User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  24
Likes Likes:  56
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 44
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    AboveMostOfYou
    Posts
    5,290
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    41

    Default

    I'm not going to say much on this except in my mind "beautiful" doesn't mean "pretty". There has always been a distinct difference. I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with what POTUS said, how he said it or where he said it. Good on him I say.

    1.having beauty; having qualities that give great pleasure or satisfaction to see, hear, think about, etc.; delighting the senses or mind: a beautiful dress; a beautiful speech.
    As for Romney's words......at the end of the day......don't care. I have no problem with what presidentialhopeful said, how he said it or where he said it. it.just.doesn't.matter.to.me.now.
    Revelation 21:4 - Psalm 51 - Psalm 121 - Ephesians
    (All words typed above are my experience and/or opinion, please feel free to agree or disagree....just please, do so without malice.)
    Loc'ed: 19/NOV/08 - Love ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~NP Convert since 06/08

  2. Likes CCmomof5 liked this post
  3. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    7,610
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alecto View Post
    Can you clarify what you meant by the emboldened line, esp the "as a distinct rather than more probable class of alleged victims" part?
    Sure. There are men who "use" women and/or feminine men for sexual purposes despite if not because they harbor hateful and/or prejudiced views about them. It is remarkably more likely for cycles of predatory sex crimes to strike people of a feminine persuasion perceived as promiscuous or otherwise outcasted from or regarded in mainstream society based on their sexual conduct (such as prostitutes, models, aesthetically regarded actresses, pageant kids, and continuing to homosexual males, "fairies", transgendered or intersexed women, etc.).

    Despite these spikes, directly related to patriarchal domination and fallout from the imposition and constraints of (not) conforming to feminine (or masculine in the case of male-identified victims) virtues, the deviation itself is sourced as a reason for a lack of credibility or overwhelming sensation. The alleged victims are penalized, blamed, and/or discredited by their social rank rather than the merit and substance of their case. This is what has allowed people to take up predilections for raping women and then killing said women, then society afforded them prostitutes then onward to killing said prostitutes then society afforded children and then the killing of said children.

    A reason it takes so long to deal with these spikes is because society is holding onto feminine virtue and the sexualization and subjugation of femininity. Sanctioned prostitutes are still on thin ice with society and imposing males just as a woman expressing her political ideals is still a sex commodity who needs to shut her mouth unless she is going to check with women to make sure they'll have her back. In this instance, Dash was sold out as an unclaimed or unvalued (if nothing more than a) sex commodity primarily by women. Just as it is seen as a compliment for gay men to be regarded as *****es while the ills and reality of the connotation still strikes women, women are still regarded as whores in a way which tends to only serve to flatter or empower men. The evidence of this oppression and subjugation can be vividly seen whereas a woman's sexual history (of choice) is used to discredit rather than support the credibility of her experience(s) of non-consent (if it's possible to be relevant at all).

    Likewise, regarding the beauty of women exclusively and particularly without any substantive context which deviates from the aesthetic norm of expression is a backhanded compliment at best and public subjugation and gender oppression at worst. It doesn't take on the positive potential of context without the context thereof. Obama has no history of regarding the beauty of any man that I know of. So, it's live and die by the sword of feminine virtue, but being thankful for not having one's corpse desecrated if you will.

    The fact that female feminists can be compelled to sell out a woman exercising her political voice in a dignified yet "feminine" fashion (in some instances perhaps, which is her body and such to source) yet slowroll on confronting "collective powers" as liable for the victimization of said commodities doesn't just silence or condemn Dash. It subjugates, degrades, and throws to predators all women from the same realm or school that the crabs in a barrel are supposed to be elevating from the clutches beyond (while men are gracefully convincing women to stay in said "places" or beat back other women who defy). She's a woman and black at that, how dare she? White women and black men with name recognition who danced a jig for Obama didn't get torched for their enthusiasm or if they were, it wasn't accepted by somewhat mainstreamed intellectuals masquerading as champions for the expression and lawful exercise of political views. Of course (in this oppressive and caste affirming society), black men who didn't support Obama caught flack but their manhood wasn't called into question.

