how about Mott Haven's reply? Isn't that right on-topic? Or is it not ignorant enough for your tastes?

So by the generalization you used in the OP, you dominate women and make them cover themselves head to toe. Right?

not really, i'm jordanian the women tend to dominate the men more :p

Right, so "arab society" has nothing to do with what it says in the Koran. :rolleyes:, it does, but taken to an extreme

What you've done is characterise Islamic countries as Arab (Indonesia, Pakistan and Bangladesh, the three countries which have the highest populations of muslims, are not Arab countries). Then you've defined hijab as the full burqha, in order to show how it's "oppressive" but not "religious."
um if your are muslim you are considered arab by default

Ashmoria's post was the first to address seriously your OP, and you deal with it by demanding verses from the Koran? :rolleyes:
i demanded quotes from the Koran?

Your aunt lives in Saudi Arabia? Does she feel oppressed, do you think?
she lives in one of those walled off communites

And now you're happy to jump on the hijack bandwagon. Still hanging onto the "enforcing the burqa" idea ... why not just say "Saudi Arabia" and be done with it, since Afghanistan or Nigeria "enforce" the burqa too, while most people (and particularly women) there are ... well, poor.


i have never been to Afganistan or Nigeria, so i wouldnt know about them

Not exactly. Arab men ARE attracted to women in Bikinis, naked women, provocative women, Victoria's Secret Ads, the works... which the folks at Google know very well from tracking the most popular Web searches from Arab lands. In fact, they are more pre-occupied with porn on the web than westerners- presumably because that's the only way they see it.

BUT, it is a culture which assumes that any woman who appears that way desires sex, immediately, from whichever men happen to be available, and their culture is built around sexual jealousy- a holdover from the desert nomadic tribal days, when tribes were all assumed mutally hostile, and of all the resources a man had to guard carefully, the reproductive capability of his tribe's women was the most important. (Male reproductive capability, on the other hand, can be replenished indefinitely, there is no possible shortage.)

So, the logic goes, to carefully protect your tribe's reproductive capability, you must guard against any sign of promiscuity on the part of the women. At all costs, NEVER let them attract a man, especially a stranger, unless it is part of a carefully arranged exchange that YOU control. At the same time, if a strange man makes any advance towards your women, you must react swiftly and violently, not only against the man, but against the woman, because she disobeyed you by flaunting herself without your permission. An example must be set, or the others may be tempted as well.

The burka is part of the control. Hide your women, so strange men will not be tempted to take them from you. That is the cultural origin.

This may seem, well, barbaric. And it is. But nomadic herd animals adopt the same pattern, generally. And the fact is, a nomadic human tribe that uses this breeding strategy will quickly dominate or destroy competing tribes that do not.

hmm that makes sense, and it answers my orignal post, thanks! but where did you get all of it ? not that im doubting, but i would like to see something about a link ;)

not really, i'm jordanian the women tend to dominate the men more :p

You live in Jordan? Sorry to appear prying, but your vague assertions about "arabs" and "arab society" suggest a person of arab descent, living in a Western country.

it does, but taken to an extreme

Agreed, it does appear that Sharia law is based on the most extreme parts of the Hadith, hardly even on the Koran itself.

Which is why I'm perplexed by how you sheet any question about "religion" back to the text of the Koran. Wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that like in the Catholic church (or any organized religion), the imams are entrenching their own power by how they interpret the texts?

um if your are muslim you are considered arab by default

:headbang: If you're a secular arab (or at least not a fundamentalist), that is exactly the sort of false impression you should be opposed to. "Muslim is arab by default" is just as offensive as "arab is Muslim by default."

Here, look at this Wikpedia list (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_countries_by_population)!

i demanded quotes from the Koran?

Yeah. Look:

no where in the koran does it say woman have to cover themselves from head to toe, i think it was just the hair

she lives in one of those walled off communites

Well, that could be good. I remember in a previous thread, someone linked to an article about a Saudi shopping mall where hijab was relaxed. Seems that it's not so strictly enforced on private property ...

But, is it your feeling that your aunt lives in Saudi Arabia only for the wages, and feels oppressed by "arab society"? Or is she comfortable with having to dress modestly?

um if your are muslim you are considered arab by default

Fail.

Fail.
On the most ignorant level.

Fail.

On the most ignorant level.

Hey, kiddies! I pointed out that the perception is wrong, without having to be so rude.

I read* "um if your are muslim you are considered arab by default" to be almost apologetic, an admission that the OP used a bad generalization.

I guess it comes down to the meaning of the word "um." I use it to mean "I admit to being vague" ... sometimes posters use it to mean "I really shouldn't have to point this out."

* Note: not "wred." I still do read it thus.

1. Are the men who are the target market for phone sex ads the same ones who impose burqas on arab women? I doubt it, nor did I imply that they were.

2. If you read my post more carefully, you would see that I said "these arab men...think that women should be dressed in burqas, while men from other cultures...have been raised from birth to be attracted to women in bikinis,". Do you see the difference?

I was pointing out that just because women in these particular arab cultures are oppressed differently than their western sisters, does not mean that they are not oppressed in another rmanner.

You're funny. I find women attractive because they are, not because of a certain type of clothing. I just find it really hard to see the woman under the Burqa. Which probably is the point of the Burqa. Anyhow.

Are the men who impose Burqa the target market of phone sex ads? Definitely. Even if many of these men would never pick up the phone to call such a number, I can tell you that lots of these men watch such ads in lieu of porn. But that's beside the point. I was arguing the point that Arabs seem to find women in bikinis just as appealing as men from other cultural backgrounds do. As I said, my satelite dish capts at least 400 Arab Phone Sex Commercial tv channels, that's 400 x 24 hours of phone sex commercials per day aimed primarily at Arab men. All Arab men. It's just too many channels to only cater to a minute minority. All in all, I honestly doubt that the majority of Arab men prefers their women dressed in Burqas.

