Some other words we need to ban, while we're at it

[Bake]

Dick, prick, tool, schlong, dickhead, dickwad, dickweed, etc. You get the idea. They are so obviously degrading, offensive terms that are intended to be offensive with reference to gender.

Of course, they are terms that I, as a man, use frequently: "Cheney's such a dickhead." "Smirk is such a TOOL!""Powell is such a prick." You get the idea. I had no idea I was being so P.I. And I don't know how I'll ever drive a car in traffic again, if I can't yell at an offending fellow motorist, "Way to go, you DICKHEAD!"

But if we're going to ban "bitch," then by God we'd better ban all the pecker references too! Unless of course (as is so often the case when I have the occasional argument with my wife), "THAT'S DIFFERENT!"

Bake

[DrWeird]

1. How about we just ban bitches.

[lyrical di]

4. you should use symbols to indicate when you're joking

Otherwise someone may presume that you are unintelligent and bigotted. I agree that female dogs shouldn't post here. I have set my little mixed mutt Lucy to the side and asked her to please stop pressing the space bar in an attempt to get me off the computer.

I do believe women have the right to express their opinions in any manner needed to convey the depth of their experiences and intellect. If other pets need to resort to name calling, perhaps their owners also need to ban them from typing on the keyboard.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SarahB]

2. If all were equal, I'd agree in theory

Unfortunately, women are still struggling here in this society. Yes, we have progressed more than the countries where we can't drive legally and are covered head to toe in a burka, but women still:

1.) are paid less
2.) are only in small amounts as CEO's of Fortune 500 corporations
3.) are more likely to be killed by a partner or ex-partner
4.) are more likely to be victims of sexual violence by a margin of 1 in 4 as opposed to 1 in 10 men
5.) are often not covered by their insurance for contraceptives, whereas drugs like Viagra are
6.) are apparently lucky to even get their birth control prescriptions filled these days
7.) don't not have access to abortion in 85% of the counties in the US
8.) have historically been looked at as property of men
9.) have only had the vote for 37% of our country's history
10.) are still judged first and foremost by external factors

I'm not sure if I agree with censoring any words completely, but there are terms used to marginalize and silence women, who, as a whole, still have less power in our society than do men. One should proceed with extreme caution in it's use. I don't think that it should necessarily be banned, but this is a healthy discussion nonetheless.

[drhilarius]

3. Slippery Slope

Extreme caution can easily become censorship. Also, censorship doesn't have to be by authoritarian mandate, it can be internalized (one may, while writing, not use the word that would pack the most punch...art would suffer). look at Tropic of Cancer. Miller's use of the word "Cunt" is effective in his characterization, for the overall themes he's trying to develop. "bitch" might be used ironically, or for satire's sake. Also, let's not forget language is a two way street, and although it can be used for oppression through one usage, it can be used for empowerment in the next. Take, for example, hows gays and Af. Am. appropriated, respectively, the words "Queer" and "nigger". All I am saying is that a binary approach to one word has a negative effect on language as whole.

[SarahB]

5. I'm aware of this

That's why I can't agree with the concept of any banning words in theory with the exception of blatant insults directed toward other members. What I'm trying to illustrate here is that while I disagree with censorship, having serious discussions at times here regarding gender issues can be of value.

[drhilarius]

7. I agree.

But shouldn't those points you brought up in your previous post be discussed head on rather than indirectly through whether or not we should ban certain words? Watching two people argue about whether or not to ban a word is like watching an atheist argue with an Evangelical. I just think it would be more productive to put up a post "how do we correct the pay inequality between the sexes" rather than "should 'bitch' be banned".

[SarahB]

13. Frequently they have

Often women's issues or sensitvities regarding them are mocked. That's the inherent problem I think.

[SOteric]

24. That is a moot point. Skinner is not proposing to entirely ban the word.

He's clearly and plainly stated that the context of the word will still be acceptable in the form of "griping" and that means that the moderators and the admins on this site will have the ability to make a judgement call. It will not be substantially different than the N-word or any number of epithets hurled at ethnically, racially or sexually diverse people. In context of a quote or in satirical speech the words are still acceptable on this site. In general usage, notsomuch.

[CTLawGuy]

6. but men...

