You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

37% agree
63% disagree
Post

Oh oh oh oh! I think you just WON a "my perception of what constitutes masculinity and femininity is shaped by the hegemonic notions of masculinity and femininity and is socially construed to bear resemblance to the dominant social norms" card! You better be careful not to challenge those beliefs, or I'm gonna have to take that card back.

+4144316 Reply

amiwhite amiwhite

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

65% agree
35% disagree
Post

Who really gives that much of a **** about being a 90's kid? We just remember the great parts of that generation, just like kids today will remember the great parts of their's. Being born in a certain year doesn't make you cool.

+404223 Reply

midnightcookies midnightcookies

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

91% agree
9% disagree
Post

The problem with our generation is people complaining about our generation and not doing shit to chane anything... But yeah, I agree with you as well

+442 Reply

MissAwesomeness MissAwesomeness

In response to “The problem with our generation is people...

I agree. I think our problem is that we have this sense of defeatism, not that we're apathetic. I've definitely heard people say things like "There's no point," or "What can I do?" more than I've heard "I don't give a shit."

And I think some of that is because the average age in the US around 37, meaning that older (ie more conservative) people make up the majority. In other words, when it comes time to vote on a controversial issue, there are more people who are likely to vote conservatively than progressively just because of the age demographic. There's nothing we can do about that...

Also, most of the recent college graduates (the ones who would be most politically active) are more concerned about finding a job and being able to make payments on their debt than they are about being proactive about change. Which is fair. I mean, if someone's not sure how they're going to pay rent this month, it's unreasonable to expect them to go out campaigning for gay rights. Basic life necessities supersede social change.

Sorry. This is way longer than I meant for it to be... >_>

+554 Reply

Apple_Pie Apple_Pie

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

98% agree
2% disagree
Post

"What happened here?" I grunted, flicking away my cigarette and surveying the scene. Bodies. Three of them. Sprawled out on the wet pavement in front of a seedy-looking drugstore. From the corner of my eye I noted the name, lkro's Pub, flickering from a faded neon sign. "Doesn't look good Stories" said Daniels, looking up from his notepad briefly to address me. "Murders, all three of em". Stepping closer to the recently deceased I made note of their post numbers "These aren't new posts Daniels, week olds all of them." It wasn't often we had trouble from the Just in gang, and never this close to the Home page. I pulled my collar up tighter against the rain, and dug into my pocket for a new cigarette "We might have trouble Daniels", I muttered, lighting up a cigarette and pausing to inhale deeply. "Did you notice these were all Just in pagers?". "I did" Daniels replied, his brow creasing, "Wouldn't have expected it from them" Wind filled the street, whipping up a frenzy of trash and newspapers. Suddenly I spotted something, a marking on one of the victims foreheads. Pushing aside a strand of hair the outline of a trollface became clear. I inhaled quickly "We've got ourselves a troll"

+434319 Reply

Tells_Stories Tells_Stories

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

93% agree
7% disagree
Post

I agree. It's annoying when people go on and on about "natural beauty." They think it means that girls shouldn't depend on makeup to make them look good, what it really means is that you have to look beautiful without it. The same beauty expectations are there, just the way to achieve that expectation is made more difficult. If they really want to help, work towards reforming beauty expectations, not making someone feel like a lesser being for not looking beautiful naturally.

+232414 Reply

CherryBlossom CherryBlossom

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

99% agree
1% disagree
Post

It's called internalised misogyny. Even women believe the stereotypes that women are melodramatic and petty, and that femininity is inferior to masculinity. They see that they DON'T adhere to this stereotype and instead of concluding that the stereotype is wrong, they believe they are the exception. The fact that women take pride in saying "I'm not like a woman" shows what they think of the female gender compared to the male one.

Note, I'm not saying it's bad to like masculine things. I'm just saying that it is still sexist to act like being like a girl/feminine is inferior to being like a boy/masculine. It's also still sexist to perpetuate silly stereotypes about what you think the rest of this gender does.

Interesting related article: http://persephonemagazine.com/2...feminist-icon/

+14142 Reply

Chou

In response to “It's called internalised misogyny. Even women...

I ranted about this shit to my friend earlier today. I go on a male dominated site, with lots of tomboys, and they (the women) immediately classify anything feminine as weak and shallow. Posts include: I prefer guy friends, women are too catty, tomboys are better than feminine girls because we are not *insert negative adjective here*, I'm ashamed of being female, I apologize for my gender,I'm just one of the guys, etc. They take PRIDE in not being like other women, and are very quick to put their own gender down.
Yeah! Let's get men to like me! Put my gender down, because we all know women are such inferior burdens!
Perfect example, today a post said (by a woman), "Women need to grow the **** up. Make your man and sandwich, and if he isn't worth it, don't be with him." She did it to gain male attention, and not seem like other women. It's amazing how quick women are to degrade their own gender. Even some of the males in the comments section pointed this out.

It makes me want to put flowers in my hair and prance around town in a pink dress.

+881 Reply

kipkayify kipkayify

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

84% agree
16% disagree
Post

What the above people said. If they're purposefully trying to fit a stereotype, that is annoying and unnecessary, and there's no reason a gay person should flaunt their sexuality any more than a straight person. But keep in mind that gay people are accused of "flaunting" for things that straight people do. Social conservatives will get angry at a gay kiss in a magazine and claim gay people are "shoving their sexuality down our throats" but no one bats an eye at a straight kiss. Some people see gay people holding hands in public and accuse them of "flaunting" but would never notice a straight couple doing it.