    The distinction is only made to oppress, admonish, or excuse if not "appreciate" rather than resolve why justice or respectful conduct won't be viable. I know of Top Ten lists of men with name recognition perceived as sexy or hot who were listed because they support Obama. They were allowed to exercise their sex appeal as they saw fit without being discredited by and large. If there were a list of Top Ten black women who support Obama and people came at them as sex commodities who only had something to say because they were looking for attention or trying to promote themselves, what would those critics really be saying and how would that translate for other women who want to stand up vocally for their less than popular political ideals? Is that to only be a man's place (to bestow) or what?

    Accepting the compliment here is no different than accepting that those who won't warrant the compliments (of their distinctly feminine virtues, as opposed to or contradicting character and/or integrity) will receive (if not deserve) the condemnation and/or unaffirming subjugation.

    Example of backlash and divisive self-admonishing feminity:
    An obese minor overhears a conversation about another young woman being drugged and raped. She hears other young women advising each other not to accept food and/or beverage from strange men. Said minor says that she has never been drugged while eating socially and, after they'd looked her up and down to posture against her audacity, they commented that it's because she's ugly. They laugh and she cries sometime later in private. She grows up and gathers that despite the backlash of their self-aggrandizing posture and contempt, she does have some risk of being victimized as such.

    Despite said awareness and whatever precautions (if any), some predator figures out how to catch her off guard, she is drugged and sexually assaulted. When she is shown in court with only her face blurred out, people remark that she lacks some credibility because it's much less likely that someone would go through all that to have sex with an "ugly" woman (as if to also imply that most predatory rapists couldn't or don't also have consensual sex). They then go on to add in how she doesn't have internal damage and that a woman who admits to having a less quantitative sex life (because she's fat) should have said evidence. The bias against her as a lesser beautiful woman is being used to elevate the femininity of other women being ("bigger") victims by those same measures while victimizing her within her own caste.

    It can go on an on. Ultimately, her champions would be far less numerous and perhaps less vocal than those championing any particular woman who conforms to feminine values (including aesthetic) by men and women alike. Then, "fat women" become less likely (than other potential victim groups) to report their rapes because they lack support in society. From there, predators catch on and there goes another spike and our collective contribution and power in this regard as a society is exercised to horror yet ignored amid social grace.

    It goes the same for the physical assault of black men and the sexual assault of black women. It's not just racism at play but also feminine and masculine virtues and those who are worthy of justice and acceptance (of those subjugated and oppressed). When women can be passionately complimented for more than their ability to please others with their presence and/or deeds, or men are also equally regarded as such, perhaps "beauty" can be elevated beyond a self-aggrandizing statement of submission, conformity or feminine virtue. Because, when a woman doesn't, you get people talking crazy about Hillary Clinton because she's an educated politically savvy woman who happens to have "served" as First Lady before her own potential in the public light had come to fruition or you get Stacey Dash being railroaded by frauds regarding themselves as feminists and getting away with it because they're women being paid or taking it up as a self-aggrandizing hobby.
    Last edited by Intellexual; 11-10-2012 at 10:21 AM.
    If your import amid discussion is to ridicule, sabotage, and/or dismiss, you will no longer receive the privilege of my attention. Passive aggressive behaviors are a defense mechanism of oppressed and ultimately even self-defeated persons. Disregarding and/or ridiculing the concerns of others doesn't legitimize or address your own. You have betrayed a critical trust I must have in you that you are engaging or asking of me to enhance each of our perspectives rather than ridicule mine or reaffirm your own biases. Express your own concerns and/or support your own ideals. Your antics reek of repression and aren't constructive.

  4. Thanks Ororo thanked for this post
    Likes Ororo liked this post
  5. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    7,722
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    25

    Default

    I need the author to have a seat. Perhaps if more fathers praised their daughters the way the president did we'd see fewer girls running around seeking that validation from men who use them up.
    Where can you find me?
    Twitter: @TheDrIsIn2015
    On the Web: https://opinionsmusingsandreflections.wordpress.com/

  6. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    8,235
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    42

    Default

    That woman was reaching for the moon and the stars on this critique. Of all the issues important to the feminist agenda this is what she chooses to speak on? A father praising his children and calling them beautiful is now not ok? As someone else noted, the word beautiful encompasses more than aesthetic. And even if he was referring to them being beautiful on the outside so what? He also described them as being strong and intelligent. Why can't they be attractive too? I'm ok with women being seen as physically appealing as long as our other attributes can be recognized too. And I consider myself a feminist....

