Trumps misogyny, and his supporters blindness/support to it is a separate issue.
In this case, along with some Republicans finally denouncing Trump, most of the “Imagine if it was…” talk is coming from non-Trump supporters. I can concede the points Mindysan made, but at the same time, circling back to my original point, these are people condemning Trump and saying such speech and attitudes are unacceptable.
But now instead of taking about how horrible Trump is, how some people are still supporting/making excuses, some are focusing that people condemning him didn’t do it in the best way - which IMHO - is taking away focus from the real issue.
It has been acknowledged that the “male POV” was maybe not intentional, so in this case I am thinking why not focus on the positive of acknowledging such behavior is unacceptable, instead of further dividing people. Haven’t we had enough of that this election?
The left has often been deeply unhappy with the Dem. party going at least back to LBJ. There was a lot of bitterness after Obama ran further to the left of Clinton but governed as a centrist, and many voices from the left weren’t as strong in 2012. Usually most on the left tend to back the Dem. for lack of any realistic alternative, though. There was also the Nader incident, which illustrates (at least to some) the dangers of the left actively campaigning against the Dem.
Because, to more or less echo @Melizmatic, in so many cases it comes too late. It’s also cynically opportunistic when coming from former Republican backers of Trump. They could already see his chances of winning have been slipping towards nil; they likely were already looking for a way out of supporting him that wouldn’t look weasel-like or two faced; and suddenly, yay, the leaked recording means they have one! Citing one’s “own” daughters, wives, and/or other family members as they back away from Trump and his especially sexist comments is just one more egregious, phony usage of them, by people who constantly seek to “divide people.” They’re performing for the public, and so, they’re not citing their daughters as some sort of genuine gesture of unity, with their daughters or with anyone else.
And if a woman cites her own daughter in registering her disgust at Trump’s sickening comments, that’s an entirely different situation. I don’t think anyone here is saying that would be a problem.
Yeah, I’m a little mixed. It is yet another kind of objectification, and it’s certainly not how I’d go about explaining why Trump bragging about sexual assault is a horrifyingly thing to anyone. At the same time, if the message is trying to get some of the more flexible Trump backers with virtually no empathy for around 80% of the US populace other than their tribe of white male conservatives to develop more empathy, maybe it might be more effective at getting them to listen and become slightly less horrible even if they’ve still got a lot of ground to make up at seeing that all human beings are human. It seems like there’s enough gray that I can’t condemn it too loudly, so long as we stay aware that it is a flawed message, though maybe I only think that since I’m a guy, and the flaws are bad enough to roundly condemn it.
Well maybe this is where some of the disconnect comes in. Like I said I heard that statement mainly from anti-Trump, pro Democrat people calling out Trump and his supporters - not Republicans edging away from Trump.
If one assumed it was mainly Republican men doing so, I could see the feeling that their actions were disingenuous.
But like I showed in my example, there are people who said the same thing who have been calling out Trump on his BS since day one. So maybe it is less what was said and more the attitudes about who said it.
On a more positive note; if you haven’t seen it yet, on the most recent episode of LWT, John Oliver gave a blistering commentary on this very aspect of objectification.
Maybe half-measures are better than no measures, or all-or-nothing measures. It definitely is a problem that many men don’t think of women in general as human beings deserving of respect without being led to imagine if those women were ones they have a personal connection with. But if that approach gets them a step or two towards treating all women with the kind of respect they’d give their immediate relatives, then that’s a step or two in the right direction.
Criticizing those men for not instantly going 100% likely makes them feel like there’s no point in having a discussion, because nothing they do is going to be good enough for those shrill feminist harpies, so why bother doing anything when you’re going get yelled at the same either way? A key to getting someone to alter their behavior is to keep them listening.
It isn’t! I do. Many other people do. My classmate obviously does as well. Which is I guess leads to my confusion why her comments and other similar ones are automatically assumed to mean otherwise.
These people couldn’t care when Trump was calling Mexicans rapists, degrading female personalities, attacking Gold Star families and whatnot. But once he talked about going after married white women, then they started running away. Lets face it, this was all a pretext for saner Republicans to run from Trump without Darth Prebius breathing down their necks.
I didn’t think otherwise nor have I accused you of such. This isn’t about you, except that you asked this question and I’ve attempted to answer it, and apparently my (consistent) answer has not been good enough. So, I’ll try again!
We’re not assuming bad intent on your classmates part, especially. It’s not about intent. It’s about how people imagine women and their role in society. Women can and often do internalize sexism and reinforce it as much as men. Many women do this actively. The problem is that it’s still about men and their feelings. It still leaves out plenty of women who are not considered because of their lack of a strong relationship with a man. It still assumes that women’s worth are determined by their relationship to men and that deviation from the norms of gender conformity mean falling outside the boundaries of respectability. It assumes we’re not agents in our own lives, but merely reflections of men.
