I always hated that song.
I agree that “I am still an embryo with a long long way to go” is a somewhat distasteful image. And a little ironic considering the relationship between feminism and abortion rights.
What about the bears?
Are they the ones that have to process all the rape kits? That us a lot of work for them, I’m sure their big paws makes it even more difficult to handle the little test tubes. That’s got to be stressful for them.
Won’t someone think about the bears?
How expensive are rags, duct tape, and chloroform these days?
You framed this as a rant and put it in the pit. These things happen.
Reframe it as a question/debate and put it in GD, (without all the random caps), and you’ll get serious responses.
Eat me. Your rant was stupid. It was based on the presumption that child rape cases got priority, which I don’t think is necessarily true. Perhaps it’s a FIFO system. That doesn’t even matter though, because it isn’t even being billed as a “child issue” and saying that women aren’t important. All that was said is that children will also benefit. So you’re wrong about the very thing you seem to have an issue with.
That makes it stupid. I was concise about that too. I didn’t post in some annoying unfiltered stream of consciousness-type prose.
Also, you’re fundamentally wrong. You’re not just wrong in this example. Some chick was telling me that this V-Day thing is getting increasingly popular. The annual report for the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation shows donations growing faster than the rate of inflation, so that’s getting more love too. Lots of “issues” are doing just fine focusing on women. Honestly, it’s been “women and children” for the last forever and is going to be “women and children” for the next forever too, so that’s the way most people are going to play it. Sometimes you see individual instances, like the ones I just mentioned.
The way Lisa Madigan put it was by saying at first that it was a women’s issue, then she corrected herself in mid-sentence to say that it was a children’s issue. She definitely implied that children’s issues are more important.
The push to cure breast cancer is also an example of a disguised women’s issue. This one happens to be dressed up as a health issue. In some other thread on this board, someone complained that breast cancer was somehow seen as a “nobler” cancer than other cancers. This is because women have channelled their energies into fundraising to fight this cancer that they might’ve used for any women’s issue. Women’s rightful anger at sexism has been diverted into fighting this horrible disease, but breast cancer is no more horrible than any other cancer.
But nobody is in favor of cancer. That makes it a safe cause.
For some reason, women in general seemed compelled to deny that they are fighting these causes for their own sake. Because we are still second class.
But nobody wants to say that. Someone might get angry.
Oh, and “chick” is a sexist slur. Hardly anyone points that out though.
Wow, chip on shoulder much?
Yes. I’ve been carrying it for years. It feels like a goddamn boulder.
It’s amazing that I have to point out that chick is a derogatory term. Do we women use it among ourselves? No.
Would anyone casually say, “Some kike was telling me that this klezmer thing was getting increasingly popular.”? No.
Don’t even start about the n-word. Can’t even spell that one out anymore.
But to object to the use of chick? C’mon, that’s just being over-sensitive.
The other day a man at the gym a man said to me “hey dude, you done with this machine?” That’s right: dude. In 2010. He may as well have asked “hey, you stupid black dumb Jew spic mick pillow-biter towelhead canuck,” because that’s how it felt to me. Worse, when I said so he said “dude, what’s your problem?” and went off to use a different machine. Sure, the equipment I touched with my dude hands is now somehow unclean. We’ve come a long way, baby? NOT. And don’t call me “baby,” dude.
I use chick all the time and I’m a woman.
You have heard of the Dixie Chicks, right? Sold millions of albums, many to women. Haven’t seen a feminist protest yet.
I vote you are oversensitive.
While I agree with you about Madigan’s statement and with a lot of your points about women’s issues in general, I can’t get behind this.
I use “chick” (and “dude”). It is sex-specific, but so is “woman.”
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Ow. I’ve sprained my eyeballs.
Fox News talking head engages in hyperbole – news at 11. And 11:03. And 11:07, 11:09, 11:14 and pretty much every couple of minutes from now on as long as people buy into bullshit.
Ow…I think I just pulled something.
So, you agree with everything she said… except some of the things she said?
And lots of women call each other chicks and read chick lit without imagining it’s some kind of slur.
Aren’t movies that we once called tearjerkers now derisively called chick flicks? Don’t we laugh about how men hate to be dragged to them? Aren’t novels that are geared towards women called chick lit, and regarded as lightweight and bubble-headed? After all, isn’t it said that while women will read a book with a male protagonist, men dislike books with a female protagonist?
Look, I could sit here and make the case that the term “dude” is derogative, since it normally refers to a man who is not too intelligent and leads a slacker lifestyle. But men don’t have to continually prove their worthiness. Women do. And referring to us as chicks doesn’t help our cause, whether it’s women using the term or not.
Yes, I’ve heard of the Dixie Chicks. I’ve also heard of the Washington Redskins. Same concept, just as wrong.
If you feel you have to continually prove your worthiness, that’s on you.
The rest of us will thank you very much to stop projecting your crap onto us, and please don’t be speaking for us until you lose that chip on your shoulder.
Thanks, Sweetcheeks.:rolleyes:
It’s my understand that the “chick flick” label is frequently affixed to romantic comedies as well.
As a minor personal note, I thought the movie Secretary was at heart a fairly formulaic romantic comedy, or chick flick if you prefer, despite the trappings (as it were) of bondage and domination.
OK, my turn to hijack - as a prosecutor and an advocate/volunteer for a domestic violence and sexual assault center, I have reservations about the “do the lab work on every kit” laws being proposed. Forget the cost, there are some women who, at the time they are sitting in a hospital on the worst day of their lives, don’t want the test done. The test, itself, can be intimidating and demeaning. The last thing many women want at that time is the prospect of a criminal investigation. Time is an imortant factor, and every hour that passes before collection is evidence lost.
In my state (and many others), women have the option of having the test collected and not tested, at least for now. This is important and should be supported, as it allows women to have the test and then, later, decide to have the test processed. Without the option, there is a sizable number of victims who will elect not to have the test at all.
I do support the notion that all tests in police evidence be tested, but I also think women should have the option of telling the SANE (Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner) to not submit the test into evidence now.