Random Politics & Religion #00

notice the smug level is off the chart: Mainly the modern part at about 2:00 mark

Not defending infidelity, but let's not forget that the government itself wasted millions prosecuting him in the first place over something that probably three quarters of them were guilty of in the first place.

Back in my day, it was usually students and while the threat was taken serious enough to cancel school and investigate, that's usually as far as it went. I think one person got caught in all those years and they had to go to court and ended up paying a fine.

Back in my day men when to war to fight and die so women could *** about first world feminist problems !

I glanced back, but once I saw the word cis-gender I said no thanks.

In case you didn't attend a liberal art college...here is a handy dandy article to define first world feminists problems.

http://hellogiggles.com/maisie-williams-first-world-feminism/


I actually read the article(I know it's shocking but I do read on occasion)

At this point, the gender equality speech Emma Watson delivered at the U.N. a few months back has been watched over eight million times on YouTube and her equality campaign’s hashtag #heforshe has been embraced by celebrities and ordinary social media users alike.

Though Watson’s speech was met with near-universal praise, not everyone completely picked up what Watson threw down. Maisie Williams (better known as feminist icon Arya Stark from HBO’s Game Of Thrones), also a self-identifying feminist, has some issues with Watson’s take on feminism. The Guardian recently interviewed Williams, and the actress did not hold back. Calling Watson’s speech “first-world feminism,” she took issue with focusing on the problems Western women face. “A lot of what Emma Watson spoke about, I just think, ‘that doesn’t bother me,'” Williams said. “I know things aren’t perfect for women in the UK and in America, but there are women in the rest of the world who have it far worse.”

So what exactly is “first-world feminism” and how do we compartmentalize it when we talk about gender equality? When someone uses “first-world feminism” as a knock again the fight for gender equality in the Western world, specifically focusing on areas like North America and Western Europe, what that person is saying is “Yes, there are gender equality problems here. Females across the boards are paid less than males. Women are objectified and taught to believe that the number that appears when they step on the scale is a direct reflection of their personal worth. Rape culture is a real thing. All those problems are real problems. Still, when you compare these problems to women being publicly stoned to death in the Middle East, girls being sold as sex slaves in Southeast Asia, over 125 million women today living in developing nations who have been forced to undergo the mutilation of female circumcision, when you talk about this and realize that you’re only touching the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the pain women suffer for being women in developing nations, the problems women face in wealthy countries, i.e. ‘first world feminism,’ do seem much more manageable in comparison.”

Comparing the lives of women in different countries is a tricky thing, because there are so many cultural, geographical and political issues to factor in. The fight for women’s rights means different things around the globe. At the same time, we can’t only look at feminism with the microscope of our daily lives, we also have to use a telescope and recognize how gender inequality manifests oceans and continents away. If we care about gender equality, we can’t just care about how the fight for fairness plays out on our home court. We have to care about how things play out everywhere.

Still, that shouldn’t negate our battle for equal rights in our home country, or the importance of feminism on a local level. Saying “Oh, well things used to be worse for women” or “Things are way worse for women in other places” is a derailing argument for the completely reasonable request to fix things like workplace sexism and street harassment on the homefront.

So we have to be able to count our blessings and still fight for change. We have to want things to be better for women thousands of miles away and women down the block. The fight for equality is global and it’s local. The important thing to remember is that we’re all in this together.

Lying under oath?

We all knew you were a hater anyways.

The thing is if you are Clinton lying is what you do all the time !

Come now Chaosx I'll pay your ticket to gender sensitivity camp. Three long weeks of pronouns adjectives etc that won't offend even the most diehard liberal !

An Open Letter to Jerry Seinfeld from a 'Politically Correct' College Student.


Entitled college student requires that you only offend him the way he likes to be offended, yet proclaims to want offensive comedy anyways.

(From the comment section)


Pleebo, did you pen that letter?

So basically I want offensive stand up comedy that doesn't offend me personally. That sounds like an easy task !

...which I'm not defending. What I'm saying is why was he there in the first place? So he cheated on his wife like probably (roughly) every president before him.