Now, if you are actually comparing Western and Arab societies, you seem to be forgetting that neither our religions, nor our laws impose bikinis on women. It is actually very common that religions impose some kind of veil or dress on married women, but since church and state are separate for the most part in Western states, such religious laws don't have much effect in Europe and North America.

If this is about sexism, then it should be noted that Arab societies aren't mysoginist because of the dress code they impose but because women are generally treated by the laws of sharia states like household property, and Burqas are only a way to secure that property.

You're funny. I find women attractive because they are, not because of a certain type of clothing. I just find it really hard to see the woman under the Burqa. Which probably is the point of the Burqa. Anyhow.

Are the men who impose Burqa the target market of phone sex ads? Definitely. Even if many of these men would never pick up the phone to call such a number, I can tell you that lots of these men watch such ads in lieu of porn. But that's beside the point. I was arguing the point that Arabs seem to find women in bikinis just as appealing as men from other cultural backgrounds do. As I said, my satelite dish capts at least 400 Arab Phone Sex Commercial tv channels, that's 400 x 24 hours of phone sex commercials per day aimed primarily at Arab men. All Arab men. It's just too many channels to only cater to a minute minority. All in all, I honestly doubt that the majority of Arab men prefers their women dressed in Burqas.

Now, if you are actually comparing Western and Arab societies, you seem to be forgetting that neither our religions, nor our laws impose bikinis on women. It is actually very common that religions impose some kind of veil or dress on married women, but since church and state are separate for the most part in Western states, such religious laws don't have much effect in Europe and North America.

If this is about sexism, then it should be noted that Arab societies aren't mysoginist because of the dress code they impose but because women are generally treated by the laws of sharia states like household property, and Burqas are only a way to secure that property.

my brain has been overwhelmed, i surrender, im only 16 give me a break,

I would say that it's mostly just a case that that's the cultural norm. If someone, whether they were female or male, went around naked, then people would be about as shocked as if an Arab woman went around in their own country dressed without covering their hair.

um if your are muslim you are considered arab by default


That's quite cool. I worked on a call centre with a white, (English), Celtic/Anglo (former C of E) chappy who converted to Islam.

I'm intrigued by this 'arab by default' thing? How do they handle that? Did he get a 'become arab' kit mailed to him, do you think?

BUT, it is a culture which assumes that any woman who appears that way desires sex, immediately, from whichever men happen to be available, and their culture is built around sexual jealousy- a holdover from the desert nomadic tribal days, when tribes were all assumed mutally hostile, and of all the resources a man had to guard carefully, the reproductive capability of his tribe's women was the most important. (Male reproductive capability, on the other hand, can be replenished indefinitely, there is no possible shortage.)

So, the logic goes, to carefully protect your tribe's reproductive capability, you must guard against any sign of promiscuity on the part of the women. At all costs, NEVER let them attract a man, especially a stranger, unless it is part of a carefully arranged exchange that YOU control. At the same time, if a strange man makes any advance towards your women, you must react swiftly and violently, not only against the man, but against the woman, because she disobeyed you by flaunting herself without your permission. An example must be set, or the others may be tempted as well.

The burka is part of the control. Hide your women, so strange men will not be tempted to take them from you. That is the cultural origin.

I'd like some evidence of this - although it may feel right I'm not so sure and a more common origin of outward displays come from class distinction and, I suppose, at its base, sexual attraction.

The tan is only a recent phenomenon of fashion as it showed one as having the money to travel overseas when flight became more accessible.

More traditionally, across most cultures, pale skin was seen as attractive as it implied you were not a working woman.

So I'd suspect that the veil was for this very reason, it kept a woman's skin white, it was a mark of wealth and was therefore culturally important in being seen as 'proper'. This 'properness' has now become entwined with tradition and bound up with all sorts of ties with chasteness and being lady-like.

Ironically, the veil may have been initiated by women.

I'm intrigued by this 'arab by default' thing? How do they handle that? Did he get a 'become arab' kit mailed to him, do you think?

The 'become arab' kit is very good value. There's makeup and instructions to make your eyes more arabic-looking, also a snake-charming kit and a CD to teach yourself to play the bongos.

men in arab society dominate woman, and make them cover themselves head to toe right?
question, if men could make woman wear bikinis all the time, wouldnt they, instead of head to toe in black, therefore this proves that arab society is not domnated by men :p
this is a semi serious post

Ah, but you forgot that in Islamic society, women are the property of men. And men can get quite jealous if another male (or even female, for that matter) eyes their offspring-producing property.
Hence the cover-up...

um, hi i am an arab *waves*

If this is true, then you should already be aware that the situation is more complicated than suggested by your OP:

men in arab society dominate woman, and make them cover themselves head to toe right?
question, if men could make woman wear bikinis all the time, wouldnt they, instead of head to toe in black, therefore this proves that arab society is not domnated by men :p
this is a semi serious post

Not exactly. Arab men ARE attracted to women in Bikinis, naked women, provocative women, Victoria's Secret Ads, the works... which the folks at Google know very well from tracking the most popular Web searches from Arab lands. In fact, they are more pre-occupied with porn on the web than westerners- presumably because that's the only way they see it.

Nowhere in any of my posts did I suggest that these men from different arab cultures were not attracted to scantily clad women. The very fact of the burqa's existence implies that men from these cultures have been socialised to view women clad in anything less than a burqa as promiscuous and sexual.

BUT, it is a culture which assumes that any woman who appears that way desires sex...And the fact is, a nomadic human tribe that uses this breeding strategy will quickly dominate or destroy competing tribes that do not.

I don't think that all nomadic tribes would use this strategy and find it successful, or else we would find evidence of polygyny in all hunter-gatherer societies. Yet we don't. I think it may also have something to do with population pressures and resource scarcity, such as found in the arabian deserts. This is just a guess, though.