  7. Likes MommieDearest, Serbbral liked this post
  8. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    T.O.
    Posts
    1,144
    Reviews
    Read 1 Reviews
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Some of the nasty things said about Stacey Dash...damn



    “This hurts but you a Romney lover and you slutting yourself to the white man only proves why no black man married u.”

    “She’s an indoor slave.”

    “You ready to head back to the fields, jiggaboo?”

    “Stacey Dash has probably been thinking that she’s white since her ‘Clueless’ days. All the signs were there.”
    It's amazing how people get the go-ahead to throw misogyny and racism at her for deviating from what a Black Woman is expected to say and do.


    Thanks for clarification above, Intell.

  9. Thanks Intellexual thanked for this post
    Likes Serbbral liked this post
  10. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    7,610
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    I can go throughout our history in the US and show women being relegated by men, despite their import, and women serving as muscle against other women or giving testimony on behalf of whatever powerful men were proven to have wronged said women. As for the current people and considerations:

    In the 2008 campaign, McCain took time out to explicitly defend Obama when his "supporters" would step entirely out of line in his (televised, in the least) presence. Yet, neither McCain nor Obama felt it was prudent and in the People's best interest to recognize their fellow candidate and the most politically accomplished third party presidential candidate in the last century or so (Cynthia McKinney). Obama's indifference and complacency, if not fearfully hopeful silence, in her exclusion was not regarded as a setback. The fact that she was not in all (let alone any) of the presidential debates has been afforded by men rending the sponsorship and hosting of said events from the League of Women Voters. That's gotten us only two "recognized" candidates per presidential campaign cycle and the most accomplished female and black candidate ever getting boxed out (beside many more diverse and People powered candidates being boxed out by male and monied interests).

    When his colleague was being falsely detained during international work subsequently, Obama had not a bit to say in support of her distinct public service and safe passage. She's one of the few serious presidential candidates to be, literally, left to die without any regard from the establishment. This was while her colleague and former fellow presidential candidate was in office. So, he didn't just ignore her to avoid risking losing black and female votes to her.

    In the next election, a blacked woman is rended for endorsing a different candidate who actually has a chance of winning. I didn't hear calls from women to have the candidate take time out to stand up against that misogyny like we called for McCain (who did) to stand up against the illogical and outlandish racism openly hurled against Obama.

    Yet, when these men (Obama being one of us without contest) go on to pet "their" womens with praises of their feminine virtues and thank their "loyal" base of women, we're supposed to not only not call that out (it's never a good time to call these men to task just as it's never not a good time to debase and ridicule a woman) nor question the integrity of people apologizing and testifying on behalf of these offensive behaviors?

    As an employer and community leader, I deserve and receive a massive amount of nuanced, impassioned, and often times ultimately constructive and effectively translated criticisms. More over, I seek them aware that my positions of power, as (a businessman, community voice, and more socially liberated male alike) may intimidate others or cause them to fear my disdain for or dislike of their imperfect and poignant pleas or advances.

    Women, particularly those of color, spoke resoundingly in support of Obama twice for presidential candidacy. Why should women's voices, particularly those critical of patriarchal domination (when it's been demonstrated time and time again that women will be complacent if not enablers for their messiahs and male leaders) be discredited and/or ridiculed by women who didn't raise their objections against men who never stood up for them to acknowledge their own contributions against the advancement and liberation of women?

    How can a man be absolved of accountability to analyze and contest the oppression of the People if he's the head executive figure within said society? When I interact with my fellow feminists, I don't get a pass because I'm a feminist and action specific contributor myself. My behaviors are called to task and I listen without ego, debasing, excusing, and/or ridiculing because that is a critical component of us all being liberated from these constraints. I'm a powerful person but I'm no president of the US. Why can we discuss financial politics every day with channels dedicated to them, but if a woman critiques the President's perspective and actions as it pertains the gender politics, our beloved President is being unfairly criticized?!