Yeah, what he did was wrong. Both the act and lying about it.

But wasting money putting him on trial because "oh no, infidelity"?

Please.

I for one will defend Bill Clinton. How he could go that long without cheating on Hillary with a more attractive woman is beyond me !

That is hard for me to write because I do think Monica Lewinsky is a scumbag that fails to take responsibility for her actions. She rather blame Bill for it. Like he forced her to give him a bj.

I'll go as far as to side with you there. I'm in full support of people identifying however they want, but the layers upon layers of new terms we need to use or being treated differently?

Be what you are. You want to be considered a man/woman/whatever? Fine, I'll happily treat you in a manner as you like. Identify as male? Cool. You're a dude. Identify as a female? Sure thing. Consider yourself "other"? Whatever, at that point I just don't really need to know at all, do I? Unless I'm hitting on you there's absolutely no reason to discuss it anyhow.

But frankly if you demand I identify you like that primarily before all else, it's my belief you're actually just trying to set yourself apart more rather than be accepted for what you are.

TL;DR -- 1) Wanting others to accept you for what you are: valid feeling, and people deserve that respect. 2) Wanting me to recognize you by your sexuality/sex above all else and somehow compensate my behavior for that? That's counterintuitive to acceptance and being treated normally for what you are.

Don't worry the gender police will set us all straight ! I look forward to proper pronoun usage.

Even I'm not clear what else to use beyond proper usage of "he/she" to identify people as they want to be identified.

I mean, I'm not going to deliberately or pro-actively whip out a "himmer", as one of my old biology teachers described dual-sexed animals, but if you put my back to a wall and tell me I need to come up with another word...Mr. Boyer's is the one that's going to spring to mind.

I'm not so sure that this is a brand new term at all. I think it just gets used more now in the current social climate.

I'd wager most people still have no idea what it means anyways. The only reason I do is because of this site.

He wasn't there because he got a BJ or because he engaged in infidelity. He was there because he lied under oath. The BJ helped make it a bigger headline cause sex sex sex! But he didn't become impeached because of a BJ, he did because he lied under oath.

The fact that you to this day still think it the whole thing was just about sex, validates how much of a sucker I think you are for media spin. I bet you still think Palin said she could see Russia from her house.

Yeah, sorry, it was only half of the charges. My bad, I should have clarified.

We'll also forget you keep ignoring I've repeatedly spoken ill of the Clintons.


Just like people like you keep using the partial quote "you didn't build that" almost entirely out of context?

For the record, no. I don't think she ever said that, at least not in any fashion beyond using it as hyperbole for Alaska's proximity to Russia.

She says enough dumb ***to not have to use stuff like that.

I've read a lot about various communities out of curiousity. "Cisgendered" and asexual/aromantic("ace") are the two biggest occurences that come to mind.

Monica Lewinsky had relations with 75% of government officials? I had no idea that she was trying break Bill's record. Close, but no cigar. No wait, that phrase doesn't work here....

Womp, womp.

Leave McDonalds Alone Obama! Leave them alone!

Me thinks Michelle Obama's getting tired of wagging her finger at the American public. Should be much easier nagging people away from fast food with your former press secretary as the chief communications officer.

Wait.

You're perfectly okay with government officials joining the corporate world until a press specialist joins a corporate office after working for Obama?

Get bent.

I tried that once in college. 'Perspectives on women' was the name of the class. It was anything but. I dropped in time for a 50% refund. I never thought that stuff would actually take off as a new trend.

Agreed.

Sexism is prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.[OxfordDictionary]
A stereotype is a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing.[OxfordDictionary]
Heteronormative is denoting or relating to a world view that promotes heterosexuality as the normal or preferred sexual orientation.[OxfordDictionary]
Heteronormative would be a stereotype.
Stereotyping on the basis of sex would be sexism.
Ergo, stating that a girl would like boys on the basis that she's a girl would be sexist.

So, would it be sexist for me to assume that my wife likes boys? Or is my assumption that she's not secretly bi/lesbian an abomination to you overly-sensitive types?

A free and independent (unbiased) press is a cornerstone of a democracy.

Biology agrees.