Stop Calling Grown Women "Girls"

[silverstar]

You're saying the demeaning, misogynistic shit didn't happen?

From you, yes.

 

[Wolf]

From you, yes.

Someone said some pretty hateful, misogynistic shit, and the OP is the one who apologized for calling them stupid.
I'd say it's relevant commentary, since it speaks to how women have been conditioned to apologize for shit they didn't even start.

 

[meangry]

I have to be honest chicago, this simply floored me. My point is meaningless because you need to go to library to check the link. You care enough about this to imply I am lying, but not enough to visit your library and actually check before implying it there. It is the Oxford English Dictionary for goodness sake - your library will have access if not a physical copy. I have apparently discredited myself by defending myself with a source when challenged. By not replying quickly enough - days later - what I have to say is somehow less valid.

It just makes me sad. This is what so many discussions on the internet become, arguments where people are looking for reasons and excuses to dismiss and ignore what the other person has to say. You've lined your reasons up perfectly, and I will admit that is far easier to do than admit that there might be a view different from your own that is perhaps even valid. I have tried my best to put it forwards, and I think it is safe to say that I failed.

What a silly girl I am.

Relevant:

The Oxford English Dictionary is a resource that requires a subscription to use. Now, if you are using a library or college network, they often pay for a subscription for the OED. It's a fantastic resource, however, there are issues here. Three...exactly.

1.) Buying the full 20 volume set is around $1200.
2.) Buying the compact OED is around $400.
3.) Buying an annual OED subscription for an individual is $90.

Now, _virginie_ is right about procurement. However, since the OED is behind a paywall, what I would have done, and what would probably be the best thing to have done for the sake of argument, is to screencap the OED definition of girl and post it here as attachments. Then, it's there for everyone to see, especially as it is being used as a reference point.

Understanding the OED and the manner of its use, I decided to utilize the Etmology of the word girl. While OED is a lot more academically credible, it is just one tool, albeit a powerful one, for the study of Etmology. Now...in that examination, the majority of uses involved age as a codifier. In society, age is used as a mechanism to discredit or negate someone, via maturity or experience or what have you. There's also the long standing tradition of youth expectations being that they are subservient to their elders.

Now, people are all about context. The word girl isn't derogatory, and nobody here is being 'triggered' by its usage. The contextual use of the term matters. But what I think some of the argument being lost here is that this about its contextual use in terms of male sexual objectification and male possession. Chicago's boyfriend calls her girl, but the context of that and their relationship also means that in serious conversations, he's not referring to her as a girl, or his girl. It's about the possessiveness, the ownership when used in such contexts that is being argued. The video posted was about objectification. And given age and that, it comes across weird that Bilak is referred to as girl and not woman.

This isn't trumpeted outrage though. It's just looking at how we work and treat people. Not everyone has to agree...but it's not some off the wall feminist concept that is destroying western society.

So...screen cap it and post it then, since you, assumedly, have ready access. It shouldn't be hard for you to screen cap and post. Hell...it would be even easier than saying to someone else that they need to verify at their library, assuming their local library does actually pay for the subscription.

 

[silverstar]

Someone said some pretty hateful, misogynistic shit, and the OP is the one who apologized for calling them stupid.
I'd say it's relevant commentary, since it speaks to how women have been conditioned to apologize for shit they didn't even start.

Yes, you. You were pretty disrespectful to _virginie_ earlier. It just shows how much of a fraud you are, since you evidently don't like it when women think for themselves and don't do what you tell/want them to do.

 

[Wolf]

Yes, you. You were pretty disrespectful to _virginie_ earlier. It just shows how much of a fraud you are, since you evidently don't like it when women think for themselves and don't do what you tell/want them to do.

I did point out that they left out pertinent info, yes.
But...disrespectful? Like, yammering about tit shots incessantly and saying vile, personalized shit like that other person did?

 

[silverstar]

I did point out that they left out pertinent info, yes.
But...disrespectful? Like, yammering about tit shots incessantly and saying vile, personalized shit like that other person did?

You were disrespectful to _virginie_, and now you're attempting to tell the OP what she should and shouldn't be saying, and how she should be thinking according to how you feel she should.

That's misogynistic.

 

[Park CollegeO]

^ Calls other people "trolls" as he desperately attempts to continue stoking the flames after seeing the conversation has evolved into calm, rational discourse.

Right, because that negates all the things you said. LOL what a troll! i don't care if she chooses to apologize to you, you're the biggest troll i've ever seen on this forum and that's saying something

 

[chicago]

So let me apologize for that. Clearly you're not stupid /QUOTE]

Yikes!! Apologizing to that troll after all the demeaning shit he threw your way?

That's pretty unorthodox

I was starting to get embarrassed at how the discussion was turning out.

I have to be honest chicago, this simply floored me. My point is meaningless because you need to go to library to check the link. You care enough about this to imply I am lying, but not enough to visit your library and actually check before implying it there. It is the Oxford English Dictionary for goodness sake - your library will have access if not a physical copy. I have apparently discredited myself by defending myself with a source when challenged. By not replying quickly enough - days later - what I have to say is somehow less valid.