You're funny. I find women attractive because they are, not because of a certain type of clothing. I just find it really hard to see the woman under the Burqa. Which probably is the point of the Burqa. Anyhow.

You, or at least most men, probably find women attractive for a whole host of reasons. Dress is one of them. In the arab cultures of which the OP speaks, the burqa is a method for others to control the expression of women's sexuality. Like you said, that's the point of the burqa. This shows that dress does influence how attracted people are to others.

...All in all, I honestly doubt that the majority of Arab men prefers their women dressed in Burqas.

You do realise that a man can want women to wear the burqa, and be attracted to scantily clad women at the same time, right?

Now, if you are actually comparing Western and Arab societies, you seem to be forgetting that neither our religions, nor our laws impose bikinis on women. It is actually very common that religions impose some kind of veil or dress on married women, but since church and state are separate for the most part in Western states, such religious laws don't have much effect in Europe and North America.

You are correct that neither religion nor law imposes bikinis on women. Instead, we have fashion magazines, men's magazines, Hooter's and other similar establishments, and other societal pressures that constantly give women several messages: the message that attracting men is the most important thing for a woman to do, and the message that women can do it if they look hot in a bikini, among others.

If this is about sexism, then it should be noted that Arab societies aren't mysoginist because of the dress code they impose but because women are generally treated by the laws of sharia states like household property, and Burqas are only a way to secure that property.

I agree that the burqa is merely a symptom of sexism. I think it gets a lot of debate time simply because it's a very visible difference between 'Western' cultures and 'Muslim' cultures.

You, or at least most men, probably find women attractive for a whole host of reasons. Dress is one of them. In the arab cultures of which the OP speaks, the burqa is a method for others to control the expression of women's sexuality. Like you said, that's the point of the burqa. This shows that dress does influence how attracted people are to others.

The burqa does that in a negative way, though, by trying to prevent random (unsanctioned) attraction.

You do realise that a man can want women to wear the burqa, and be attracted to scantily clad women at the same time, right?

"His" woman going out in public in the burqa, other women scantily clad or naked through the peep-hole of porn. Perhaps?

I'd like to make the point that the burqa and the far more common (largely symbolic) headscarf, are expected of women going out in public. In the privacy of their homes, women are not expected to cover up like that. The covering-up is to "protect" the women from the intentions of strangers.

Is that really so different from the situation in the West? I like to go swimming at the pool or the beach, so I see women in bikinis or (more commonly) one-piece bathing suits ... but on the street? In other people's houses? In workplaces? No, not really.

As a part of everyday life, Western women dress modestly for the most part. Red-blooded blokes might notice the ones in short skirts or body-fitting tops disproportionately, but the fact is that most women dress to partially conceal their shape. In a word, modestly. And no-one, least of all the women, is complaining that they are being oppressed by male expectations of modesty.

I agree that the burqa is merely a symptom of sexism. I think it gets a lot of debate time simply because it's a very visible difference between 'Western' cultures and 'Muslim' cultures.

But as I've said a few times now, most Muslims do not live in Saudi Arabia or the other countries where the burqa is enforced. Most Muslims live in non-arabic countries in fact ... even if Pakistan is counted as an "arab" country. This Wikipedia list of countries by Muslim population (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_countries_by_population) bears linking to again. Even if the census information it was based on is innacurate by a huge margin it shows the folly of characterising "muslims countries" as "places where the burqa is enforced" or even "arab countries."

The headscarf is far more widely worn, and often enforced in "Muslim cultures." Even if not by law, it is socially expected. Instead of repeatedly focussing on the far rarer instance of the burqa as exemplifying the sexism of Islamic culture, we should be very clear that it is the most extreme and egregious case of that sexual discrimination.

The burqa is not the norm in arab countries, nor in muslim countries. We should not fall into the OP's trap of defining "arab countries" as "women in burqas" and "western countries" as "women in bikinis." That is so skewed as to appear mischievous!

You are correct that neither religion nor law imposes bikinis on women. Instead, we have fashion magazines, men's magazines, Hooter's and other similar establishments, and other societal pressures that constantly give women several messages: the message that attracting men is the most important thing for a woman to do, and the message that women can do it if they look hot in a bikini, among others.

You do realize that fashion magazines, women's magazines, ads, tv commercials, strip clubs, and Abercrombie & Fitch catalogues are putting exactly the same pressure on men - that of looking good topless. Which men try to in order to attract women. So, in your opinion: is Western society mutually sexist? Wouldn't that make it ipso facto egalitarian?

"His" woman going out in public in the burqa, other women scantily clad or naked through the peep-hole of porn. Perhaps?

Thank you. I've been trying to communicate exactly that, but failed miserably!

You do realize that fashion magazines, women's magazines, ads, tv commercials, strip clubs, and Abercrombie & Fitch catalogues are putting exactly the same pressure on men - that of looking good topless. Which men try to in order to attract women. So, in your opinion: is Western society mutually sexist? Wouldn't that make it ipso facto egalitarian?

It is not 'exactly the same pressure'. In fact, it is not even similar. And that is because many western societies are not 'mutually sexist'.

Thank you. I've been trying to communicate exactly that, but failed miserably!

Lately. I've found myself becoming annoyed when people quote my posts and then begin to explain something to me as if I was unaware of it. This is despite the fact that the post of mine that was quoted does not imply ignorance of the subject.

That's quite cool. I worked on a call centre with a white, (English), Celtic/Anglo (former C of E) chappy who converted to Islam.

I'm intrigued by this 'arab by default' thing? How do they handle that? Did he get a 'become arab' kit mailed to him, do you think?

I know a lily-white, redheaded blue eyed convert. Will he be sent a pot of brown stain for his skin, hair and beard now?

Brown contact lenses?

men in society dominate women

There, fixed that for you.

Lately. I've found myself becoming annoyed when people quote my posts and then begin to explain something to me as if I was unaware of it. This is despite the fact that the post of mine that was quoted does not imply ignorance of the subject.

