I see this as a boiler plate response.
When a disaster happens, they go to “thoughts and prayers,” because it denotes that they are a religious.
When they say “As a father of…” it denotes that they are married and believe in family values. They console, but at the same time promote their brand.
10 Likes
OK, I don’t get this. Maybe you can walk me through it.
Shortly after this happened, someone I went to school with, who I would describe as both a liberal and feminist (I would also describe her as a fire cracker, with a disabled adopted child from another country I have seen her fiercely defend. She raised money throughout her small town to put in those “soft” play ground floor coatings at all the school play areas.), posted, “How would you feel if this were said about your wives, mothers, daughters, sisters, friends, granddaughters? Honestly, how would you feel???”
I don’t see this or similar statements as suggesting ownership in the least. Nor that women aren’t individuals. I think she is the last person I know who I would accuse of promoting a “sexist view”.
I believe it is an effort to see the nameless, faceless person that Trump was referring to as someone with a face and name that you know and are close to. And if one can empathize with someone you know and are familiar with, then you might be able to extrapolate that to a nameless, faceless woman.
My whole point is these statements were made originally to further condemn Trump, and now it feels like pedantry, criticizing that the condemnation isn’t done the “right” way. People making the statements like the one above are not the enemy.
2 Likes
Because what about the rest of us? Or women who aren’t someone’s relative? We don’t need to say “treat men with respect because they are related to some woman.” We treat men with respect because they are individuals. Why are women only seen in relation to men in their life? And you can see this as something of a slight aimed at men, too. That they can only think in relation to themselves when it comes to women, rather than more broadly and abstractly. Do you think that’s true, that you only consider women in their relation to other men? Do you only consider me in relation to my husband or male relatives? No, because you don’t know them, you know me. You know me in relation to myself and hopefully, have respect for me due to that, not because there are men in my life.
They maybe not be your enemy, but when people only consider me in relation to the men in my life, I do find it insulting, that I’m not a full human being worth of respect in and of myself, but only because there are men around. That might not be the intent, but that’s how it feels.
24 Likes
“Black lives matter” vs.
“All lives matter.”
Difference? The first side is making a point that has been ignored for years.
“Father with a daughter, wife etc.” vs.
“All women matter.”
Difference? The second side is making a point that has been ignored for years
20 Likes
I don’t believe anyone is saying that.
The challenge to THINK about the issue vs just dismiss it as “boys will be boys”, STARTS with the familiar, but encourages one to apply your standard for the familiar to everyone.
Using a point of familiarity doesn’t preclude the overall inclusion of ALL women. I feel like some people are making this either/or, when it can be both.
In the quote from my former classmates post, her plea is to not dismiss this and to think of this faceless nameless woman as a person - which I believe is the point, right?
Bravo, sir.
14 Likes
It’s still only considering women from a male POV, as opposed to starting from the point of women’s inherent humanity. The point might be to remind people of women’s humanity, but it’s still doing so through women’s relationship to men.
Sure. But it’s also true that we really shouldn’t have to remind men that we exist outside of the familial context, yeah? Why is that somehow a troubling point? We DO exist outside of the men in our life and it would be nice if some men could remember that and not assume that the only thing that actually matters is our relation to men.
14 Likes
I am more than just a mere “Madonna or a Whore.”
I am more than just an extension of someone else.
##I HAVE AGENCY.
20 Likes
Women also have daughters and mothers and wives.
2 Likes
Women are human beings.
10 Likes
I don’t think my classmate’s statement was necessarily from a male POV. She certainly isn’t a male.
I see the point you are making about ones’ starting point and that, “We DO exist outside of the men in our life and it would be nice if some men could remember that and not assume that the only thing that actually matters is our relation to men.”
I guess I disagree that is necessarily the angle being played here. But people interpret things differently.
True enough, but that isn’t the issue, though.
The issue is that certain segments of the populace didn’t seem to care about He Who Shall Not Be Named’s obvious misogyny… until it was made public that he was more than willing to encroach upon other men’s women.
Then, ‘suddenly’, it became a problem.
12 Likes
I think it’s the inherent angle being played. It still assumes that our sense of worth rests in our relation to men.
I’m aware. This tends to be employed when talking about sexism, such as in this case where we’re discussing Trump’s misogynistic comments. As someone who has both a mother and a daughter I’m well aware that those categories exist. I promise I’m not completely dense. 
12 Likes
Surprisingly some people don’t actually believe that, because “human being” means a man.
7 Likes
“We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal…”
While that phrasing has since been unofficially amended in the last 200+ years, the fact is that’s how the original sentiment was written, and it’s very telling.
Also, obligatory:
18 Likes
Probably the English is lost to me.
But do you try to tell ‘It’s a stepping stone, and to have people made aware a lot is allowed. Later on people will make the step to see woman as individuals and not as property’ (Or something around that line)? What I BTW would understand as a viewpoint.
Or do you just not understand?
This?
9 Likes
I’ve been saying for years … “Imagine that was your daughter!” is such a fucked up thought. Short for “I know rape is no big deal to you, so in order for you to see what I mean here I need you to imagine your daughter was raped”. No, I’m good. I know terrorism is bad even though I didn’t lose anyone to terrorism, and I know plane crashes are bad even though nobody I know has ever died in one. And I know that rape is bad even though my daughter has not been raped.
21 Likes
I get that it’s a reflexive, paternalistic instinct.
But there’s also the point that part of the reason Trump is here is because of enablers who apparently don’t give a shit about someone’s awful behavior until they can imagine it somehow negatively affecting a straight white man.
It’s the “Sexual assault is bad because it might affect my daughter (and thus me)!” not “Sexual assault bad because it’s a violation of human dignity and basic bodily integrity.”
12 Likes
That speaks to the inherent but often unspoken problem in that kind of emotional appeal:
We have become so indifferent and apathetic to the plight of others, that unless it directly affects us in some personal way, we simply do not care.
16 Likes
I have no doubt that “married woman” was a critical element, but I think it was a bit of a perfect storm. The married woman thing works the way you say, but it also works to show that he thinks conventional standards are a joke. It’s also out and out creepy. You hear him commenting about the tic tac, you hear the actual tic tac box rattle and the “grab them by the pussy” remark. Then, you see him get out of the bus… and the polite mask goes on. That scarcely could have been more, stylistically effective, I guess I’d call it if had been fake found footage in that kind of horror movie.
4 Likes