1) pay more in auto insurance simply for being male. (If the genders were reversed would feminists let it stand?)
2) are executed at a grossly disproportionate rate
3) are the only gender who is subject to the draft.
4) must become gainfully employed, as society frowns on men choosing to stay home and take care of kids.
5) are at a disadvantage when it comes to child custody disputes
6) have a lower life expectancy than women
7) have zero reproductive rights (society forces men to take care of kids should the woman choose to have them (child support), whereas a woman may choose to abort any kid she does not want.)
8) are judged primarily by height (shorter men make less than taller men, shorter men are less likely to have girlfriends)
9) are more likely to be killed at work
10) are punished more severely for statutory rape on girls than female statutory rape on boys.

My point is, both genders have specific disadvantages. Do we want a society free of those on all sides?

[SarahB]

12. but men....

1). are statistically more often in auto accidents.
2). commit capital crimes at grossly disproportionate rates (still oppose the death penalty though)
3.) are the only gender who can't get pregnant in combat due to consenting sexual activity or in the hands of the enemy
4.) That's a personal decision and not everyone would agree.
5.) unless the have a better lawyer
6.) perhaps take more risks or take less care of themselves and this is fairly recent as historically, women had shorter life spans
7.) have zero reproductive capacity or capability within their bodies; when they do, they have every right to control their bodies as well
8.) Nothing I can do about genetics, but I'd have to say, I have an attraction to tall men, but married a man who's just under 5'9" because intelligent woman look at multiple factors in a partner. Intelligent employers do as well.
9.) men are more likely to choose dangerous jobs
10.) It far more difficult for a woman to have sex with a man without consent.

Why wouldn't we want a society free of gender specific disadvantages? There are differences, but primarily they include your lack of ability to give birth or breastfeed and my lack of ability to effectively pee standing. Neither should affect my right to contraception or equal pay NOR your right to choose to be a stay at home dad or be gainfully employed while height challenged. You brought up some thoughtful discourse and I'm not entirely trying to continue an argument, but point a few things out.

[Bake]

15. Your response to #10 is totally incorrect.

Were you atttempting to argue on a FACTUAL or LEGAL basis, you would know that statutory rape, which was the subject of point #10, has nothing at all to do with whether or not the minor cooperated in the act -- which blows your response out of the water. The reason it is statutory rape is that, by definition, a minor CANNOT legally consent to sex. That is, even if the minor was a wiling participant in the act, there is no legal consent and the perpetrator/adult is still guilty of the crime.

Let's put the shoe on the other foot. As is so often stated, rape (in the general sense) is not about sex. It's about power, abuse, etc. Your argument is equivalent to a man saying that the woman "wanted it."

You're just wrong.

Bake

[SarahB]

21. I know the legal definition of statutory rape

I think perhaps because it is more difficult for a women to physically rape a man, leniency is shown more. I'm not saying it's necessarily right (and if some women went after one of my boys when he was a young adolescent, she'd face quite a wrath), but that's likely why it is. However, there are women in prison for this very act. There just are less of them. Think Mary Kay Leturno. Find me some statistics of percentage arrested (not even prosecuted or convicted) on crimes of sexual violence. I'd be shocked if it's even 5-10% women. It's almost always a man. I'm not being sexist. It's a statistical fact.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SarahB]

22. Are you suggesting...

that women commit capital crimes at the same rates at men and are not being prosecuted? My "opinion" has nothing to do with race or being sexist. These are statistical facts. If you have data that shows otherwise-> post your data. I'd be happy to retract my statement if you can show statistical evidence to the contrary. Not individual cases, but overall statistics.

[daveskilt]

19. well put!

all this poor oppressed men talk is so silly. its not even in the same ballpark. although mens life expectancy is due to some annoying socialization that makes them feel the need to prove manliness by taking dangerous jobs, doing stupid things and working in manual labor to make a living for the family at home for 45 years. just as many of womens problems are due to insistance on societally defined gender roles for men and women.

[camero]

25. If men don't take the dangerous jobs

then who will do them? Women? I don't think so. Also, these "dangerous jobs" include police, firefighters, construction workers, truck drivers, etc. Fortunately some women are taking these jobs and more power to them but just insulting men brings nothing to the table.

[daveskilt]

26. Don't be silly. I'm not insulting men.

The socialization of men and women into gender roles which are societally defined is the cause of many problems for men and women. men die younger because of this socialization leading them to more dangerous situations. women get the short end of the stick on most gender role issues.

the fact that you accept these constructed roles so readily and without question shows how deeply ingrained they are.

[camero]

27. I would say this is an insult

although mens life expectancy is due to some annoying socialization that makes them feel the need to prove manliness by taking dangerous jobs,doing stupid things and working in manual labor to make a living for the family at home for 45 years.


