Women: Choice vs causality

  1. qwer says:

    Modern industrialized society chronically and pervasively objectifies the female body, and many women have come to view themselves through the lens of an external observer, habitually monitoring their own appearance whether in public or private settings. Given the negative effects associated with self-objectification—such as body shame, appearance anxiety, depression, and disordered eating—an empirically based approach to researching and counteracting self-objectification is critical.

    • Dota says:

      Everything begins with choice. Women are objectified because they choose to be and like it. Men have always been valued for what they do (Hard work, accomplishments) whereas women have always been valued for what they are (young, fertile ect). Nobody holds a gun to a woman’s head and makes her use her body to sell a product; she chooses to do so. Women must learn to take responsibility for their actions before feeling entitled to the nation’s launch codes.

      1. qwer says:

        I conclude you believe in classical free will. Your choice scenario requires an unreasonable dualist notion of the self. You simply ignore the causality I describe. Further discussion is pointless.

        With regard to “Men have always been valued for what they do” and “women have always been valued for what they are”; These two statements are only true for misogynistic assholes.

        ———————————————————————————————

        Qwer makes some interesting points above, but I’m afraid I disagree with most of them for reasons I’ll outline below.

        Let’s start here: “With regard to “Men have always been valued for what they do” and “women have always been valued for what they are”; These two statements are only true for misogynistic assholes.

        No Qwer, those statements have been true for much of our history. In every epic and fairytale, men have been valued for what they do whereas women were valued for what they are. Hercules offered to slay the lion and was rewarded sex with Thespius’s 50 daughters. In the Ramayan, Ram proved his worth by vanquishing Lanka’s army and rescuing his consort Sita (what he did) who was required to do one thing: prove her chastity (what she is).

        Love poetry over the ages glorified women’s beauty and even today it is not women’s careers that give men a boner. The difference between between liberal thinking and conservative thinking is that liberals try to bend reality to make it fit their ideology whereas conservatives observe reality for what it is and then draw their conclusions from it.

        I conclude you believe in classical free will. Your choice scenario requires an unreasonable dualist notion of the self. You simply ignore the causality I describe.

        I do not ignore causality. I do, however, distinguish between causality and external locus of control. There is a difference between responding to cause and blaming everything on one’s environment. Causality does not diminish agency as individuals are still free to react to causes in any manner they choose. As I pointed out above, society has traditionally objectified women because the female’s function is reproduction, without which our species would go extinct. Every other function is secondary. The only way of attaining the loony feminist paradigm of gender equality is for humanity to discover asexual reproduction.

        But the objectification of the female form has reached an unprecedented level today which wouldn’t be possible without female participation. As I’ve pointed out already, nobody forces women to use their bodies to sell a product at gunpoint. Nobody forces women to star in porn flicks. A few decades ago most women would be married with kids at age 25. Monogamous marriage alleviates female pathologies but feminism has sabotaged marriage. I know several female acquaintances in India who are fat but happily married.

        The fat acceptance movement in North America is a joke precisely because its advocates use objectification to fight objectification; hence the rise of the ‘BBW’. The self absorbed, vain, and narcissist skanks depicted in my meme are not ‘oppressed victims’ to be pitied. Those misguided fools that do pity them are doing them a disservice by robbing them of their agency.

         

         

         

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Asia, conservative values, Feminism, Subversion, Western Values and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Women: Choice vs causality

  1. Elias Cresh says:

    Hmmm. Interesting. I would take issue with two things. 1) Suggesting that society treats women for what they are because of the ability to have children (i.e. women help keep our society going) seems, at best, unknowable (how do you know why society does what it does without further evidence) and, more likely, circular (women are viewed this way because society needs something from them that makes them that way that make society view them that way that makes them….I’ve gone crosseyed). Also, the suggesting that childbirth is the primary function of women as viewed by society is highly suspect given A) the short time span they can reproduce and B) the massive amount of other things they do. Also, why are men not viewed the same way if that’s the function, as babies don’t come from simply a woman?
    2) Why is it feminism’s fault that traditional marriage has eroded? That claim seems to ascribe WAY too much power to feminists. We can’t slow down the national debt one iota, but a small percentage of women have decimated marriage? Highly suspect. Industrialization in a world with wider communication nets presenting more options to people that need to work less and are at a disadvantage with large families would seem to be a much more likely culprit for the erosion of traditional marriage than feminism. Without that plank, your point might still hold, though the thing about pathologies seems close to spurious. But the agency point is interesting in itself. It’s the lynchpin of which most modern feminism dares not address, the thing they make a flat statement about and move on from because it’s a messed up thing to consider. (i.e. Catherine Mackinnon’s suggestion that women played no role in the development of the rules of the world. Men have simply stood on their necks). A nice way to wipe away an entire line of inquiry and responsibility without addressing it in a meaningful way.

    • Dota says:

      It’s not circular at all. Traditional patriarchal cultures do objectify women to some degree for the reasons I’ve listed above. I don’t mind female vanity all that much but what bothers me is the hypocrisy. Women shamelessly objectify themselves like never before and then place all the blame on men and society.

