Red Mosquito

BurtReynolds wrote:When the white man justly berates his bartender for a poorly made drink, and DOESN'T receive a thank you and a free replacement for his trouble, I wonder what happened to my America.

I bet you doug rr has the people skills to receive both the thank you and the free replacement drink.

surfndestroy wrote:

malice wrote:please list the disadvantages to being a man in this society - or a few of them at least

Dying on average 5 years earlier.
The education system.

Two very basic human rights.

Liking women would be on there but that's not universal among men. Maybe the Gays are onto something.

do we need to revisit the whole men die sooner than women bullshit? men die sooner thus leaving old women to fend for themselves and generally becoming poverty stricken and disenfranchised by the society.

how is that a disadvantage?

and I for one agree with the educational system needing an overhaul - regardless of how disadvantageous it is for boys - and I'm not indicating it's not, I'm telling that this is symptomatic of a much larger problem the world is having with educating all children.

we largely still use a classroom model that was designed for children of the industrial age - teaching them to adhere to strict school codes (so they'd be good factory employees basically) and learn how to perform repetitive tasks in order to work well on assembly lines etc) - this is a failure now because we are not in the industrial age anymore. and if you go searching through my posts (which I wouldn't ask ANYONE to do as even the worst of punishments) you'll see I've been talking about that forever on RM.

the fact that this model is no longer advantageous for boys is incidental to the larger problem of it no longer being beneficial to anyone.

next

surfndestroy wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:When the white man justly berates his bartender for a poorly made drink, and DOESN'T receive a thank you and a free replacement for his trouble, I wonder what happened to my America.

I bet you doug rr has the people skills to receive both the thank you and the free replacement drink.

I dont mess with people that make my drinks or my food..I've only had one argument before with a bartender in NY because he poured me a fake jameson..I won that argument fwiw

malice wrote:and I for one agree with the educational system needing an overhaul - regardless of how disadvantageous it is for boys - and I'm not indicating it's not, I'm telling that this is symptomatic of a much larger problem the world is having with educating all children.

we largely still use a classroom model that was designed for children of the industrial age - teaching them to adhere to strict school codes (so they'd be good factory employees basically) and learn how to perform repetitive tasks in order to work well on assembly lines etc) - this is a failure now because we are not in the industrial age anymore.

malice wrote:do we need to revisit the whole men die sooner than women bullshit? men die sooner thus leaving old women to fend for themselves and generally becoming poverty stricken and disenfranchised by the society.

how is that a disadvantage?

So can we call partner/spousal homicide bullshit as it leaves the survivor/murderer to fend for themselves. Generally becoming poverty stricken, unemployed and incarcerated.

surfndestroy wrote:

malice wrote:do we need to revisit the whole men die sooner than women bullshit? men die sooner thus leaving old women to fend for themselves and generally becoming poverty stricken and disenfranchised by the society.

how is that a disadvantage?

So can we call partner/spousal homicide bullshit as it leaves the survivor/murderer to fend for themselves. Generally becoming poverty stricken, unemployed and incarcerated.

oh, ok, I didn't realize the reason all men died sooner than women was due to spousal murders. in that case, carry on, disadvantaged one

malice wrote:

harmless wrote:Minority perspectives are belittled and made into a joke, yup.

so I see jokes as a first step to actually dealing with a societal problem. even ones that are belittling.

we're too insecure as a society to handle rapid change that does away with exclusivity so we start with jokes- disparaging and otherwise.
this is actually better than non-acknowledgement.
the next step is a takeover of the joke making by the 'victims' - controlling the message kind of thing. and it's already in process with most 'not white male' society members.

This makes sense

doug rr wrote:

surfndestroy wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:When the white man justly berates his bartender for a poorly made drink, and DOESN'T receive a thank you and a free replacement for his trouble, I wonder what happened to my America.

I bet you doug rr has the people skills to receive both the thank you and the free replacement drink.

I dont mess with people that make my drinks or my food..I've only had one argument before with a bartender in NY because he poured me a fake jameson..I won that argument fwiw

That one actually happened yesterday. He was a bad bartender and might have been high, but the customer was being purposefully argumentative and taking it way too far. I waited tables for eight years so I kinda wanted to punch him. But I stood by and did nothing. NOTHING!

surfndestroy wrote:

malice wrote:do we need to revisit the whole men die sooner than women bullshit? men die sooner thus leaving old women to fend for themselves and generally becoming poverty stricken and disenfranchised by the society.

how is that a disadvantage?

So can we call partner/spousal homicide bullshit as it leaves the survivor/murderer to fend for themselves. Generally becoming poverty stricken, unemployed and incarcerated.

