Male student forced to step down after democratically elected as women’s officer at TUU
134 replies, posted
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;47490319]If this is truly the case, and the feminists I speak of are a small vocal minority, then why did that petition get over a thousand signatures? This is the exact point James Ritchie is trying to make. What he was trying to do was progressive. Maybe too progressive for even "modern feminists".
His attempt at consolidating a human issue, rather than a women's issue was met with hostility by the very group he was trying to represent.
I think that's the problem. Even women still see this as a "women's issue" and not a human issue. You can't progress in a two sided endeavour without both sides being on board.
I don't see this as a small vocal minority. I see this as widespread overcompensation in the form of hatred.
I also think that believing in equality in genders does not make you a feminist, it makes you a considerate human fucking being. Feminism is a buzzword, and now, it's a misguided, misused buzzword. It is widely used as a tool for social high-horsing. You can find all the proof you need by visiting tumblr. Tumblr of course is the most blatant and disgusting example of social high-horsing, but it does exist outside of the walls of the internet.[/QUOTE]
how about you read academic texts about feminist ideologies instead of basing your perceptions on teenaged girls on a blogging website
Having been at that University. It's been rife with SJW controversies for some time now. It's getting ridiculous.
A TUU official spent $30,000+ on a transgender bathroom (With very little transgender community) using student money. Then later came out as transgender. Lets just say conflict of interest is...apparent.
It was like it was literally ripped straight from the episode of southpark where cartman becomes transgender.
Seriously, fuck women!
:v:
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;47490319]If this is truly the case, and the feminists I speak of are a small vocal minority, then why did that petition get over a thousand signatures? This is the exact point James Ritchie is trying to make. What he was trying to do was progressive. Maybe too progressive for even "modern feminists".
His attempt at consolidating a human issue, rather than a women's issue was met with hostility by the very group he was trying to represent.
I think that's the problem. Even women still see this as a "women's issue" and not a human issue. You can't progress in a two sided endeavour without both sides being on board.
I don't see this as a small vocal minority. I see this as widespread overcompensation in the form of hatred.
I also think that believing in equality in genders does not make you a feminist, it makes you a considerate human fucking being. Feminism is a buzzword, and now, it's a misguided, misused buzzword. It is widely used as a tool for social high-horsing. You can find all the proof you need by visiting tumblr. Tumblr of course is the most blatant and disgusting example of social high-horsing, but it does exist outside of the walls of the internet.[/QUOTE]
it was a fucking change.org petition, anybody who has ever signed a change.org petition gets emails about new petitions. I bet more than half or maybe more were just random people from around the world who just read the first 10 lines of the damn thing.
There is no problem with a man who supports equality representing the interests of women, unless you're a man-hating neo-feminist or sexist towards men.
[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;47496403]it was a fucking change.org petition, anybody who has ever signed a change.org petition gets emails about new petitions. I bet more than half or maybe more were just random people from around the world who just read the first 10 lines of the damn thing.
There is no problem with a man who supports equality representing the interests of women, unless you're a man-hating neo-feminist or sexist towards men.[/QUOTE]
I can actually think of a lot of advantages a group could have by using a male figurehead to represent feminism.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;47497609]I can actually think of a lot of advantages a group could have by using a male figurehead to represent feminism.[/QUOTE]
stop supporting the patriarchy >:C
Just a side note related to the mention of the stereotype that "women are gentile creatures" on the first page. Most women(and men) are indeed gentiles, and it's not a stereotype. There aren't that many Jews after all.
[QUOTE=Sableye;47489393]Ya that's the toxic male-hating part of feminism that I dont agree with, you really can't be a man and agree 100% with feminism, its just impossible especially because of its direct use of gendered grammar to imply anything male is bad
Like the idea that a femenin society is somehow nicer and more polite than a masculine society, both acknowledging and embracing the stereotype that women are gentile creatures, and ignoring that aggression is not a gender specific thing, also it is just rediculous to apply gendered connotations to society[/QUOTE]
Hey guys, always wanted to say it here but never found someone saying the opposite.
What we do with all that research (Steven Pinker) that shows women are actually less prone to violence in the form of physical aggression and tend to escalate less?
I mean, if THAT research is true, then more women should be in more important roles.
[QUOTE=Cutthecrap;47499642]Hey guys, always wanted to say it here but never found someone saying the opposite.
What we do with all that research (Steven Pinker) that shows women are actually less prone to violence in the form of physical aggression and tend to escalate less?
I mean, if THAT research is true, then more women should be in more important roles.[/QUOTE]
you don't commonly see CEOs duking it out do you?
its certainly possible that women are less prone to violence, but i dont see how that inherently makes them more suitable for important roles.
being less prone to violence doesn't mean they make better decisions or are better leaders, right?
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;47499719]you don't commonly see CEOs duking it out do you?
its certainly possible that women are less prone to violence, but i dont see how that inherently makes them more suitable for important roles.
being less prone to violence doesn't mean they make better decisions or are better leaders, right?[/QUOTE]
Women on average may be less aggressive but the people who become CEOs usually have to be aggressive (aggression isn't the same thing as violence btw).
[QUOTE=Zyler;47500101]Women on average may be less aggressive but the people who become CEOs usually have to be aggressive (aggression isn't the same thing as violence btw).[/QUOTE]
well cutthecrap's post was saying that men are more prone to violence, so i was referring to that.
[QUOTE=momoiro;47498362]Just a side note related to the mention of the stereotype that "women are gentile creatures" on the first page. Most women(and men) are indeed gentiles, and it's not a stereotype. There aren't that many Jews after all.[/QUOTE]
That typo's got nothing on the time someone said "I'm sieving with rage."
[QUOTE=Raidyr;47497609]I can actually think of a lot of advantages a group could have by using a male figurehead to represent feminism.[/QUOTE]
Feminism would save hundreds on oil changes that's for sure!
There's no reason why a man can't represent women but if the student union would prefer a woman for this role they should have made that clear in the first place. Most of them have various groups that elect their own leaders so why not just start a women's group and then restrict voting to members of that group?
[QUOTE=Zeke129;47500341]Feminism would save hundreds on oil changes that's for sure!
There's no reason why a man can't represent women but if the student union would prefer a woman for this role they should have made that clear in the first place. Most of them have various groups that elect their own leaders so why not just start a women's group and then restrict voting to members of that group?[/QUOTE]
I'm not necessarily saying one way or the other, just that a unique opportunity was available. I can see why a women's union would want a woman leader but they could have given the guy a shot.
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;47500112]well cutthecrap's post was saying that men are more prone to violence, so i was referring to that.[/QUOTE]
Yes.
And not only violence, but also impulsive behaviour. If I properly understood what Pinker said in "The better Angels of our Nature", men tend to act more....
Hold on, I'll grab the book and find those bits....
"We don't know what causes what, but biology and history suggest that all else being equal, a world in which women have more influence will be a world with fewer wars"
"A person response to a challenge of dominance depends in part on the amount of testosterone released into the bloodstream and on the distribution of receptors for the hormone in his or her brain".
"As Panskepp notes, "In virtually all mammals, male sexuality requires an assertive attitude, so that male sexuality and aggressiveness normally go together. Indeed, these tendencies are intertwined throughout the neuroaxis (...)"
EDIT: I put the testosterone quote, because it is explained throughout the book that males have more testosterone. And while it doesn't make them outright violent, it makes them more "twitchy" when faced against a competitor or similar male. Whereas females don't have that same reaction.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;47490375]He ran for the position of 'Women's Officer', good intentions or not, does it not seem more logical and reasonable for a woman, someone who actually has to experience women's problems every day of her life, to take that position?[/QUOTE]
Women are perfectly comfortable telling me how privileged my life must be all the time, despite not being a man and having no idea what challenges I face in my personal life or with society in general. How is a man taking the position of "Women's Officer" any worse than that?
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;47543773]Women are perfectly comfortable telling me how privileged my life must be all the time, despite not being a man and having no idea what challenges I face in my personal life or with society in general. How is a man taking the position of "Women's Officer" any worse than that?[/QUOTE]
No, you see, it's not you personally that's privileged, but the social economic group that you're a part of is. Therefore you are. Don't take it so personally. Your personal challenges don't matter because as a group you are privileged, you see. It's nothing against you at all.
[QUOTE=mobrockers;47544086]No, you see, it's not you personally that's privileged, but the social economic group that you're a part of is. Therefore you are. Don't take it so personally. Your personal challenges don't matter because as a group you are privileged, you see. It's nothing against you at all.[/QUOTE]
Is that Poe's law?
[QUOTE=bunguer;47544252]Is that Poe's law?[/QUOTE]
yes
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;47543773]Women are perfectly comfortable telling me how privileged my life must be all the time, despite not being a man and having no idea what challenges I face in my personal life or with society in general. [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=mobrockers;47544086]No, you see, it's not you personally that's privileged, but the social economic group that you're a part of is. Therefore you are. Don't take it so personally. Your personal challenges don't matter because as a group you are privileged, you see. It's nothing against you at all.[/QUOTE]
That's not what privilege means and anyone who presents it that way, man or woman, has no idea what they're talking about.
I can't believe I'm actually defending feminism here but your own ignorance of social theory is not an argument against it. Privilege describes social trends that favor some groups over others through systemic biases and has nothing to do with individuals. It's not about how hard your childhood was and it's not saying your experiences don't matter because you're part of a privileged group.
[QUOTE=catbarf;47544677]That's not what privilege means and anyone who presents it that way, man or woman, has no idea what they're talking about.
I can't believe I'm actually defending feminism here but your own ignorance of social theory is not an argument against it. Privilege describes social trends that favor some groups over others through systemic biases and has nothing to do with individuals. It's not about how hard your childhood was and it's not saying your experiences don't matter because you're part of a privileged group.[/QUOTE]
And once you throw in intersectionality(probably spelled that wrong), you take into account things like race, income level, sexuality, identified gender.
[editline]17th April 2015[/editline]
Privilege is not just about your upbringing, its about your current status and the advantages given to you via that status.
So because he is male in a female position means he should not work in that position? Despite the fact he was elected by a majority of students to be in the work position? How appalling. What is worse is that Ritchie was actually [B]RIDICULED[/B] for being in the position, despite the fact he took on the role because he supported women's rights and he wanted to stand up for them.
What a absolutely disgusting display of feminism here.
[QUOTE=WitlessTanuki;47545451]So because he is male in a female position means he should not work in that position? Despite the fact he was elected by a majority of students to be in the work position? How appalling. What is worse is that Ritchie was actually [B]RIDICULED[/B] for being in the position, despite the fact he took on the role because he supported women's rights and he wanted to stand up for them.
What a absolutely disgusting display of feminism here.[/QUOTE]
Just because he was elected by a majority of the voters doesn't mean he has the majority mandate of the electorate. University elections have awfully low turnouts because no one gives a shit. He could have literally just went to his friends and told them to go and vote for him, and those few people could have had a massive influence on the result. And besides, if you were a woman and went to approach your women's representative about something like receiving sexual harassment from men, would you be comfortable with being open with your representative, who is a man?
I always find it really weird when presumably a male talks about things like 'that's a disgusting display of feminism'. As if you're someone who has a stake in the feminism movement, as if you're actually a woman. I'm not a woman but I don't go around saying 'no you can only be a true feminist if you do this and don't do that'.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;47545536]Just because he was elected by a majority of the voters doesn't mean he has the majority mandate of the electorate. University elections have awfully low turnouts because no one gives a shit. He could have literally just went to his friends and told them to go and vote for him, and those few people could have had a massive influence on the result. And besides, if you were a woman and went to approach your women's representative about something like receiving sexual harassment from men, would you be comfortable with being open with your representative, who is a man?
I always find it really weird when presumably a male talks about things like 'that's a disgusting display of feminism'. As if you're someone who has a stake in the feminism movement, as if you're actually a woman. I'm not a woman but I don't go around saying 'no you can only be a true feminist if you do this and don't do that'.[/QUOTE]You're aware you're defending the same thing feminists are trying to fight, inequality and gender roles in various positions? We can't have equality while at the same time dictating what a man can't be. It goes against the whole idea. By that logic should all gynos be women too since men don't have vaginas? Or are you saying men are not capable of understanding womens' issues?
[QUOTE=itisjuly;47545568]You're aware you're defending the same thing feminists are trying to fight, inequality and gender roles in various positions? We can't have equality while at the same time dictating what a man can't be. It goes against the whole idea. By that logic should all gynos be women too since men don't have vaginas? Or are you saying men are not capable of understanding womens' issues?[/QUOTE]
Well explain why feminists are upset that a man was elected as women's officer then? And don't tell me that they aren't 'true feminists', because I don't think you, presumably a male, could make that judgement about a movement you have no stake in.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;47545599]Well explain why feminists are upset that a man was elected as women's officer then? And don't tell me that they aren't 'true feminists', because I don't think you, presumably a male, could make that judgement about a movement you have no stake in.[/QUOTE]
So now, as a male, I have no stake in the movement? Holy shit dude are you even hearing yourself? You're like these feminazis giving a bad name to a great movement.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;47545611]So now, as a male, I have no stake in the movement? Holy shit dude are you even hearing yourself? You're like these feminazis giving a bad name to a great movement.[/QUOTE]
You didn't answer the question.
Also I can't take someone who, unironically, uses the term feminazi seriously.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;47545568]By that logic should all gynos be women too since men don't have vaginas? Or are you saying men are not capable of understanding womens' issues?[/QUOTE]
Bit of a difference between understanding medical procedures you've never experienced and understanding social issues you've never experienced, unless you're saying that a doctor telling you about an operation he's never undergone is the same as a trust fund one-percenter lecturing about living on welfare.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;47545599]Well explain why feminists are upset that a man was elected as women's officer then? And don't tell me that they aren't 'true feminists', because I don't think you, presumably a male, could make that judgement about a movement you have no stake in.[/QUOTE]
"B-But feminism is equality for everyone!"
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;47546323]"B-But feminism is equality for everyone!"[/QUOTE]
What the fuck are you even doing any more? You really should stop yourself from commenting on things like this, it's making you look really, really dumb.
What logical reason is there for a male to represent female issues on campus? Something he hasn't experienced, and likely will not experience due to him being male. It's like letting the whitest motherfucker you know represent the blackest cocks on campus, despite the white guy never having to deal with the racial issues of being a black person. How can they effectively represent that? Would the people they are representing really feel comfortable coming to them with problems? Would they really understand the impact of any changes as they don't exactly impact that person themselves?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.