I do, as do humanists, among many others. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t vote, volunteer, pay my taxes, hand money to the homeless guy outside the train station, return the wallet I found, etc. etc. I understand the point you’re trying to make, but if we didn’t care about anonymous, unmentioned people, then society wouldn’t function.
I disagree. Worrying about a person’s future is not to be “owned” by them, you are simply putting your needs and concerns behind someone else’s needs and concerns.
It’s an old, overused rhetorical flourish–when I see a woman getting assaulted in the streets, I don’t need to think of any women I know personally in order to rouse my own sympathy and take action.
No, never said you did. While I agree that some people do have a problem seeing women as people, clearly a lot of people don’t have this problem either. Which is why I am having trouble seeing why one assumes their statements reinforce the negative, vs supporting the positive.
I understand your points, which I tried to concede above somewhere. I even concur in the broad picture sense. Like I said where I am having trouble is that this seems to be people trying to do the right thing, trying to condemn Trump and reaffirm that this behavior is unacceptable. Now they are being criticized for using the “wrong” language.
I think @L_Mariachi above echos what I am trying to articulate.
The other revelation I had above and after watching John Oliver’s bit on the matter, is the assumption of where people are coming from. I conceded if you have a male Republican making this statement that it can seem both disingenuous, and why one would assume their approach on the matter.
But I saw several women making similar statements, none of them Republican (to my knowledge). I don’t feel like they were re-enforcing anything, but rather making an appeal to think about the issue and not just blow it off.
And isn’t that, no matter how we got there, how we are going to move forward in a positive direction?
Well you are better than most people. Honestly, most humans only have the capacity to “care” for a few hundred people they know. And many people don’t genuinely care, but they do at least have some empathy for others when something bad happens and they don’t out right wish them ill will. I would say many if not most people respect and wish no ill will on people they will never meet. But at the same time they aren’t doing anything to help them. Present company included.
Being a parent is strange - there is a sense in which your kids own you. I was just pointing out that I am driven to protect and care for my babies. That there is no limit to that care - everything I have or am is available to them. The fact that they are girls doesn’t really influence that except that we live in a sexist society. Because of that they may face more and/or different threats than boys (if I had them- which I don’t). I’m very aware that there are bad people out there. I’m also aware that they won’t want me wrapping them in cotton wool. Even today the two year old had her own mind. Heaven forbid you try and tell her something she doesn’t like.
One day they will be out in a world with the likes of Trump to worry about. I hope I have equipped them to deal with them.
Because I don’t think it’s about intent, but effect. One can have the best of intentions and still reinforce sexist views about women.
This is about a specific thing that they said, though and how that has the effect of reinforcing sexism, despite their intent. [quote=“Mister44, post:76, topic:87115”]
is the assumption of where people are coming from.
[/quote]
I’m not assuming where they are coming from, rather dealing with the actual effect of their words. I am dealing with things they actually said, not assuming what they think.
Women can also reinforce this stuff. None of us are perfect and internalized sexism is hard to shake for all of us. [quote=“Mister44, post:76, topic:87115”]
how we are going to move forward in a positive direction?
[/quote]
It would be nice if people didn’t assume that all criticism is an attack on one’s character rather than just pointing something out. I’m not assuming someone is a bad person, rather I’m actually addressing the words that they are saying. It is getting a little tedious to be told I need to be more polite and keep quiet when I see problematic behavior/statements.
Christian conservatives view women as chattel. In their worldview, women are less-than-whole humans without agency, who are to be owned. The tweets Caroline included are all from self-proclaimed Christian conservatives who are Republican politicians. The point of view these men come from is germane to this conversation.
They’re not trying to do the right thing. They’re rats fleeing a sinking ship, and they chose this lovely bit of misogyny to hang onto as their excuse.
I guess the overt sexism is completely outshining the other issues in my ability to understand. The effect of Trumps words and the reinforcement of those views seem major compared to the other comments.
I’m like 80-90% of the way with you, but I just can’t come to the same conclusion.
That’s fair. But it is easy to take such criticism as an attack on character, isn’t it? Especially when it is unintentional.
I can relate to that. I feel that way sometimes too.
Though to be clear I’m not telling anyone to be quiet. And my comments are more directed at John Legend and the others who were quoted saying similar things. And even they don’t have to be quiet. I just feel their criticism is perhaps misplaced.
In several places I noted this language used by people who never supported Trump. I conceded that coming from some people it comes off as disingenuous.