Katherine Knight Born

malice wrote:do we need to revisit the whole men die sooner than women bullshit? men die sooner thus leaving old women to fend for themselves and generally becoming poverty stricken and disenfranchised by the society.

how is that a disadvantage?

Demographically, this statistic is drastically skewed towards women who live in rural areas or who are already living near or below the poverty line. Figures post-1990 suggest that about 15-20 percent of women experience a change of economic class due to loss of a spouse, and almost all of those are rural, non-whites, or a combination thereof. Almost literally none of them are in the top 40% economically.

So is this a gender issue, or another class abandonment issue?

so I see jokes as a first step to actually dealing with a societal problem. even ones that are belittling.

I would add that a lot of the time jokes on these subjects (and some of Burt's work here comes to mind) are as much about ridiculing the ridiculing, or commenting on the nature of the dismissive, as they are about actually dismissing.

McParadigm wrote:

malice wrote:do we need to revisit the whole men die sooner than women bullshit? men die sooner thus leaving old women to fend for themselves and generally becoming poverty stricken and disenfranchised by the society.

how is that a disadvantage?

Demographically, this statistic is drastically skewed towards women who live in rural areas or who are already living near or below the poverty line. Figures post-1990 suggest that about 15-20 percent of women experience a change of economic class due to loss of a spouse, and almost all of those are rural, non-whites, or a combination thereof. Almost literally none of them are in the top 40% economically.

So is this a gender issue, or another class abandonment issue?

it's a gender issue for the women affected. what do those women do in rural america? go work in a coal mine like their now dead husband did?

actually, it's something of a gender issue for the ones who are part of the top economic 40% too - I'd assume (since I have no statistical knowledge, and no desire to go a-hunting on the internetz ) that the women who are not affected negatively by their husband's death are the ones who have either worked against the restrictions on women and maintained their own careers (at a 20% discount from what men make, anyway) - or have been made economically secure through their husbands' and/or inherited wealth due to the social restrictions placed on them through out their lives and women. (I went to college for my Mrs. Degree etc etc)

that doesn't mean I discount the class abandonment issues that exist either - but women who are part of both classes - gender disadvantage and class disadvantage - are still women, and thus extra burdened by society to maintain a standard of living they had when a spouse was part of the economic contribution

McParadigm wrote:

so I see jokes as a first step to actually dealing with a societal problem. even ones that are belittling.

I would add that a lot of the time jokes on these subjects (and some of Burt's work here comes to mind) are as much about ridiculing the ridiculing, or commenting on the nature of the dismissive, as they are about actually dismissing.

I'm just Malice's court fool.

Spoiler: show

Malice's Court, where everyone is guilty.

I'm better looking than judge judy

malice wrote:I'm better looking than judge judy

really? how you doin?

Just pulled this off wiki. after hearing the word a 20 times I had to know what it was all about. seems fine.


Intersectionality (or Intersectionalism) is the study of intersections between different disenfranchised groups or groups of minorities; specifically, the study of the interactions of multiple systems of oppression or discrimination.[1] The term is particularly prevalent in black feminism, which argues that the experience of being a black female cannot simply be understood in terms of being black, and of being female, considered independently, but must include the interactions, which frequently reinforce each other.[citation needed]
This feminist sociological theory was first named by Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989, though the concept can be traced back to the 19th century.[2][3] The theory suggests that—and seeks to examine how—various biological, social and cultural categories such as gender, race, class, ability, sexual orientation, species, and other axes of identity interact on multiple and often simultaneous levels, contributing to systematic injustice and social inequality. Intersectionality holds that the classical conceptualizations of oppression within society, such as racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and belief-based bigotry including nationalism, do not act independently of one another; instead, these forms of oppression interrelate, creating a system of oppression that reflects the "intersection" of multiple forms of discrimination.[4]
A standard textbook example of intersectionality theory is "the view that women experience oppression in varying configurations and in varying degrees of intensity".[5] Cultural patterns of oppression are not only interrelated, but are bound together and influenced by the intersectional systems of society. Examples of this include race, gender, class, ability, and ethnicity.[6]
Intersectionality is an important paradigm for sociology and cultural studies, but difficulties arise due to the many complexities involved in making "multidimensional conceptualizations"[7] that explain the way in which socially constructed categories of differentiation interact to create a social hierarchy. For example, intersectionality holds that knowing a woman lives in a sexist society is insufficient information to describe her experience; instead, it is also necessary to know her race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, class, etc., as well as society's attitude toward each of these in order to fully understand her position within society.
The theory of intersectionality also suggests that discrete forms and expressions of oppression are shaped by one another. Thus, in order to fully understand the racialization of oppressed groups, one must investigate the ways in which racializing structures, social processes, and social representations (or ideas purporting to represent groups and group members in society) are shaped by gender, class, sexuality, etc.[8] While the theory began as an exploration of the oppression of women within society, today sociologists strive to apply it to all people and to many different intersections of group membership.