OK, I'll try not to do that. The freestanding rave style suits me better anyway.

OK, I'll try not to do that. The freestanding rave style suits me better anyway.

You had to go and do that. Be all understanding and stuff when I just got a nice fat ball of bitterness going.

You had to go and do that. Be all understanding and stuff when I just got a nice fat ball of bitterness going.

It's true, I'm as useful in a free-ranging debate as a condom-vending machine in a nunnery.

This thread has a distinct lack of goforwardness anyway, I can't think of much to talk about other than how dumb the Original Post is.

There, fixed that for you.Not every society. Modern European society is like that and so is some Muslim societies but not everywhere is.Hunter-gathering societies are very much egalitarian, where the women usually do different work from the men but are treated equally.

Lately. I've found myself becoming annoyed when people quote my posts and then begin to explain something to me as if I was unaware of it. This is despite the fact that the post of mine that was quoted does not imply ignorance of the subject.

No, honestly. You are funny.

Now: just to check whether I understood you correctly - because maybe there is some ignorance on my part that I was up to now fully unaware of: Did you or did you not say that naked women in magazines were the reason women are dieting, but naked men in magazines were not the reason men are running off to the gym. All of that presented without a shred of evidence... Well, at least you're pleased with yourself, I suppose, and that's most important in some types of people. We wouldn't want you to doubt your faculties of reasoning. (Which I am not implying you to be completely devoid of. Only, your argument lacked in demonstration, and I find that quite deplorable in a reasonable discussion.)

question, if men could make woman wear bikinis all the time, wouldnt they,

Not obviously so. Neither husbands nor fathers would be particularly inclined to endorse that arrangement.

Not obviously so. Neither husbands nor fathers would be particularly inclined to endorse that arrangement.

nor those who take seriously strange old religious beliefs about purity and shamefulness, that supposedly were delivered direct from the gods.

No, honestly. You are funny.

Now: just to check whether I understood you correctly - because maybe there is some ignorance on my part that I was up to now fully unaware of: Did you or did you not say that naked women in magazines were the reason women are dieting, but naked men in magazines were not the reason men are running off to the gym....snip useless stuff....

I said the reasons were not exactly identical. This is obvious when we see the extent of beauty and self-image issues surrounding women, and compare them to those of men. Obviously, women deal with these issues more often and more intensely. Another reason is that a man's livelihood and material success is rarely dependent on his looks because other men don't really care. Women find themselves needing to look good to impress men far more often to ensure their livelihood. In fact, there are so many ways in which men and women are treated differently in this context that it would be easier to list the few examples in which they are identical. I can't think of any.

I said the reasons were not exactly identical. This is obvious when we see the extent of beauty and self-image issues surrounding women, and compare them to those of men. Obviously, women deal with these issues more often and more intensely. Another reason is that a man's livelihood and material success is rarely dependent on his looks because other men don't really care. Women find themselves needing to look good to impress men far more often to ensure their livelihood. In fact, there are so many ways in which men and women are treated differently in this context that it would be easier to list the few examples in which they are identical. I can't think of any.

Well, modern culture is very health-oriented, which is a point of similarity. Men and women might not work out for exactly the same reasons, but the main reason is the health and stress-management one. That's pretty much the same for both.

For both men and women, regular exercise controls weight. Because of physiological differences, men become more visibly muscled. I think the fashion in what "looks hot" -- muscles on both men and women -- is quite soundly based in good health.

1. Are the men who are the target market for phone sex ads the same ones who impose burqas on arab women? I doubt it, nor did I imply that they were.

Men are hypocrites in every culture/society and Arabs are no exception. There is evidence that some of the 911 hijackers went to titty bars to get lap dances before killing themselves for Islam. Many gulf sheiks engage in these things out of the country while keeping their own women in a burqa.

Men are hypocrites in every culture/society and Arabs are no exception.

Oh, what a penetrating observation. Perhaps you'd like to explain why men are hypocrits? Not just give examples, I mean explain what element of masculinity causes hypocrisy ... and is it a genetic predisposition, or some kind of gender role?

Oh, what am I talking about. That was just a generic "hi, I'm here" statement ... ;)

There is evidence that some of the 911 hijackers went to titty bars to get lap dances before killing themselves for Islam.

Show this evidence.

I'm not here to defend mass-murderers or defend their hypocrisy in killing for Islam.
It's just a ludicrous and inflammatory example, and I'm asking for the evidence.

Oh, what a penetrating observation. Perhaps you'd like to explain why men are hypocrits? Not just give examples, I mean explain what element of masculinity causes hypocrisy ... and is it a genetic predisposition, or some kind of gender role?

Oh, what am I talking about. That was just a generic "hi, I'm here" statement ... ;)



Most of the world is run by patriarchal (sp?) societies. When it comes to ogling, promiscuity etc, it is my observation that men are such hypocrites. I say this as a guy.



Show this evidence.

I'm not here to defend mass-murderers or defend their hypocrisy in killing for Islam.
It's just a ludicrous and inflammatory example, and I'm asking for the evidence.

It is common knowledge. Nothing ludicrous or inflammatory there.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/10/04/MN102970.DTL

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a091101beforepinkpony&scale=0#a091101beforepinkpony

Most of the world is run by patriarchal (sp?) societies. When it comes to ogling, promiscuity etc, it is my observation that men are such hypocrites. I say this as a guy.

OK. We've got patriarchy, promiscuity and hipocrisy. Somehow, in my mind these three aren't connected, like, at all. And, if I may say so, being a guy myself, the men I know are perfectly honest about their promiscuity.

Hypocrisy is a cliché usually linked to the fairer sex, which is sometimes referred to as backstabbing bitches - a term I'd never use, personally. Then of course, I'd never generalize about any gender.

