Look, despite your habit of assuming what everyone knows, you’ve failed to distinguish or create a distinction between insults towards women that either are, or are not what you call misogynistic. This nebulous treatment of what is out of bounds vs a-ok insults is precisely what criticisms of PC-ness are all about.
I think I covered that pretty thoroughly in post #33.
The right: Fuck you, pussy.
The left: That’s misogynistic and hurts my feelings.
The right: So what? Fuck you and your feelings. Vote TRUMP!
Maybe that’s not enough to win an election, but I wouldn’t count it out. This is America (see 2004). The left needs a better collective response to this. Complaining about feelings and cultural oppression indicates weakness and fragility. PC aside, just complaining about ad hominems and fallacies isn’t much better. I’d say fight fire with fire, burn it all down and take them with you. Trying to “rise above it” is too risky and just lets them control the debate.
It’s an observation.
Look, you didn’t. You may think you did, but you didn’t. That was the post where you used as evidence a thread where you said there were non-misogynistic insults in the first paragraph, then in post #34 said that there were in fact misogynistic insults in the same thread.
Look, The rest of your post #33 simply restated the idea that no women deserve some kind of insults as a matter of fact. There is no criteria attempted to delineate what is acceptable and what is misogynistic beyond your declaration.
Look, given that there are plenty of insults which disparage men as men, why are insults which disparage women as women out of bounds?
Look, I think you are quoting the wrong person? Perhaps BG will shed light on what we seem to already know, that no woman deserves to be insulted in a kind of way that he knows we know. You know?
The fact that a man being called a bitch is insulting is because the man is being compared to a woman. That’s as misogynistic, if not more so, as calling a woman a bitch.
Look, I think we all know I screwed up that post. BG knows what I meant, and what I will mean in the future.
There aren’t very many insults aimed at men that specifically and pointedly label them as fit only as objects of sexual attention. However, most of the “un-PC” insults aimed at women are specifically about their sexual history and/or sexual desirability or lack thereof.
A woman being labeled ‘cunt’ is being labeled as fit only to spread her legs for a man; she has no other characteristics worthy of mention. She’s not even really a person, just a convenient receptacle for a penis. What insult aimed at men carries that same denotation or connotation?
“Dick.”
Or was that too obvious?
I have seen that picture in motion before – is it static there?
Thank you – anyone who widely publicizes any unpopular opinion is going to suffer endless abuse.
After 1953, very few people were prosecuted for the crime Anti-Soviet Propaganda. During the rule of Leonid Brezhnev, the fact that someone criticizes progressive Socialist values was considered evidence that that person is insane.
Well, no. “Dick” used as an insult usually means something very different from “nothing more than a sex object.”
Well, that general phenomenon is much older than the phrase or concept of “PC,” which is not needed to account for it and is not well labeled by it.
Bullying existed since Cain.
. . . So?
Trump LOVES waving sticks. His Kelly tiff is just another example. It makes him appear strong, and has this primate-level appeal (as the monkey that rushes into the troop sitting around digesting their bananas, grooming each other–this monkey rushes in screaming, waving a tree branch, and induces just the right amount of shock and fear and awe to become the new alpha; qv Conniff’s The Ape in the Corner Office).
The problem with PC is that, what was once aimed, credibly, at the common good (a display, say, of sociological wisdom), now can become a straitjacket (unwise). OTOH the anti-PC movement opens the door to "say anything" as BG highlights in the OP; BUT there is STILL never a loss of requirement to be wise, especially the higher up the ladder you go in terms of statecraft. So what Trump is doing becomes another cheap tactic to play a kind of celebrity angle (one way celebrities rise in the "polls" is by saying controversial stuff; great for tuning public sensibilities, but skeevy for a politician). Then of course people call him to task (rightly IMO) for sounding like an ape. While certain members of the right (which seems to have adopted some form of warrior/athelete's value system--strength foremost) wave flags, cheer him on, because he's displaying "strength" by surviving the blowback to those statements (and once he gets past that, and has his adoring strength-above-all-else fan base stoked to some kind of climax, he can afford to say stuff like, "Oh, no. I LOVE women/Muslims/Mexicans.").What I’m saying is that 1) insults like “cunt” that disparage women as women are misogynistic, and 2) no woman deserves misogyny.
To which part of that do you object?
But “political correctness,” whatever it might be, has not.