You mean we can't reliably understand one's experience by lumping them into broad categories based on race/sex/etc? And we shouldn't assign an individual a place in the social hierarchy based on just a few general factors? fucking shocking. Maybe we should do that with everyone.

yeah it didn't seem that mind-blowing to me either, but there is probably more to it than that

malice wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

malice wrote:do we need to revisit the whole men die sooner than women bullshit? men die sooner thus leaving old women to fend for themselves and generally becoming poverty stricken and disenfranchised by the society.

how is that a disadvantage?

Demographically, this statistic is drastically skewed towards women who live in rural areas or who are already living near or below the poverty line. Figures post-1990 suggest that about 15-20 percent of women experience a change of economic class due to loss of a spouse, and almost all of those are rural, non-whites, or a combination thereof. Almost literally none of them are in the top 40% economically.

So is this a gender issue, or another class abandonment issue?

it's a gender issue for the women affected. what do those women do in rural america? go work in a coal mine like their now dead husband did?

actually, it's something of a gender issue for the ones who are part of the top economic 40% too - I'd assume (since I have no statistical knowledge, and no desire to go a-hunting on the internetz ) that the women who are not affected negatively by their husband's death are the ones who have either worked against the restrictions on women and maintained their own careers (at a 20% discount from what men make, anyway) - or have been made economically secure through their husbands' and/or inherited wealth due to the social restrictions placed on them through out their lives and women. (I went to college for my Mrs. Degree etc etc)

that doesn't mean I discount the class abandonment issues that exist either - but women who are part of both classes - gender disadvantage and class disadvantage - are still women, and thus extra burdened by society to maintain a standard of living they had when a spouse was part of the economic contribution

I would argue the class is far more influencing than gender when it comes to loss of a spouse, and here's why…

My father was a very wealthy man. Because of this, he had the available resources to invest in a variety of economically sustaining resources. Trust funds, real estate, seven-figure life insurance policies, you name it. He also had a personal accountant whose sole job was centered around him and his business, and protecting his expanding assets.

When he died, all of this went to his wife, as did his business, which had long since developed a self-sustaining highly functioning managerial system and business plan.

I on the other hand, am middle-class. If I can deal with all of the expenses related to parenthood, homeownership, and basic living and still be able to include a little "fun" without adding to my debt, it's been a pretty good year. If I died tomorrow, my wife would be left with a house that's halfway paid off and in need of some maintenance, two aging vehicles that are fully paid off and approaching replacement, and very little other debt. But she would be attempting to maintain all this on just 55% of our previous household income (she makes a little more than I do).

Finally, my brother has spina bifida and some mild cognitive problems related to a shunt issue when he was younger. He and his wife live off of his Social Security, what little he gets as a freelance writer, and her $12 an hour job. They have no assets to speak of, a small but (for their situation) difficult to manage amount of debt, and a child.

Consider the differences in the impacts of the death of a spouse at those three starting points. Now consider how little the story would change in each of those cases if you reversed it and imagined the wife dying instead. There is far more opportunity for wealth management and sustainability, the higher you go up the economic ladder. It is way more influential than your gender

malice wrote: in thinking about this idea of victimhood - it's likely all minorities or all people of 'different' status other than white male, can be made to appear dabbling in victimhood.

Probably, and its just as likely all white males to can be made to appear the beneficiaries of oppression given the proper world view and life experience. There are some important distinctions though between dabbling in victimhood and expressing an observation of the effects of something like institutional racism or sexism. I think the misconceptions about disadvantaged minorities and victimhood come from the conflicts with the WASP-y ideas of personal responsibility that many white males are raised with, because they don't face the same societal prejudices that the disadvantaged do they don't perceive the difficultly the disadvantaged can have with basic economic and social challenges. As some who raised to be that way, I tend to think: "well if we just changes the laws so that everyone is legally, and let nature sort it from there, society will fair." It's difficult to see past this, which is why I like to be a more active participant in these threads, it helps me see a bit beyond my experience. That doesn't mean I necessarily agree with the plans or schools thought that have evolved to address the issues, or even think these are problems that are high on the list of things society needs to fix, but I want to at least engage in discussion with people who think differently.

malice wrote: it seems that in order to achieve a status of equality all people not white male must never make mention of their differences to the white males... lest we be assumed to be playing the {whatever} card in order to gain an advantage...

This is a terrible attitude that is unfortunately common in Real America that doesn't help anyone or increase understanding or cooperation.

And IMO, inheritance the most complex social justice issue there is.