What you don't say is that suicide is the 4th leading cause of death among men of all ages while it is 19th for women. The low rate of suicide among women does not portend a group that would be oppressed.
Suicide is also seen as an escape from oppression. Also in alot of states, welfare is available only to single women with children. Men in poverty stay in poverty, while women in poverty do get some help.

While I agree that there is social pressure to conform to certain traits, that is not the sole cause of death among people and the simplistic argument fails. Calling me silly does not lend any credence to your argument but detracts from it.

[daveskilt]

30. we are agreeing mostly

the suicide arguement only adds to what I am saying. I am saying that gender roles are socially constructed and that this is a negative thing as it stands now both for men and for women. suicide is rarely about oppression regardless of what durkheim had to say about it. I may be being a bit simplistic but no one wants to read my thesis.

I think that government attempts to redress the balance are always going to fall short or over reach as is the case with any attempt to redress an overarching societal attitude that negatively impacts a group in society. The welfare situation is not ideal neither is the SS situation where widows recieve less than widowers. how to fix it? i dont know. but recognizing the constructed nature of gender roles - that they are not "real" is a good step towards preventing the negative impacts of those assigned roles on men and women.

If I injured your pride by saying silly I am truly sorry however it does seem to show a societally defined male trait at work - one which leads to higher blood pressure, increased emotional stress and a higher likelihood of early death. I do not mean to imply that you are in any way daft, I was trying to keep it light and say I was not disagreeing or argueing merely looking at a different side (only one of many sides of the issue) which is that of socialized gender roles and their negative effects on individuals much the same as any other class structure seen as absolute and inalterable.

I am sure you are a very smart chap - you post here and vote democrat dont you?

[camero]

32. Yes I do vote democrat

In fact it's my mother that complains about me voting a straight democratic ticket. I just don't buy the BS that petty bourgeoius women are oppressed in the definition of the term or that women are going to take dangerous jobs in droves tomorrow and yesterday. And conscription is also a part of male's lower life expectancy. It's a credit to feminists that they have protested the draft.

But men do not have a monopoly on doing stupid things and violence as I have seen way too much.

[daveskilt]

34. see I knew we were agreeing

the gender roles hurt everyone - male and female. women who are socialized to be submissive to men or to not go to school and men who do daft things - same difference.

[camero]

35. It's the power struggle that hurts

I think that both can be equally sexist. That's where we differ. The rest I agree with. Neither sex (and that would include me) deserves a pedestal. I would leave that pedestal for Mother Theresa and Gandhi.
MLK and Susan B. Anthony to name another.


And just repeating the all boys are stupid point over and over again gets ya nowhere.

[Fight_n_back]

8. Its not equal..Women are in the majority

you can vote in whomever you want.

Quit whining and do something for christ sakes. Vote or something.

And then ask a guy out on a date.

1.) are paid less
Ask for a raise...its what a man would do

2.) are only in small amounts as CEO's of Fortune 500 corporations
Start a company, its illegal to deny a loan based on gender

3.) are more likely to be killed by a partner or ex-partner
Stop going out with pricks

4.) are more likely to be victims of sexual violence by a margin of 1 in 4 as opposed to 1 in 10 men
See number three

5.) are often not covered by their insurance for contraceptives, whereas drugs like Viagra are
Yeah, well, you got me there

6.) are apparently lucky to even get their birth control prescriptions filled these days
Hey, Im all for women having a lot of sex

7.) don't not have access to abortion in 85% of the counties in the US
Then VOTE FOR BETTER CANDIDATES...Women are the MAJORITY in the WORLD

8.) have historically been looked at as property of men
Thats like saying Greeks were traditionally the property of Romans

9.) have only had the vote for 37% of our country's history
But now you are THE MAJORITY and could elect any candidate they want

10.) are still judged first and foremost by external factors

By other women and themselves...first and foremost. Fashion models are on the covers of women's magazines. Athletes and cars are on the cover of mens magazines.



1) Men die sooner
2) Men are more likely to be murdered
3) Men are more likely to die in a mining accident
4) Men are more likely to get the death penalty
5) Men are more likely to lose control of the TV
6) Men are more likely to drink themselves deaf so they don't have to hear your top ten
7) Men are more likely to be judged by their professional success
8) It is 150% more likely that a man will suffocate in the thin atmosphere of Mars than be asked on a date by a woman
9) Men are 90% less likely to finish a top ten list


Lighten up...hardly anybody here is your enemy.