    Which month or day in a given year are feminists and women allowed to deal with the refuges and nuances of patriarchal domination or just exercise their freedoms without being petted and praised for their conformity and graceful submission? Besides those who are oppressed, who else has to bide their time to get a chance to discuss the overt and nuanced offenses and setbacks they're experiencing and/or observing?
    Last edited by Intellexual; 11-10-2012 at 11:04 PM.
    If your import amid discussion is to ridicule, sabotage, and/or dismiss, you will no longer receive the privilege of my attention. Passive aggressive behaviors are a defense mechanism of oppressed and ultimately even self-defeated persons. Disregarding and/or ridiculing the concerns of others doesn't legitimize or address your own. You have betrayed a critical trust I must have in you that you are engaging or asking of me to enhance each of our perspectives rather than ridicule mine or reaffirm your own biases. Express your own concerns and/or support your own ideals. Your antics reek of repression and aren't constructive.

  11. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,755
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karibana View Post
    I don't think her issue is that deep down she thinks black women belong lower then white women on the beauty totem pole, I'd say it's tone deaf because as many commenters say she missed the context of Obama's statement and it's reaching. I understand what she's saying about society giving too much value to beauty as an attribute for women but she fails her arguments against Obama's statements are weak, starting with her saying that a parent wouldn't say his son is handsome.
    Agreed, it's far from uncommon fora man to say his son is handsome and teens can be so insecure, they need to know that they're special and beautiful to someone.

    Quote Originally Posted by EvesDilemma View Post
    I need the author to have a seat. Perhaps if more fathers praised their daughters the way the president did we'd see fewer girls running around seeking that validation from men who use them up.
    *applause*

    Precisely, they need to have their self-worth instilled as children that way their self validation is in place and their 'norm' by the time they reach adulthood.

    Geeze if a farther can't tell his daughter she's beautiful, who can?

    DeBe

  12. Likes luvfaithfully, Serbbral liked this post
  13. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    7,610
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    The consequences of masculine psychology and conformity for young and even adult males aren't to be ignored, as if those praises (also often void of context) don't come with affirming subjugation and assimilation. I can offer many ills and hateful perspectives which can readily be sourced to males feeling especially or inadequately representative of masculine ideals and the adverse effects on their well-being and the women who are subjected to them. This isn't a zero-sum game. In reality, both males and females are either being force-fed or conversely denied massive doses of sugar based on their social favor. The consequence of not knowing and embracing one's self without those superficially and socially specific praises AND the consequences of being excluded from what seems like constructive praises are remarkable and documented.

    The validation for one's vanity, conformity, and social virtues comes at the inherent expense of self for the sake of subsequent social acceptance and/or validation. In the case of women and minorities, the game is also rigged against them in spite of their conformity. However, playing the game at all (as a blacked male parent to blacked minors) is something I won't do and don't appreciate. It's not okay to only tell blacked males that they're handsome or would be more handsome if they deny their "feminine" interests (such as having substantial hair atop their heads in many households). It's not okay to treat a young woman to a kind oppressor (father) so that when she submits to another male oppressor/authority, she'll be "hopefully" conditioned to only accept a kinder oppressor. Smart and beautiful women are not taught to lead their households, communities, and/or countries. No one is asking President Obama, Bush, Clinton if they have to deal with their daughters feeling pressure to continue the family's political prominence on the nation's grandest stage because...they're female.

    It's just oppressor-slave talk to say that a child has good grades, is "smart", and is handsome and/or beautiful. What really tells the tale is how parents and society treat children who don't or simply cannot conform to the ideals of femininity, masculinity, aesthetic ideals, and/or the gender binary. Also, it is still a diss to a man for someone to acknowledge that someone's female relative or acquaintance would be better to have said discussion or debate with (unless the courtship and/or personal interest of said female is being offered). So, when a man prefaces his regard for or advertisement of a female's pleasing presence with regard for her smarts, wouldn't it be reasonable to question when and/or how she's going to be allowed then to apply her smarts and/or intelligence? They've seen fit to press or relax their daughters' hair. Would we rather not offer that there could be a more constructive ideal or would that be harsh to suggest? Dismissal of that wouldn't work well by saying that no one was so focused on the hair of other first family's children.