      Also, the suggesting that childbirth is the primary function of women as viewed by society is highly suspect given A) the short time span they can reproduce and B) the massive amount of other things they do.

      I’m not suggesting that women aren’t capable of anything but reproduction. All I’m saying is those other functions are secondary. I guess nature is sexist. What a shame.

      Also, why are men not viewed the same way if that’s the function, as babies don’t come from simply a woman?

      Because men have occupied their time with other activities like constructing monuments, articulating philosophy, nation building ect

      Why is it feminism’s fault that traditional marriage has eroded?

      Undermining gender roles, getting women to put career before kids, and punitive divorce laws in women’s favour tend to do that to marriage. Good wives are not born, they are made.

      We can’t slow down the national debt one iota, but a small percentage of women have decimated marriage? Highly suspect.

      A small percentage of women with lots of elite backing.

  2. RD Sultan says:

    Feminism is as dangerous in a woman as toxoplasmosis in a cat.

  3. Beatrix says:

    “Women who seek to be equal with men lack ambition.”
    – Marilyn Monroe
    “Every Women’s Magazine, In One Cover”
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09/01/womens-magazines-spoof_n_5746758.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
    Seriously, in every culture around the world I’ve lived in men are valued for how much $ they make & women are valued for their beauty.

    • Beatrix says:

      An exception to my comment above-
      I recall a ‘cultural anthropology’ brief I attended once on African culture while at UNICEF. Quite interesting. In most African cultures a man’s wealth & status are determined by the number of wives & cattle he ‘owns’ be it by buying, stealing, kidnapping, as payment for something, or as a gift of some sort. The woman’s value isn’t based on her looks- a ‘hot’ woman is worth as much as any other woman & vice versa.
      This cultural practice of polygamy as wealth in Africa started way before any contact with Muslims -so you can’t blame it on Islam.
      ‘Stealing’ girls such as those by Boko Haram in Nigeria is an ongoing malicious practice between tribes just as stealing cattle is in Africa, it is not the Muslim vs. Christian conflict being sold to us by the press.

      • Dota says:

        The woman’s value isn’t based on her looks- a ‘hot’ woman is worth as much as any other woman & vice versa.

        I’m willing to bet that the women kidnapped were mostly young though. Beauty = youth = fertility, ie what women are thus objectification

      • Beatrix says:

        True, the kidnapped Nigerian women were all between the ages of 16 & 18 yrs. Also in African culture wife #1 has precedence over wife #2 who has precedence over wife #4 in the African household.
        Interesting that in February of this year (before the kidnapping of the women) Boko Haram shot or burned to death 59 boys at a Nigerian boarding school.
        I did’t & don’t hear much weeping, wailing or gnashing of teeth about the murders of those boys. Sexist much?

  4. qwer says:

    “No Qwer, those statements have been true for much of our history.”
    You mean the history (and poetry) that was written down by mysogynistic assholes while they were opressing women by force? The stuff that was written within the context of a more or less patriarchal society? Solid evidence you got there.

    “Causality does not diminish agency as individuals are still free to react to causes in any manner they choose.” Like I said; this would require an unreasonable dualist notion of the mind; classical free will. You are basically saying the mind is independent from the brain (which is like claiming people have a soul that lives on when they die).

    “liberals try to bend reality to make it fit their ideology whereas conservatives observe reality for what it is and then draw their conclusions from it.” Based on your posts and this definition I conclude you are a liberal and that most scientists are likely to be conservatives. Shall I try to find some data on how most scientists identify themselves (and then watch you bend it to make it fit your ideology)?

    • Dota says:

      You mean the history (and poetry) that was written down by mysogynistic assholes while they were opressing women by force?

      Nobody was oppressing women by force. Historically, women have been the keepers of patriarchy and in some extereme cases also participated in honour killings, and do so to this day. History is so black and white through those Marxist spectacles eh?

      It’s also good to know that you see Homer, Hesiod, Valmiki ect as “mysogynistic assholes”. You’re so cultured.

      Shall I try to find some data on how most scientists identify themselves (and then watch you bend it to make it fit your ideology)?

      Sounds like you’ve got your work cut out for you. Enjoy your fool’s errand.

      • qwer says:

        I prefer black and white marxist spectacles (whatever that is supposed to mean) to your black only hitlerist spectacles.

        “you see Homer, Hesiod, Valmiki ect as mysogynistic assholes”. I was asking you if YOU were referring to history and poems written down by mysogynistic assholes. If you base your mysogyny on their work then I guess you are right; they are mysogynistic assholes (or you’ve interpreted them incorrectly)

        “Sounds like you’ve got your work cut out for you.”
        Done in two minutes; http://skepticsplay.blogspot.nl/2009/09/liberal-bias-in-scientists.html
        The people that professionally “observe reality for what it is and then draw their conclusions from it” are overwhelmingly liberal. Now I will let you “bend reality to make it fit their (your) ideology”.