Also, gift-of-g'd, self image issues are not as restricted to women as you seem to think. They're becoming quite common among men these days as well. Eg, there was a guy on MTV Real who absolutely needed to get calf implants. All his friend's were telling him he was completely out of his mind but he was quite desperate to have the implants. I have personally had guy friends with eating disorders. It's just not a women-only thing any more.

And I really don't know what world you are living in, but in the real world, success in business is often linked to attractiveness - sometimes more so in men, than in women (who may even be stigmatized by their good looks which may expose them to nasty water cooler talk from envious co-workers). Men with full heads of hair have a higher chance of being thought of as successful in their job than men with receding hairlines. There actually is a correlation between whiteness of teeth in both male and female lawyers and jury verdicts in the US.

Also, I don't know whether you have watched any tv commercials lately, but the ratio of unclothed men to unclothed women is pretty high on the men's side. When people say "sex sells", it seems they nowadays mean "nude men sell". For example, it has become completely normal to show fully nude men advertising cologne, while I can't remember the last time a woman in any state of undress advertised perfume in Germany. Which is why I can say with conviction that at least in Germany, men are just as much objectified in a sexual manner as women, and there is no difference between the pressures both sexes are exposed to.

But even if there were a difference, the only difference you, gift-of-g'd, pointed out was that men are not under any pressure from their own sex. Now, be that true or not, same-sex-pressure would hardly qualify as chauvinist or patriarchal anyway, and the absence of such pressure among men (though I honestly doubt such an absence to be the case, judging again from the specific perspective of my circle of male friends) has no bearing on that evaluation, especially when we are talking about societal pressure on women. If you were implicitly arguing that in addition to pressure from men, women were suffering pressure created by other women: that doesn't prove sexism, it only proves competition among women, which I find completely normal.

Also, gift-of-g'd, self image issues are not as restricted to women as you seem to think. They're becoming quite common among men these days as well. Eg, there was a guy on MTV Real who absolutely needed to get calf implants. All his friend's were telling him he was completely out of his mind but he was quite desperate to have the implants. I have personally had guy friends with eating disorders. It's just not a women-only thing any more.

I never said it was a women only thing. I said that it is so much more prevalent and intense for woman that it would be foolish to compare the two.

And I really don't know what world you are living in, but in the real world, success in business is often linked to attractiveness - sometimes more so in men, than in women (who may even be stigmatized by their good looks which may expose them to nasty water cooler talk from envious co-workers).

Right. Men feel some pressure to look good. Women feel even more pressure to look good, but they also have to worry about looking too good. Therefore women suffer more pressures and are subjected to them more often and intensely.

Men with full heads of hair have a higher chance of being thought of as successful in their job than men with receding hairlines.

And ugly women are not hired. And good looking women have to deal with rumours that they only got hired because of their looks. Again, women are dealing with more crap than men in this regard.

There actually is a correlation between whiteness of teeth in both male and female lawyers and jury verdicts in the US.

That's nice. Stay on topic.

Also, I don't know whether you have watched any tv commercials lately, but the ratio of unclothed men to unclothed women is pretty high on the men's side....Which is why I can say with conviction that at least in Germany, men are just as much objectified in a sexual manner as women, and there is no difference between the pressures both sexes are exposed to.

Actually, you can't say that with conviction. That is simply your impression. If you want to state it unequivocally, I would need some sort of evidence.

But even if there were a difference, the only difference you, gift-of-g'd, pointed out was that men are not under any pressure from their own sex.

If I listed all the differences we would be here all day. I listed some above. Like I keep saying, there are many differences. That is why we can consider many western cultures to still be somewhat sexist.

Now, be that true or not, same-sex-pressure would hardly qualify as chauvinist or patriarchal anyway, and the absence of such pressure among men (though I honestly doubt such an absence to be the case, judging again from the specific perspective of my circle of male friends) has no bearing on that evaluation, especially when we are talking about societal pressure on women.

Long sentence. Badly written. I have no idea what you're trying to communicate here.

If you were implicitly arguing that in addition to pressure from men, women were suffering pressure created by other women: that doesn't prove sexism, it only proves competition among women, which I find completely normal.

Women suffer from societal pressures that men do not. This is sexist. These pressures can come from men and women. The fact that such pressures may come from a woman does not make it free of sexism.

*enters lengthy suing with LG* over my dead body

From this comment, you are quite clearly American.

Actually, you can't say that with conviction. That is simply your impression. If you want to state it unequivocally, I would need some sort of evidence.

So, just to get this right: when I ask you for proof, you deliver none, but suddenly I have to furnish evidence for a personal observation?

Here you go:
M7 by Yves Saint-Laurent, Davidoff Cool Water, Lacoste, Declare - advertisements using male nudity (YSL, Declare and Lacoste showed full frontal in Germany). Female nudity in perfume advertisements in Germany in the last few years: none. Male nudity also abounded in margerine advertisements, in phone carrier ads and in the lifestyle sector. Women are completely underrepresented.

Long sentence. Badly written. I have no idea what you're trying to communicate here.

Yeah, you're obviously better-versed in English than I am.

The fact that such PRESSURES may come from a woman does not make IT free of sexism. (capitalizations added by Dry Heads)

Oh, well, actually you aren't. You don't even manage the correlation in as simple a syntax as this one. What does that make that? Right: Short sentence. Badly written.

From this comment, you are quite clearly American.

Fine fine *wages jihad against Mirkana* you happy now

Wow, what's with this thread? It was barely serious.

Men are hypocrites in every culture/society

Ouch! :eek:

So, just to get this right: when I ask you for proof, you deliver none, but suddenly I have to furnish evidence for a personal observation?

No. If you want me to treat your personal observation as something other than simply your opinion, you have to provide evidence.

Here you go:
M7 by Yves Saint-Laurent, Davidoff Cool Water, Lacoste, Declare - advertisements using male nudity (YSL, Declare and Lacoste showed full frontal in Germany). Female nudity in perfume advertisements in Germany in the last few years: none. Male nudity also abounded in margerine advertisements, in phone carrier ads and in the lifestyle sector. Women are completely underrepresented.

