A rather typical example of the double standard

I think it wouldn't fly anywhere on the site except maybe I/P, or the Gungeon.

People seem to be able to get away with all kinds of stuff in those places. It's always been that way, to some extent.

Anyway, B. I'm personally fine with this thread being and staying here, but it's really more of a meta question IMHO.

The reason I didn't want to post in Meta is because I already know what would happen and I am not seeking that kind of response.

I think her post about "slapping a person across the face with his cock" shows a couple of things worthy of discussion.

One, it shows the negative associations that some people feel free to throw around about "men" and "penises". What she meant to say is that penises are weapons that angry men use in the act of doing nasty bad things.

Two, it points out that the word "cock" in this context is okay whereas we cannot use the wordy "pussy" or, more similarly, "cunt" without creating a frenzy.

It reminds me of how some women like to talk about "testosterone poisoning" or say that a person has "too much testosterone" as a way of criticizing them. In this context, "testosterone" is shorthand for violence and all the bad things that men represent in their minds.

So, all in all, I think it was a very telling post from that person.

No, seriously. I do.

Scootaloo is not a "she": http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=820362

Since you've brought it into our group, I assume you want it looked at.



Okay, so, let's have a look at Dworkin's "criticism" of the same, shall we?




Anyone want to come out of the woodwork to defend those specific quotes?

I'll wait.

More, from Scootaloo:



Except, she WAS crazy. She hallucinated being pursued by giant invisible penises across Europe, in the years before she died. Even her most ardent supporters realized that she had finally come completely unglued, unlike her prior partial unglued-ness that caused her to say shit like penetrative intercourse is "immune to reform".


Scootaloo has obviously, deliberately and blatantly misrepresented the record on Andrea Dworkin.

I leave it to the reader to decide if Scootaloo is misrepresenting anything else.

I was just providing evidence that Scootaloo is not a "she". (The subject line starts "Well, as a male...".) Gender misassignment bugs me.

Could have been achieved without the link to the defense of Dworkin's sanity, right?

Doesnt exactly count as a point in scootaloo's credibility column, now, does it.

If I cared, perhaps I would have searched for a different post that established that. (I know how y'all feel about Dworkin, geez, I didn't show up on DU yesterday.)

Just correcting gender misassignment.

Or do you think it's an elaborate internet put-on?

http://www.wired.com/underwire/2011/06/bronies-my-little-ponys/


I think its an elaborate internet put-on, myself.

But we here in the men's group should be supportive of any fellow guy who wants to be one.

I'm just trying to figure out if it's an Andy Kaufmanesque postmodern put-on, or for real.

(I am also supportive of any guy who wants to do an Andy Kaufmanesque postmodern put-on thing)

I'm an old school Gen X straight up sarcasm-and-irony type. I'm like the Onion. When I'm kidding, you know I'm kidding.

I fully admit I can't figure out this Millennial pretend-but-then-also-genuine earnestness thing.

is a brony. He even did the artwork for the nametags and autograph cards at the recent Bronycon (or whatever the blue hell it was called) in NYC a few weeks ago.

While fixing one of my computers he showed me an episode of the show. Speaking as a lifelong fan of animation, I have to say it was quite cute and very well done. It's real. My friend said there were over 4,000 people at the convention. Harmless enough in the grand scheme of things, methinks.

I just thought maybe there was some meta-joke that I was too old or out of touch to get.

But it sure makes me want to watch and see what all the fuss is about.

Me, too.

which I certainly did (the "Meet the Beat-Alls" episode was one of the cleverest cartoons this side of Warner Bros. in their heyday) you will find MLPFIM at least tolerable. It was developed by Lauren Faust, who was a writer and storyboard artist for PPG and is married to PPG creator Craig McCracken.

The animation is very nice indeed. It's a little cutesy, but not nauseatingly so, and it has its sly and hip moments as well.

Yes, I am a cartoon/animation geek.

Men and women are perfectly equal . . . except when men are worse.

...I'll just add that I agree with your observation here.

It does only further damage things, and I don't like this kind of speech either.

The penis and vagina function differently in sex, leading to different analogies and symbols. To say something similar about Condolezza Rice, I'm afraid you'd have to say she slapped her strap-on across Arab leader's faces.

However, whether referring to vagina or penis, they're both already equally offensive and unwelcomed in polite, serious conversations and formal writing. There are people who would reject a post like this and never answer or recommend it. I don't know what else you can want, here.

Yes, if he had used a vagina analogy, women, and a few men, would have complained. However, it seems men don't complain as much when their genitals are used for such references. Why? Any guess I make will sound like a joke.

Nevertheless, you can either take poster's point as communicated, or divert the conversation to the way he chose to communicate it. Penises just don't distract me enough to hassle about it.

Remember, the poster is suggesting that, in this order, President Obama AND two politicians (who happen to be Jewish, but that's a coincidence. I'm sure.) are engaged in the conduct- metaphorically "only", of course- described in the post.

The fact is, that sort of statement wouldn't fly in most corners of this site, on most topics. I think another double standard is that some people think they can get away with all sorts of OTT rhetoric when the subject is I/P, or, say, guns.

That's been pretty clear, lately.

In my experience, the poster will then get frustrated and say that your point about the words he chose is irrelevant to the point of his statement, and the point you then made about his statement is ignored. By choosing his mode of communications at all, you've probably sacrifice your chance to make any point about his message.

That, btw, is a recap of what happened when I chose to do both.

Yes, it's offensive in the way you describe as well, something I didn't notice at first. However, one thing about resorting to crass, vulgar analogies in casual discussion is, you're often numb to the collateral insults you could be making.