Additionally, some people do naturally fit the stereotype and there are some straight people that fit gay stereotypes as well. If a gay person likes musicals and Lady Gaga and Glee just because that's who he is and what he likes, then it shouldn't be a problem.

+992 Reply

Logan Logan

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

94% agree
6% disagree
Post

It's not the information, but the fact that statistics are often more correlation than causation that's the problem. If a statistic said that a certain ethnic group was more likely to steal, people would take that as an excuse to discriminate and act as though that group is inherently more likely to commit this crime, rather than looking at the reasons behind it. This reminds me of this thing that we learned in psych class, where this guy was trying to prove that human intelligence goes like Asians > Caucasians > Africans. He may have been able to find statistics, but if you take those statistics and assert them as 100%, that can be racist. After all, when you account the different education systems and past experiences, as well as overall cultural norms and opportunities, you would be able to see that intelligence isn't related so much to the group, as much as to various factors behind each group. If people of each ethnicity had the exact same upbringing and opportunities, the difference in intelligence would likely be nonexistent. So basically, the racism/sexism/bigotry comes from how the statistics are used, and not from the numbers themselves.

+303117 Reply

CherryBlossom CherryBlossom

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

95% agree
5% disagree
Post

It's just to do with humanisation. Whether the person in the book is a real, non-fiction person or just a fictional character, they FEEL more real because you learn about them inside and out; an oppurtunity you don't often get in real life. This is why dehumanisation is such a powerful tool in warfare, oppression, bullying, etc.

I believe this phenomenon is referred to as "Dunbar's number" (or "the monkey sphere"), and you can read about it here: http://tinyurl.com/ly6vw . It's a social theory about how many "friends" a person can have whilst still considering each one to be an actual, 3D human being. Beyond that number, people start to just become hazy statistical non-entities you can't really diffrentiate. It's an interesting read, made all the more interesting by things like Facebook, where having 500 "friends" is common, while most estimates place the Dunbar's number at a highest of 230. :P

+1211 Reply

Chou

In response to “It's just to do with humanisation. Whether...

It's nice to know I'm not the only psychology freak on this site. :P

+2311 Reply

Suzywao Suzywao

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

83% agree
17% disagree
Post

"If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality." -Bishop Desmond Tutu

You've probably heard that quote before, at least the first sentence of it anyways.

Desmond Tutu was the first black South African Archbishop of Cape Town, South Africa. He has done a lot of activism for human rights. His activism extends to such issues as AIDS, tuberculosis, poverty, racism, sexism, homophobia, and transphobia. He received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984. He didn't get that by "ignoring" these injustices.

Nothing ever gets done by ignoring it or pretending that it doesn't exist. Ever. Bad things will still happen, and a lot more often, you just won't hear about it. And that's worse.

And no offense, but pretending that ignorance will solve problems is just another way to say that you don't care about the injustices of the world.

+8912 Reply

CherryBlossom CherryBlossom

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

47% agree
53% disagree
Post

It's called human decency, something rarely given to women as it is, but even so it is compartmentalized and given only to "deserving" women. Deserving is usually synonymous with a modest, chaste, or overly demure archetype. If a women breaks free from the acceptable mold then she is stripped of her humanity and of any respect granted.

Why? Because we have been brainwashed repeatedly to accept that a woman's sexuality exists solely for others, and never herself, an idea that both men and women perpetuate.

It is NEVER acceptable to objectify a woman. It's NEVER acceptable to put your hands on a woman without invitation. It's NEVER acceptable to degrade a woman based on how she chooses to dress.

People, as a whole, are aesthetic creatures. Yes, we will look at each other. That does not mean that we should not expect some **** civility at the same time! What angers me about this is that women are constantly ogled and objectified REGARDLESS of how we dress. If a woman dresses really conservatively but gets looks and comments all the time because she has a banging body it's not her fault, but if a women dresses provocatively it is her fault? She "deserves" it?

What the ****.

+24244 Reply

Cuban_B Cuban_B

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

47% agree
53% disagree
Post

Rapists cause rape. Disrespectful individuals (in this case, men) cause disrespect. What a woman chooses to wear is NOT the cause though. Are women not allowed to wear something cute simply because men are unable to control themselves? Society advocates women being sexy, but not for themselves. If I decide to wear a short skirt, I'm wearing it for ME, to feel a little out of the ordinary, just for the fun of it- in no way am I asking for male attention. Just because I decide to show off my legs a little, in no way means I have any intention of spreading them.

Believing that when a woman wears something revealing she's "inviting" men, you're supporting the ridiculous ****-shaming, victim-blaming culture- and that is disgusting. Someone's attire is NO excuse to act crudely- have some decency, and treat others with respect.

+7078825 Reply

liesliesalmondeyes liesliesalmondeyes

Find out your friends' opinions

Amirite is the premier opinion-based social network where people from all around the world discover, debate and discuss today's hottest issues. Share your perspective to the world and interact with like-minded individuals on breaking news, hot topics and controversial issues now!

With that many angles, the discussions on Amirite will open your eyes to a panoramic view of your world that you won't get anywhere else, allowing you to see the big picture and discuss it.

Every opinion matters on Amirite.

Sign up to have your opinion heard!

It only takes a second.
Connect with Facebook, Twitter or Google.

or create an account with your email...

Sign Up Already Have An Account?

Login to your Amirite account...

Login Forgot Your Details? Need An Account?

Enter your email address and we'll email you your account details.

Send Details Back To Login Form

Login using...

Login

Forgotten username or password?
We'll send you your username and a new password.

Email Address

Login

Sign up to have your opinion heard!

Show posts as Grid List

By creating an account you indicate that you have read and agree to abide by our rules.

Create My Account