Sure. Looked at the Tom Ford perfume ad, lately?

http://pzrservices.typepad.com/advertisingisgoodforyou/advertising_to_men/index.html

Yeah, you're obviously better-versed in English than I am.

Oh, well, actually you aren't. You don't even manage the correlation in as simple a syntax as this one. What does that make that? Right: Short sentence. Badly written.

Instead of getting snippy, just tell me what you meant. I couldn't care less about your level of english, as long as I can get what you're saying.

http://pzrservices.typepad.com/advertisingisgoodforyou/advertising_to_men/index.html


I use Tom Ford myself, but I haven't seen any ads in public for it yet, neither in print media nor on tv. Distribution in Germany is handled by select stores, and publicity in my case was purely word-of-mouth. When you visite tomford.com, you will find that you have to pass a check before you can look at the ad. It's apparently considered sexually explicit.

The sentence you didn't understand before was: pressure from women on women cannot be interpreted as sexist (IMO); I understood your post to say that the difference between pressure on women and pressure on men was that women were under pressure from both sexes, whereas men were only under pressure from women. I concluded that when talking about sexism, pressure coming from people of the same sex cannot be taken into account because (again IMO) it has nothing to do with sexism.

The way I see it sexism is always directed at the other sex, not at your own sex. But, obviously, in your definition, sexism is an attitude that can be directed at your own sex as well. This means we are applying two fundamentally divergent definitions of sexism. In that case, there is no point to our discussion. We're not talking about the same thing.

Someone, maybe you, I didn't check, equated the mediated "pressure" to take care of one's looks arising from depictions of women in the mass media to the actual, immediate pressure from certain religious groups in sharia states on women to completely cover themselves.

I find it completely normal to have certain expectations towards your own sex and towards members of the other sex. In no way do I find the treatment of women in Germany or the US even remotely comparable to that of women in sharia ruled societies. The point I was trying to make was that in Germany - which I used as a model Western society in this thread - mediated "pressure" goes both ways without attesting to any kind of discriminatory sexism. In a sharia state discrimination against women becomes visible by the compulsory wearing of headscarfs or burqas. But that is only a symptom of fathers and husbands treating their daughters and wives as property. It has been stated several times in this thread that this specific kind of dress is intended to cover the entire body so as to protect it from the looks of other men. It is ridiculous to draw parallels between women's treatment in such a sharia ruled society and the simple strain exerted in eg Germany on both men and women to look good for a variety of reasons, among others sexual attraction and professional success.

I use Tom Ford myself, but I haven't seen any ads in public for it yet, neither in print media nor on tv. Distribution in Germany is handled by select stores, and publicity in my case was purely word-of-mouth. When you visite tomford.com, you will find that you have to pass a check before you can look at the ad. It's apparently considered sexually explicit.

Yes, and it disproves your claim that nude women are not represented in perfume ads to day. As do these:

http://images.google.ca/images?gbv=2&svnum=10&hl=en&q=perfume+ads&btnG=Search+Images

The sentence you didn't understand before was: pressure from women on women cannot be interpreted as sexist (IMO); I understood your post to say that the difference between pressure on women and pressure on men was that women were under pressure from both sexes, whereas men were only under pressure from women. I concluded that when talking about sexism, pressure coming from people of the same sex cannot be taken into account because (again IMO) it has nothing to do with sexism.

Your opinion is wrong. If a Muslim woman forces her daughter to wear a burqa, it's still sexist. If a man beats his son for wearing a dress, it's still sexism.

The way I see it sexism is always directed at the other sex, not at your own sex. But, obviously, in your definition, sexism is an attitude that can be directed at your own sex as well. This means we are applying two fundamentally divergent definitions of sexism. In that case, there is no point to our discussion. We're not talking about the same thing.

Oh. I see. Well, see above.

Someone, maybe you, I didn't check, equated the mediated "pressure" to take care of one's looks arising from depictions of women in the mass media to the actual, immediate pressure from certain religious groups in sharia states on women to completely cover themselves.

Could have been me. There are definite points of comparison.

I find it completely normal to have certain expectations towards your own sex and towards members of the other sex.

I try to treat people as individuals. Go figure. The shape of their genitals rarley interests me.

In no way do I find the treatment of women in Germany or the US even remotely comparable to that of women in sharia ruled societies.

Except that both have to deal with sexism.

The point I was trying to make was that in Germany - which I used as a model Western society in this thread - mediated "pressure" goes both ways without attesting to any kind of discriminatory sexism.

No. It doesn't. You made that claim, but I see no evidence of it.

In a sharia state discrimination against women becomes visible by the compulsory wearing of headscarfs or burqas. But that is only a symptom of fathers and husbands treating their daughters and wives as property. It has been stated several times in this thread that this specific kind of dress is intended to cover the entire body so as to protect it from the looks of other men.

Yes. All of this is quite clear.

It is ridiculous to draw parallels between women's treatment in such a sharia ruled society and the simple strain exerted in eg Germany on both men and women to look good for a variety of reasons, among others sexual attraction and professional success.

It would be ridiculuous if sexism wasn't alive and well in Germany, but sadly (http://www.realitytvworld.com/news/german-top-model-show-criticized-for-promoting-eating-disorders-1007029.php), it is (http://www.expatica.com/de/housing/relocation/expat-women-frustrated-by-sexism-in-germany-28075.html).

Yes, and it disproves your claim that nude women are not represented in perfume ads to day.

Exactly, because that is proved by a perfume ad displayed only on a website but not in stores and the print media and only after you actively accept to watch sexually explicit material.


Your opinion is wrong. If a Muslim woman forces her daughter to wear a burqa, it's still sexist. If a man beats his son for wearing a dress, it's still sexism.