      • Dota says:

        If you base your mysogyny on their work then I guess you are right; they are mysogynistic assholes

        Love the circular logic.

        (or you’ve interpreted them incorrectly)

        Feel free to share your interpretation.

        Done in two minutes; http://skepticsplay.blogspot.nl/2009/09/liberal-bias-in-scientists.html
        Cool, that survey was done in the US. There are scientists outside the US as well. I was talking about Women in general and so if your analogy is to fit, you need to conclusively prove that the vast majority of scientists around the world share the demented liberal social views of the modern left. Have fun.

        The people that professionally “observe reality for what it is and then draw their conclusions from it” are overwhelmingly liberal. Now I will let you “bend reality to make it fit their (your) ideology”.

        I don’t have to bend anything, I’m not the liberal here. The observation/reason/empirical approach to culture was quite popular during the enlightenment (that little movement that replaced God with science) and right up to world war 2. It’s after that period that cultural marxism began to infect the academic community and scientists were no exception.

        This is what happens to someone that tries to use the old empirical approach to culture

        Liberals and cultural marxist fruitcakes need to reinvent reality (everything except the nonsense they spew is socially constructed) in order for their silly theories to work.

  5. qwer says:

    “Love the circular logic.”
    You are a mysogynist and you claim you base this on some old bullshit. Only two options remain; either you misinterpreted the bullshit or the bullshit is mysogynist. Clearly you do not know what circular logic means. How old are you anyway?

    “I was talking about Women in general”
    No you were talking about liberals and conservatives in the american sense of those words; “liberals try to bend reality to make it fit their ideology whereas conservatives observe reality for what it is and then draw their conclusions from it.”. Claiming you were talking about women in general is bending reality. I provided evidence that the people that professionally “observe reality for what it is and then draw their conclusions from it” are overwhelmingly liberal. Your attempt to make this about women in general is an attempt “to bend reality to make it fit their (your) ideology”

    Why not just admit you are a mysogynist asshole? You are like a KKK member that claims black people are inferior to white people (based on some old bullshit written long ago by some white men) yet objects to beeing called a racist.

    • Dota says:

      It seems I grossly overestimated your intelligence. Circular logic is where the premise and conclusion are identical and where the premise is unproven. Allow me to walk you through it.

      1) Dota is a misogynist thus
      2) Ancient literature and civ are misogynous because
      3) Dota invokes it and
      4) Dota is a misogynist.

      1 = 4. You end up where you started.

      either you misinterpreted the bullshit or the bullshit is mysogynist.

      That second option wasn’t part of your first post where you had your liberal knee jerk reaction and wrote of world civilization as misogynist. You added it to your later posts because you clearly figured out that your logic was circular and that someone might call bullshit.

      Claiming you were talking about women in general is bending reality.

      No it isn’t. I’ve always talked about women in general on this website. See here, and here.

      No you were talking about liberals and conservatives in the american sense of those words;

      Yes I was; and that is because liberals in North America have the most retarded approach to women. Politicians in the rest of the world (liberals included) see women for what they are and understand their nature. That’s because they come from cultures that are normal and healthy, albeit backward in other aspects. Is this so hard to follow?

      I provided evidence that the people that professionally “observe reality for what it is and then draw their conclusions from it” are overwhelmingly liberal.

      And I pointed out that Scientists and researchers in the US and Canada are not unaffected by commie PC tyranny.

      Why not just admit you are a mysogynist asshole?

      I will once you admit you are whiny, entitled, and solipsistic liberal with an external locus of control the radius of Manhattan.

      Also, watch the tone, else you will get banned. You have been warned. If this website gets your panties in a bunch, you ought to stick to commenting within the echo chambers of Jezebel. They’ll keep you safe from that nasty thing known as an opposing viewpoint.

  6. GulliverFredrich says:

    Hey Dota and Bag

    I have a nephew who is being brainwashed and conditioned by the feminism and mainstream culture conditioning that is passed as the norm and behavior of narcissism and obnoxious that most young people her age bracket mimic from each other. She has just entered high school, and I’m already beginning to see the pathologies described by the online webosphere appear in her; this includes pretentiousness, high levels of ego-centrism, arrogance, complete lack of respect for others or any type of authority figures or competence, lack of empathetic abilities, obsession with social media and having a fake personality, disorganization, high-degree of entitlement, high levels of self-centeredness, overall detestable character and a faux sense of superiority over any type of male or others perceived as lower or inferior while having an obsession with feminist ideas.

    I feel like slapping her the majority of the time she talks and most girls in this age bracket due to these kinds of behaviors that are the results of what is going on with the destructive corrosive social engineering that is running amok in the Western education system. The amount of disrespect for others and the type of deplorable behaviors young girls display these days is completely abhorrent. However I feel helpless about this and feel like I can’t assert myself in this sort of situation. What should I do to halt and reverse these symptoms? How do I deal with it?

    • Dota says:

      I can’t in good conscience give you any advice since I’m not a parent. I do know that girls are a hassle to raise since society doesn’t hold them up to any standards. But I just don’t have any advice to give.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s