[SarahB]

11. Reply

you can vote in whomever you want.

Quit whining and do something for christ sakes. Vote or something.

I do, as do other women here.

And then ask a guy out on a date.

I'm married, but I used to.

1.) are paid less
Ask for a raise...its what a man would do

I would and have.

2.) are only in small amounts as CEO's of Fortune 500 corporations
Start a company, its illegal to deny a loan based on gender

Yes, but they often do not have access to investors like men in the wealthy elite circles. Every woman here is smarter than W. He got plenty of investment for the companies he was involved with and smarts had nothing to do with success. It's old school male upper class nepotism (but I concur this is as much class as gender based often).

3.) are more likely to be killed by a partner or ex-partner
Stop going out with pricks

I never was into men like that. The women who make bad relationship choices still don't deserve it.

4.) are more likely to be victims of sexual violence by a margin of 1 in 4 as opposed to 1 in 10 men
See number three

So because so many young girls of victims of incest or other forms of sexual abuse, they go out with pricks? It's one in 4 by age 18 who are abused.

5.) are often not covered by their insurance for contraceptives, whereas drugs like Viagra are
Yeah, well, you got me there

Yup

6.) are apparently lucky to even get their birth control prescriptions filled these days
Hey, I'm all for women having a lot of sex

Me, too, so what's up with the executives of insurance companies?

7.) don't not have access to abortion in 85% of the counties in the US
Then VOTE FOR BETTER CANDIDATES...Women are the MAJORITY in the WORLD

I do as do most women here.

8.) have historically been looked at as property of men
Thats like saying Greeks were traditionally the property of Romans

What does that have to do with it?

9.) have only had the vote for 37% of our country's history
But now you are THE MAJORITY and could elect any candidate they want

So, women need to not fear taking their power. Most of the women here do not.

10.) are still judged first and foremost by external factors

By other women and themselves...first and foremost. Fashion models are on the covers of women's magazines. Athletes and cars are on the cover of mens magazines.

In a sense, you're right, but why do you think we can get this way?



1) Men die sooner

they take more risks

2) Men are more likely to be murdered

see #1

3) Men are more likely to die in a mining accident

more likely to choose jobs as miners

4) Men are more likely to get the death penalty

more likely to commit capital crimes (I'm opposed to the death penalty for anyone though)

5) Men are more likely to lose control of the TV

that sounds like your personal issue

6) Men are more likely to drink themselves deaf so they don't have to hear your top ten

These words are written. Are you hearing strange voices or something?

7) Men are more likely to be judged by their professional success

Men are more likely to judge each other by this. Not all women are shallow.

8) It is 150% more likely that a man will suffocate in the thin atmosphere of Mars than be asked on a date by a woman

I'm an attractive woman who has asked men out and is assertive. I find it freaks them out.

9) Men are 90% less likely to finish a top ten list

hee-hee!


Lighten up...hardly anybody here is your enemy.

I am light. 90% of my DU posts are light. Sometimes though, I just got to say what needs to be said.

[Donkeyboy75]

14. I agree with most of your points,

but if you think it's fair to say that men die more frequently, have more dangerous jobs, and live a shorter life than women because they "take more risks," then isn't it also fair to postulate that it is one of many reasons there are, for instance, more male CEOs than female CEOs? After all, career advancement like that is usually a product of risk taking.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's the primary reason men make more and have more leadership positions, but it's certainly a factor.

One of the biggest problems I see is in corporate America is the branding of an aggressive professional female as a "ballbuster," while it's a good quality for a male.

[SarahB]

23. I think you do have a point

Too many women do not take risks in our society because it isn't as socially acceptable. You are correct in this assessment. Nothing ventured, nothing gained!

[CTLawGuy]

10. this is probably not due to discrimination

"1.) are paid less"


the reason I know is that in economics, a firm's purogative is to minimize costs, part of maximizing profits. If a firm can get equal services from a man for $1 as from a woman for $0.75, he would never hire any men until all available women were employed.

Here's why.

Firm A and Firm B need 4 workers each to make pizzas. The wage rate for a male worker is $1 per pizza made. the wage rate for a female worker is $0.75 per pizza.

Firm A hires only male workers. Its costs are $4 per pizza (4 workers * $1 per worker).
Firm B hires only female workers. Its costs are $3 per pizza (4 workers * $0.75 per worker).

they have to compete for business. Firm A sets the price at $5 per pizza. It would get $1 profit per pizza. But then firm B sets its price to $4, which would BOTH draw ALL the business from firm A and give firm B a $1 profit.