Not per my definition. But we've been there, and we disagree. Although I have to admit that in the case of the Muslima forcing a burqa on her daughter, I'd still see that as sexist, because the Muslim mother is just the medium imposing a rule obviously created by the patriarchy she's subject to.
Whereas gender role issues between parents and their children are usually connected to a fear or hatred of homosexuality, not to sexism. Unless you consider homophobia sexist too. But probably you do.

It would be ridiculuous if sexism wasn't alive and well in Germany, but sadly (http://www.realitytvworld.com/news/german-top-model-show-criticized-for-promoting-eating-disorders-1007029.php), it is (http://www.expatica.com/de/housing/relocation/expat-women-frustrated-by-sexism-in-germany-28075.html).

You're citing Germany's Next Top Model as sexist? There was a show in German prime-time TV over a decade ago already called "Mann O Mann" where men competed in several categories and had to strip and were completely objectified by the female audience.
Are ou honestly pretending that the modelling business is sexist? Because even that would go for both sexes, unless you completely blank out the existence of male models.
Concerning the representation of women in the workplace, you should look into the German statistics on public functionnaries. The justice system has been dominated by women lately, for example. The majority of recent law school alumni is female. Working conditions and re-insertion after maternity leave are so favorable in the public sector that private businesses are simply not as attractive for women who are considering founding a family. Needless to say that European legislation on gender equality in the workplace has created further pressure on private employers.
Last year, a former news anchor voicing some very conservative views about the place of women in society was all but censured, lost her job and met with harsh criticism from all strata of society and all political parties except for the far right.

When I said that the situation of women in the US and Germany on one side and in Sharia states on the other side was not comparable, I was referring to the intensity, immediacy and all-pervasiveness of discrimination against women under Sharia rule. I frankly don't care about what these women are forced to wear. What I am bothered by and what simply doesn't exist in Germany or the US in a systematic, legally and religiously sanctioned manner is the treatment of women as property.

Already I feel sorry, I have actually sat down to type this post. We don't have the same definitions of sexism, and I can't remember a single post by you in this thread where you have given intensity much thought or accepted it as an argument. In that case, I'm sorry for wasting your and my time.

Exactly, because that is proved by a perfume ad displayed only on a website but not in stores and the print media and only after you actively accept to watch sexually explicit material.

How many german perfume ads have you shownme with naked men. None. I've shown you several apges of the same ads with naked women. I just chose the Tom Ford because it was the first one that popped up on Google. There are hundreds more.

Not per my definition. But we've been there, and we disagree. Although I have to admit that in the case of the Muslima forcing a burqa on her daughter, I'd still see that as sexist, because the Muslim mother is just the medium imposing a rule obviously created by the patriarchy she's subject to.

So, according to you, women can't be sexist to other women. Except this Muslim woman can. Is there something special about western women that they don't act as medium for imposing patriarchical rules?

Whereas gender role issues between parents and their children are usually connected to a fear or hatred of homosexuality, not to sexism. Unless you consider homophobia sexist too. But probably you do.

No, but many of the same issues are at play, including the patriarchy and its notions of sexuality.


You're citing Germany's Next Top Model as sexist? There was a show in German prime-time TV over a decade ago already called "Mann O Mann" where men competed in several categories and had to strip and were completely objectified by the female audience.

No. I am using actual examples of sexism in german society. If you were to provide something that supported your claim that there is no sexism in Germany, you'd be getting somewhere.

Are ou honestly pretending that the modelling business is sexist? Because even that would go for both sexes, unless you completely blank out the existence of male models.

The existence of male models does not mean that the modelling industry doesn't objectify women.

Concerning the representation of women in the workplace, you should look into the German statistics on public functionnaries. The justice system has been dominated by women lately, for example. The majority of recent law school alumni is female. Working conditions and re-insertion after maternity leave are so favorable in the public sector that private businesses are simply not as attractive for women who are considering founding a family. Needless to say that European legislation on gender equality in the workplace has created further pressure on private employers.

Do you have a source for any of this?

Last year, a former news anchor voicing some very conservative views about the place of women in society was all but censured, lost her job and met with harsh criticism from all strata of society and all political parties except for the far right.

Or this?

When I said that the situation of women in the US and Germany on one side and in Sharia states on the other side was not comparable, I was referring to the intensity, immediacy and all-pervasiveness of discrimination against women under Sharia rule. I frankly don't care about what these women are forced to wear. What I am bothered by and what simply doesn't exist in Germany or the US in a systematic, legally and religiously sanctioned manner is the treatment of women as property.

Actually, what you said was that since Germany portrayed women and men in a sexually objectified manner, Germany was no longer sexist. I believe your exact words were "The point I was trying to make was that in Germany - which I used as a model Western society in this thread - mediated "pressure" goes both ways without attesting to any kind of discriminatory sexism."

That's why I am addressing that issue and not women under Sharia.

Already I feel sorry, I have actually sat down to type this post. We don't have the same definitions of sexism, and I can't remember a single post by you in this thread where you have given intensity much thought or accepted it as an argument. In that case, I'm sorry for wasting your and my time.

I thought about your definition of sexism. I thought about it long enough to understand how it is wrong. Think about it. If a woman is discriminated against because she's a woman, does it matter what sex or gender the discriminator is?

If a little boy doesn't like rough sports, and all the other boys pick on him, is that not sexism?

OK. We've got patriarchy, promiscuity and hipocrisy. Somehow, in my mind these three aren't connected, like, at all. And, if I may say so, being a guy myself, the men I know are perfectly honest about their promiscuity. ...snipped

I should have said that when it comes to issues like chastity/modesty, men are hypocrites in most societies of the world.

I agree that in very liberalised parts of societies in US and EU where women has free sex and equality (compared to other parts), there is less hypocrisy from men.

In most parts of the world, men expect women to be more modest and chaste than they are themselves. That is what I called hypocrisy. This is not just in conservative muslim societies although we can see exaggerated hypocrisy in many cases.