    The role that female family members have traditionally played, in political campaigns and office, has been as unopinionated spokesmodels or champions of human interest campaigns (sort of like Ms. America pageant winners). So, if the intelligence and smarts of women are still socially regarded as an affront to be overcome and then their beauty is publicly regarded (which does have tangible applications and meaning in our society), why does intersectionality suddenly disappear and the import get dictionary technical and dismissive?
    Last edited by Intellexual; 11-11-2012 at 12:25 AM.
    If your import amid discussion is to ridicule, sabotage, and/or dismiss, you will no longer receive the privilege of my attention. Passive aggressive behaviors are a defense mechanism of oppressed and ultimately even self-defeated persons. Disregarding and/or ridiculing the concerns of others doesn't legitimize or address your own. You have betrayed a critical trust I must have in you that you are engaging or asking of me to enhance each of our perspectives rather than ridicule mine or reaffirm your own biases. Express your own concerns and/or support your own ideals. Your antics reek of repression and aren't constructive.

  14. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,476
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    Oh Good Grief! Now, he can't give his daughters a compliment. What's next? He breathes too hard (?) or perhaps he's holding his hands by his side wrong (?).
    Never Underestimate ANYONE

  15. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    7,610
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Would it be ridiculous if the writer were a black father being critical of his own conditioning, as reflected or projected in treatment and conditioning of his children, in the light of affirming the beauty of a daughter with hideous scarring about the face and head while still or no longer affirming the aesthetic beauty of his other superficially unblemished child? If the problem is either the messenger or the messiah, perhaps consider the message without the sentimental figures. If the message or case itself is not of interest without the messiah or messenger, the exasperation of apologists and/or enablers is of what import?

    The ridicule and apologism serves to block, sabotage, or limit the scope of advancement or discussion based on the limitations and/or intolerances of those confronting the discussants rather than the topic itself. How many times in history has that served to enable persecution, subjugation, oppression, and atrocity? Why become educated and sophisticated if we will only offend and cause further autogenocide based on perceived knowledge rather than affirmed ignorance? What good has ever come from such tactics, beside self-aggrandizement and social jockeying through degradation of others?

    If you don't see it, look, listen, observe, etc. If you do and just don't feel like being of civil support to those who are wrestling with these matters, where's that posture rather than apologism and ridicule? Where's the, "I get where you're coming from brothers and sisters, but I also think <this and this> may help with that."? Where's the call for people who have resorted to ridicule to stand down and let the brothers and sisters come into greater wisdom and understanding?

    The opposition and ridicule speaks to a fervor based on social appeal and favor rather than substance. In that, the messiah is protected in spite of it being demonstrated time and time again that that is precisely how women remain oppressed. I wouldn't imagine confronting a terrible father about these concerns. That would seem rather beyond one's ability to grasp. Rather, it would be good fathers who are laying it on a bit too thick in that regard who could gain from a firmer grasp of gender politics and healthy masculinity and femininity (if there is any such thing).

    At any rate, this has been a good opportunity for me to update my ignore list. I'm rather delighted to have some new apologists and ridiculers moved from my purview.
    Last edited by Intellexual; 11-11-2012 at 02:09 PM.
    If your import amid discussion is to ridicule, sabotage, and/or dismiss, you will no longer receive the privilege of my attention. Passive aggressive behaviors are a defense mechanism of oppressed and ultimately even self-defeated persons. Disregarding and/or ridiculing the concerns of others doesn't legitimize or address your own. You have betrayed a critical trust I must have in you that you are engaging or asking of me to enhance each of our perspectives rather than ridicule mine or reaffirm your own biases. Express your own concerns and/or support your own ideals. Your antics reek of repression and aren't constructive.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. President Obama Eats "Black Power Ice Cream"
    By Muzikal203 in forum Other Life Topics Discussion
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 07-27-2010, 06:59 PM
  2. Joe Wilson Called President Obama A Liar
    By ursula10 in forum New Era Politics 2019
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 09-10-2009, 10:53 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-03-2008, 05:22 PM
  4. Aussie "slip" Conditioner, Now Called "knot Forgotten"
    By iandi in forum Commercial Hair Products
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-21-2006, 07:53 PM
  5. Introducing A Beautiful Artist Called " Chosan"
    By serel in forum Online Photo Album Links
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-01-2005, 07:27 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •