Aeolus451 said:
Teeqoz said:
You didn't take my points seriously because of how you judge my character? Surely arguments should be judged on their own merit, on not based on your own opinion of the person making them?
Most female celebs may be feminists, but they aren't the fringe feminists that you are constantly outraged about. Same with media and "the left".
As for the pussyhat march, again, I don't see how that's related to the type of fringe feminism you complain about. Sure, there were definitely fringe feminists supporting it, but you wouldn't judge a large group based on a minority, would you?
Sure, the wage gap isn't real, and males and females are pretty much equal in terms of rights, but if you can't see how society still pushes boys and girls in different directions (walking into a toy store should be enough to ilustrate this), then this discussion will be fruitless.
I'm trying to get you to explain to me how feminists could force the owners of these tournaments to stop this practice. Could you answer that? How did feminists force them to do this?
And I'd appreciate if you could stop trying to explain to me what I'm trying to do. I'm pretty sure I know more about what I'm trying to do, so you don't have to make up things to tell me.
PS: Check out the underlined part in italics. If you have to choose one thing to reply to, I'd prefer if it was that.
|
No, it's because you're saying absurd things about the influence of feminists. Celeb feminists are pretty bat shit. A bunch of them cut their hair super short in protest to trump getting elected. Maybe you haven't seen any of their speeches.
Sex-negative feminism is fairly popular within feminism. If they're against sex work, porn or the sexual freedom of women and men, they are basically one. I tried to look up any demographic breakdown of how many feminists agree with either side. I couldn't find anything. I know that the more radical ones are like the TERFs.
I don't see the toy thing as an issue. Males and females have different tastes/preferences. It's mainly biological and not social.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/24/gender-toys-children-toy-preferences-hormones_n_1827727.html
To that underlined bit, I already mentioned this a few times. They used social pressure.
|
Uhm... okay, they cut their hair? You're gonna have to come up with better examples than that, people can do whatever they want with their hair as far as I'm concerned...
There is far too little evidence to say it's "mainly biological and not social". Does biology play an important role? Sure, but society sure does its very best to influence and increase this difference in interests even more. Biological biases are exacerbated by society's influence.
Social pressure arises because of consequences. You can't have social pressure, unless there are larger consequences behind it. To use an informal example, the reason you'd rather not openly fart in a large group of people is because it could result in an awkward situation and possibly affect your social status - generally make you feel uncomfortable. That's because farting in a large group of people has over time become behaviour that is generally looked down upon.
So what are the consequences that forced the F1 owners' hands? I don't doubt that there were consequences. Specifically, financial ones, because a large enough group of people don't really want to mix models together with formula 1 racing, that the owners probably fear it could alienate some viewers. AKA the owners are adapting to what they think their audience wants. So what do you suggest? Should we force the owners of the tournament to reinstate the practice against their will, even though they've made a judgement call against it?