I thought about your definition of sexism. I thought about it long enough to understand how it is wrong. Think about it. If a woman is discriminated against because she's a woman, does it matter what sex or gender the discriminator is?

If a little boy doesn't like rough sports, and all the other boys pick on him, is that not sexism?

Yes, it matters, and no, that's not sexism. If a rule is originally created as autodiscriminatory, that's not sexist. Been there, said that. I accepted your mother-daughter-example because the mother was just a VEHICLE for a rule made by sexist, women-discriminating men.

The news anchor's name is Eva Herman.

I did name four very visible ad campaigns. If you don't know about Eva Herman, a topic which completely dominated the second half of last year in the German media, then you obviously have no first-hand insight into Germany. I don't blame you for it. It's just strange to claim knowledge about the public visibility of ad campaigns in stores and in the print media when you're not actually living here. Again: Tom Ford did not use sexually explicit material in print media, as far as I could see, nor were or are there any poster ads or other props in the select stores selling Tom Ford that I frequent. You're internet link proves nothing, neither would any google link to an ad picture, because that says nothing about public visibility in print media and stores.

I officially bow out of this thread. There's no point in dragging this out any longer. Go, have the last word on this. I don't care for discussing Western "sexism" when the actual topic should be (and if I remember correctly is) the gross, systematic, legally sanctioned discrimination against women in sharia states.

men in arab society dominate woman, and make them cover themselves head to toe right?
question, if men could make woman wear bikinis all the time, wouldnt they, instead of head to toe in black, therefore this proves that arab society is not domnated by men :p
this is a semi serious post

Men, especially in a very patriarchal society, have never been as concerned with what they get to see than by what other men get to see. In a society where a virgin daughter is money in the bank and your families fortunes rise or fall by the perceived sexual unavailability of your women, you're going to keep them wrapped up.

Remember, the poorer elements of Middle Eastern society never wore those cumbersome coverings. They had to work and those things were impractical (like footbinding in imperial China). Families only get into that when they consider themselves upwardly mobile. Or at least they once did and aren't ready to give up the social ghost.

I should have said that when it comes to issues like chastity/modesty, men are hypocrites in most societies of the world.

I agree that in very liberalised parts of societies in US and EU where women has free sex and equality (compared to other parts), there is less hypocrisy from men.

In most parts of the world, men expect women to be more modest and chaste than they are themselves. That is what I called hypocrisy. This is not just in conservative muslim societies although we can see exaggerated hypocrisy in many cases.

Yes, but in most societies in the world sexual fidelity means less to women than it does to men.

My wife and I were talking about the movie Indecent Proposal where Robert Redford offers a million dollars for a night with Demi Moore. When my wife asked if I would agree to such a deal (adjusted for inflation) I told her I wasn't sure. It's a tough one. I asked if she'd agree to a reversed situation, a reasonably attractive rich middle-aged woman offering a million for a night with me. She responded with an enthusiastic yes.

More often than not it's probably women dominating other women by making them wear hijabs, niqabs, burkas and all the rest of it.

A woman can probably deal with an angry husband...it's a lot harder to deal with an angry matriarch.

Fergi America;13361069']If the women wore bikinis, the men wouldn't have dominance for long...after all, a lot of times when a man sees something nice in a bikini he immediately starts thinking with the little head (unless he's gay), and quickly forgets that not everything the hottie wants him to do is in his best interests...:p


yeah, because all straight men are like that...


:mad:

Men are hypocrites in every culture/society


And you think women are any better?


If I thought what you thought I'd have no faith in humanity at all.

Originally Posted by Aryavartha View Post
Humans are hypocrites in every culture/society

Corrected. ;)

men in arab society dominate woman, and make them cover themselves head to toe right?
question, if men could make woman wear bikinis all the time, wouldnt they, instead of head to toe in black, therefore this proves that arab society is not domnated by men :p
this is a semi serious post

I love the way you seem to be able to switch an Islamic religious tradition to an Arabic cultural one so easily...

I love the way you seem to be able to switch an Islamic religious tradition to an Arabic cultural one so easily...
well most arabs are muslim, *shrugs*

Yes, it matters, and no, that's not sexism. If a rule is originally created as autodiscriminatory, that's not sexist. Been there, said that. I accepted your mother-daughter-example because the mother was just a VEHICLE for a rule made by sexist, women-discriminating men.

Again, you keep making these claims and not providing any backup for them. Why does it matter if the person is a man or woman. Let me give you yet another example:

Is this statement sexist: "All men are rapists" ?

It is because it assumes that all men are degenerate fucktards simply because they have penises. Note how the statement is sexist regardless of the fact that you don't know my sex or gender.

The news anchor's name is Eva Herman.

Thank you for providing the minimal information required to check up on what you have to say. She was fired for publicly supporting Nazi family policies (http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,504790,00.html). That's a little different than claiming that there is no sexism in Germany.

I did name four very visible ad campaigns. If you don't know about Eva Herman, a topic which completely dominated the second half of last year in the German media, then you obviously have no first-hand insight into Germany. I don't blame you for it. It's just strange to claim knowledge about the public visibility of ad campaigns in stores and in the print media when you're not actually living here. Again: Tom Ford did not use sexually explicit material in print media, as far as I could see, nor were or are there any poster ads or other props in the select stores selling Tom Ford that I frequent. You're internet link proves nothing, neither would any google link to an ad picture, because that says nothing about public visibility in print media and stores.

I live in Montreal. I don't visit Germany very often. But I'm not going to assume that sexism no longer exists in Germany simply baecause you have the impression that men are presented nude more often than women in perfume ads in German print media. Especially when you don't even provide an example of this supposed nudity.

I officially bow out of this thread. There's no point in dragging this out any longer. Go, have the last word on this. I don't care for discussing Western "sexism" when the actual topic should be (and if I remember correctly is) the gross, systematic, legally sanctioned discrimination against women in sharia states.

Conversations evolve.