It just makes me sad. This is what so many discussions on the internet become, arguments where people are looking for reasons and excuses to dismiss and ignore what the other person has to say. You've lined your reasons up perfectly, and I will admit that is far easier to do than admit that there might be a view different from your own that is perhaps even valid. I have tried my best to put it forwards, and I think it is safe to say that I failed.

What a silly girl I am.

I'm not sure what you have to be floored about. Providing sources to back up what you say isn't really that outrageous.

Wth all the resources available online, you have to rely on one that a person needs to go to the library to see or pay for access to see. Why is it that one definition can't be found anywhere else?

It's your point and your opinion you're trying to express here. The onus is on you to provide your own support, not make a statement and then tell others to go to their library lol

To meangry's point, why not screen shot it and email it to yourself so you can provide your own reference for your own thoughts versus having me do it?

 

[Park CollegeO]

Someone said some pretty hateful, misogynistic shit, and the OP is the one who apologized for calling them stupid.
I'd say it's relevant commentary, since it speaks to how women have been conditioned to apologize for shit they didn't even start.

DING DING DING!

Sad, but true.

 

[silverstar]

Right, because that negates all the things you said. LOL what a troll! i don't care if she chooses to apologize to you, you're the biggest troll i've ever seen on this forum and that's saying something

Then perhaps you should stop misogynistically telling her what you think she should be saying and let her think for herself.

It's your point and your opinion you're trying to express here. The onus is on you to provide your own support, not make a statement and then tell others to go to their library lol

Agree with this.

 

[Park CollegeO]

Then perhaps you should stop misogynistically telling her what you think she should be saying and let her think for herself.

I like your newfound concern and respect.

 

[silverstar]

I like your newfound concern and respect.

Personal respect goes to those people (key word) who earn it. Gender by itself doesn't automatically command respect.

You only being respectful to someone because of their gender while being disrespectful to the other, shows that one is a disingenuous and distrustful person. I wouldn't trust a guy for instance who holds open the door for women with a fake smile, but lets it slam in the face of males.

 

[Wolf]

Personal respect goes to those people (key word) who earn it. Gender by itself doesn't automatically command respect.

You only being respectful to someone because of their gender while being disrespectful to the other, shows that one is a disingenuous and distrustful person. I wouldn't trust a guy for instance who holds open the door for women with a fake smile, but lets it slam in the face of males.

So, he's disloyal for not showing respect to a man who made vile, personal attacks on a woman?

 

[silverstar]

So, he's disloyal for not showing respect to a man who made vile, personal attacks on a woman?

No, not disloyal. Just a fraud. And the OP did post a tit shot, she even acknowledged that. However, unlike you, I feel she can make her own decisions and do what she wants. Whether I agree with them, is another story.

You should stop attempting to tell the OP how you think she should be thinking according to what you want, it's misogynistic.

 

[Wolf]

No, not disloyal. Just a fraud.

And you should stop attempting to tell the OP how you think she should be thinking according to what you want, it's misogynistic.

I didn't say anything of the sort.
I'm just stunned that you think you're being clever right now. But I shouldn't be.

 

[silverstar]

I didn't say anything of the sort.
I'm just stunned that you think you're being clever right now. But I shouldn't be.

Well, since you're a disingenuous and intellectually dishonest person, I wouldn't expect you to know when you're actually being a misogynist, when you think you're "protecting" and shilling for all women.

Women can think for themselves. Apparently, you don't think they can and want them to think and feel according to how you tell them they should.

 

[Wolf]

Well, since you're a disingenuous person, I wouldn't expect you to know when you're actually being a misogynist, when you think you're "protecting" and shilling for all women.

Women can think for themselves. Apparently, you don't think they can and want them to think and feel according to how you tell them they should.

Again, didn't do that. I pointed out that society has conditioned women to apologize for shit that's not their fault.
Everything else is just you thinking you're clever, thinking you're flipping the narrative. But that would only be true if I'd told the OP to do something.

Let me guess...you think laws about sexual harassment are demeaning to women, too?

 

[silverstar]

Again, didn't do that. I pointed out that society has conditioned women to apologize for shit that's not their fault.
Everything else is just you thinking you're clever, thinking you're flipping the narrative. But that would only be true if I'd told the OP to do something.

You don't like something that the OP said, because you think she should be thinking a different way. Ergo, you don't respect her ability to be able to think for herself and make her own decisions. Don't deviate from that.

Your perspective towards the OP (and apparently all women) regarding her coming to her own decisions and thinking for herself, is as misogynistic as it gets. You just simply don't like me pointing it out after you have fraudulently tried to paint yourself as a protector of women.

 

[Wolf]

You don't like something that the OP said, because you think she should be thinking a different way. Ergo, you don't respect her ability to be able to think for herself and make her own decisions. Don't deviate from that. Your perspective towards the OP (and apparently all women) regarding her coming to her own decisions and thinking for herself, is as misogynistic as it gets.

Yeah, again; no matter how many hilariously convoluted leaps of logic you try to make, that ain't what I said.

Next, you're going to say your personal attacks, specifically about their gender, were actually more respectful, right?

 

[silverstar]

Yeah, again; no matter how many hilariously convoluted leaps of logic you try to make, that ain't what I said.

Next, you're going to say your personal attacks, specifically about their gender, were actually more respectful, right?

Don't deviate. You doing so is your attempt to deflect from the point.

You don't like something the OP said because you think she should be feeling a certain way, according to how you think women should think. That's misogynistic, and the more you try and deny this, it just makes you look even more like the fraud both you and I know you are.

 

[Wolf]

Don't deviate. You doing so is your attempt to deflect from the point.

You don't like something the OP said because you think she should be feeling a certain way, according to how you think she should. That's misogynistic, and the more you try and deny this, it just makes you look even more like the fraud both you and I know you are.

You keep saying the same wrong thing as if repeating it will make it true.
You're saying I think a certain way, based on what you claim I said, when I said nothing of the kind. Read it again, or have someone read it to you.

 

[silverstar]

You keep saying the same wrong thing as if repeating it will make it true.
You're saying I think a certain way, based on what you claim I said, when I said nothing of the kind. Read it again, or have someone read it to you.

No, I only keep repeating it because you keep denying it (not surprised, since you're an intellectually dishonest individual), as if you denying it will make it untrue when you clearly expressed your displeasure with something that the OP said to me, because YOU think she should be feeling and thinking a certain way according to what you want.

And no, I'm saying you think the OP should be thinking a certain way. Another example of your intellectual dishonesty by deliberately twisting my words.

 

[Wolf]

No, I only keep repeating it because you keep denying it (not surprised, since you're an intellectually dishonest individual), as if you denying it will make it untrue when you clearly expressed your displeasure with something that the OP said to me, because YOU think she should be feeling and thinking a certain way according to what you want.

And no, I'm saying you think the OP should be thinking a certain way. Another example of your intellectual dishonesty by deliberately twisting my words.

I don't have to twist your words. They were pretty bad on their own.
Again, I never said what you're claiming.


Basically, this is the same argument that's used by a lot of people:

"I can say whatever crap I want about a certain group, and if you argue against it, it means you're actually against them because you don't respect them enough to let them fight their own battles!
So, you're the real (insert term here), and I'm the one whose showing them respect by talking shit about them!"

Sound familiar?
Same tune, slightly different words.

 

[silverstar]

I don't have to twist your words. They were pretty bad on their own.
Again, I never said what you're claiming.


Basically, this is the same argument that's used by a lot of people:

"I can say whatever crap I want about a certain group, and if you argue against it, it means you're actually against them because you don't respect them enough to let them fight their own battles!
So, you're the real (insert term here), and I'm the one whose showing them respect by talking shit about them!"

Sound familiar?
Same tune, slightly different words.

Another example of your intellectual dishonesty.

And not "them." The only female I was having a dispute with earlier with the OP, which turned amicable, because she is intellectually honest. I may disagree with some of her ideas and actions (posting a picture of her tit for attention), but she's able to make her own decisions. The OP doesn't represent all women. Another example of your misogyny, by attempting to speak for them all.

You, however, were disrespectful to _virginie_, and then you don't like something that the OP said, because you think all women should be feeling and thinking a certain way. No, you didn't directly say it, but another person basically told the OP what she should and shouldn't be saying and how she should and shouldn't be feeling, and you went along with it.

So yes, your attitude towards women not being able to think for themselves without you telling them what they should and shouldn't be saying and should and shouldn't be thinking, is far more misogynistic than anyone has said in this thread. Having a dispute with someone who happens to be a female, isn't misogynistic in itself.

You still remain, a fraud. And I'll happily keep pointing it out, despite the fact that it bothers you. Which is your problem, not mine. If me calling out your misogyny bothers you, then do something to fix it.

 

[Wolf]

Another example of your intellectual dishonesty.
And not "them." The only female I was having a dispute with earlier with the OP, which turned amicable, because she is intellectually honest. I may disagree with some of her ideas and actions (posting a picture of her tit for attention), but she's able to make her own decisions. The OP doesn't represent all women. Another example of your misogyny, by attempting to speak for them all.
You, however, were disrespectful to _virginie_, and then you don't like something that the OP said, because you think all women should be feeling and thinking a certain way. No, you didn't directly say it, but another person basically told the OP what she should and shouldn't be saying and how she should and shouldn't be feeling, and you went along with it.
So yes, your attitude towards women not being able to think for themselves without you telling them what they should and shouldn't be saying and should and shouldn't be thinking, is far more misogynistic than anyone has said in this thread. Having a dispute with someone who happens to be a female, isn't misogynistic in itself.
You still remain, a fraud. And I'll happily keep pointing it out, despite the fact that it bothers you.

There is absolutely no way you could bother me. There's nothing you could say that would even come close.
Your statements have no basis in fact, and I've already pointed out the fallacy in your "who's the real misogynist" argument.
It's been done, on other subjects.