Frim A responds by setting its price to $4 as well, so it barely breaks even, but the two firms share the business.

Then firm B goes for the kill, it sets its price at 3.75 per pizza. It gets all the business and makes a $0.75 profit. If Firm A set its price to 3.75, it would lose 25 cents per pizza, so it can't do that. Firm B makes a profit because they hired the cheaper female workers, and firm A goes out of business.

If women really made 75 cents for every man's dollar, in a particular job, no one would hire any men and be able to stay competitive.

The reason women earn 75 cents on the dollar, in the aggregate, is because women tend to take lower paying jobs (would could likely be discrimination),and they tend to take time off from earning money to raise families.

[Liberal Christian]

31. Your analysis fails

The issue is not so much that a man and a woman doing the same job for the same employer are making different salaries, although that used to be the case in most businesses.

The issue remains that overall, on average, women's pay is still lower than men's. This happens because more jobs traditionally done by women are still low-wage jobs -- child care worker, teacher, bank teller, retail, restaurant server, part-time cashier at a discount store, to name just a few. True there are men doing all of these jobs, but there are more women in these jobs, which pulls down the average wage.

There are not nearly as many women at the high end of earnings as men, which also skews the average. It takes a hell of a lot of part time Walmart salaries to equal one $12,000,000/year CEO salary.

Now, often these jobs supplement the wages of another household wage earner. Often they don't, however. And that shouldn't enter into it.

There is often somewhat more flexibility in scheduling in some of these jobs which enables those people who do them to also be home for kids after school, which is choice that some people make.

All kinds of factors enter into the wage disparity which your analysis complete fails to consider. The world is not as simplistic as you want to make it.

[RebelOne]

17. Let's get rid of the F word. I hate it.

[polazarus]

18. I think that this is not a good Idea

To ban certain words. I think that the current rules in place are sufficient enough to handle offensive and rude behavior. When you ban profanity or any type of speech you go into that grey area of "thought police" which becomes counter-productive.

[Loonman]

20. I totally agree

If "bitch" has to go, words that pejoratively denigrate men should be eliminated as well.

[Bake]

28. Evidently it's still OK to insult men based on gender alone.

Is that because we're a majority? I'm sick of all this bullshit! "ALL men are dicks, tools, schlongs, pricks, etc., but you'd better not call anyone a bitch ..."

And this place has the gall to talk about free speech. About as free as freeperland. And the deleted post above was mine. Not a personal attack in it. Directly related to the issue of discussion, but apparently I offended the mod by comparing the argument about statistical frequency of crimes committed by men to crimes committed by various racial groups, and of course that's over the line. The POINT I WAS MAKING IS THAT STATISTICS DO NOT EQUATE TO RIGHT AND WRONG!!! Oh well, censor first and ask questions later.

I'm just about up to here with the censorship on this board.

Bake

[Westegg]

29. I'm sorta late to this thread. Is this serious?...

We're really talking about banning words on DU now? I'm a bit stunned by that one. I'm supposed to start censoring my posts before I send them? I don't THINK so. In my humble opinion, the moderators here do an extremely efficient job of yanking stuff they feel is inappropriate. That's okay by me, as the rules of DU were in place long before I signed up, and I made a conscious decision to adhere to them. But if we're now going to start parsing language, hell, where does THAT end? Sounds like a very slippery slope indeed, and not what I came here to experience. I came here to enjoy a free exchange of ideas and opinions. To my mind, that includes the language that a typical DU'er will choose to use.

Please inform me if I've somehow misunderstood.

[Bake]

33. Yes, we're really talking about banning words here

The terms bitch, bitchslap, etc. are offensive to some, perhaps many DUers. Where you been? Over in GD yesterday -- maybe even today (I've been scared to go in there) -- there were at least eight threads, with at least 1000+ total posts, arguing about whether to ban any use of any term derived from "bitch" that does not refer to (a) a female dog, or (b) complaining.

Since I oppose censorship of any kind, particularly in a forum such as this which is supposedly designed for the free exchange of ideas, I suggested that IF we're going to ban such words, we be consistent about it and ban derogatory sexual references to men, as suggested in the opening post of this thread. But of course, THAT'S DIFFERENT!! So it is apparently still OK to insult people by referring to them as dicks, dickheads, tools, schlongs, prongs, (although cocksucker is probably out).

I wasn't seriously advocating banning anything. I was trying to make a point, and it flew right over the heads of the censor-types.

Bake