Analysis The Small Things

[Eddie Dingle]

I'd imagine that a lot of these dudes would've been rejected by a woman in the past and subsequently have a massive chip on their shoulder. I'm sure we all know people who have had one bad experience and then proceed to hold the entire opposite sex in very low regard as a result.

Is there a man alive that hasn't been rejected by a woman?

 

[Trewth]

Is there a man alive that hasn't been rejected by a woman?

Plenty. The ones that aren't interested in women, and charming gentlemen like me

 

[Lagooner]

Is there a man alive that hasn't been rejected by a woman?

Probably not. But while most just get on with life, some get pretty jaded and hateful, especially if it's a long term situation and they feel like they've been dudded.

I probably didn't explain that properly in my post though. I must've been distracted by all those weirdos with **** rings in the Poo Eckert Colosseum.

 

[Eddie Dingle]

Plenty. The ones that aren't interested in women, and charming gentlemen like me

 

[Eddie Dingle]

Probably not. But while most just get on with life, some get pretty jaded and hateful, especially if it's a long term situation and they feel like they've been dudded.

I probably didn't explain that properly in my post though. I must've been distracted by all those bearded weirdos with **** rings in the Poo Eckert Colosseum.

efa

 

[Lagooner]

efa

There's just so much going on in there, such a rich tapestry.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Cricketer Chris Gayle, already facing a barrage of criticism over inappropriate remarks to a female television reporter, allegedly indecently exposed himself to a woman during a Sydney training session at last year's World Cup.

The Australian woman, who was working around the West Indies team in Sydney, has detailed the incident to Fairfax Media. In the course of her work she entered the team dressing room to get a sandwich as she hadn't eaten all day, thinking the players were on the field training.

Just a once-off. Cultural differences.


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cric...o-me-woman-20160105-glzrkp.html#ixzz3wPbnqbkH

 

[charcolechaddy]

No....

But if nothing is done and no stance taken....

Racism would be rife ....

Women would be in the kitchen....

Kids would be working in coal mines....

Ehh you get the point...

Racism is still rife

Kids are in diamond mines

And I'm in the f%&ing kitchen!

 

[BIG MATTY WHITE]

Racism is still rife

Kids are in diamond mines

And I'm in the f%&ing kitchen!

I meant in countries that society deems cool...

;P

 

[charcolechaddy]

I meant in countries that society deems cool...

;P

If I can send my kids to a diamond mine then I'm talking about Australia, are you meaning cool like Victor harbor or cool like Jamaican"cool man".

 

[El_Scorcho]

****boys sharing posts about "double standards" of some Today host hitting on a guy at the beach on my Facebook, all the while missing the entire point.

Not only is objectification of men not a cultural issue but what I don't understand is why people must set up camp against people saying what Gayle did was not on?

Why can't you just look at it and think - well, this isn't alright. I won't try to dig up some perceived double standard because we'll deal with that when it comes. For now, I'll just condemn Gayle's actions for being wrong.

Especially when several female reporters have come out and said they deal with these things daily off camera, and Gayle has a history on and off the camera basically harrassing female reporters. It's clearly an issue in male dominated industries and judging by the response, our society in general.

Stop trying to make it into something it isn't and make out like all men are victims of an incident where a female reporter was hit on in her place of work.

Nail on the head.

Mel McLaughlin actively portrays herself as a professional sports journalist and it was incredibly demeaning to effectively reduce her to a trophy that he gets for making runs.

The similar incidents with the roles reversed are totally irrelevant because

a) The objectification of men simply isn't a problem in society, because men haven't spent the entirety of human existence being judged solely on their looks, and if a man is objectified, it happens for a short amount of time before everyone gets back to talking about his other qualities. That just isn't true for women.

The only men who have a problem with the objectification of men are the ones not being objectified.

b) The people in those interviews knew what they were getting themselves into and weren't trying to have a serious conversation about the topic they were there for before being blindsided by an embarrassing sexual advance on national television. It's absolutely not comparable.

 

[Lagooner]

The only men who have a problem with the objectification of men are the ones not being objectified.

This is part of the problem I reckon.

Most dudes would cream themselves at the prospect of being the object of Sharapova's attention. So when the "roles are reversed", and the cultural context of a woman in that situation is overlooked, a gap in understanding is exposed and in part explains the lack of empathy.

And some people just simply don't give a f@#k how their conduct impacts on other people.

 

[Doctor Feel]

If runs get you trophy women, that indian kid who made 1000 not out will be swamped by beautiful women any second.

 

[Zakk Wylde]

If runs get you trophy women, that indian kid who made 1000 not out will be swamped by beautiful women any second.

I got 33no in a T20 last night.

 

[Doctor Feel]

I got 33no in a T20 last night.

33 virgins to you good sir.

 

[charcolechaddy]

This is part of the problem I reckon.



And some people just simply don't give a f@#k how their conduct impacts on other people.

You are talking about 96% of politicians, billionaire,'s and royalty.

This is why the world is so fu:ked!

 

[BrockBlitz]

Nail on the head.

Mel McLaughlin actively portrays herself as a professional sports journalist and it was incredibly demeaning to effectively reduce her to a trophy that he gets for making runs.

The similar incidents with the roles reversed are totally irrelevant because

a) The objectification of men simply isn't a problem in society, because men haven't spent the entirety of human existence being judged solely on their looks, and if a man is objectified, it happens for a short amount of time before everyone gets back to talking about his other qualities. That just isn't true for women.

The only men who have a problem with the objectification of men are the ones not being objectified.

b) The people in those interviews knew what they were getting themselves into and weren't trying to have a serious conversation about the topic they were there for before being blindsided by an embarrassing sexual advance on national television. It's absolutely not comparable.

I think you're missing the point about people bringing up double standards. As I've said before when various issues get brought up on this board, I'm all for everyone having equal rights. That means we don't cherry pick at all and have a completely unbiased view from this point on. If we don't, we have a ' well you had more cake last week so I'll have more than you this week' which just oscillates who is getting the raw end of the deal. If we want to move forward with sexism, racism etc - we need to take the higher ground, otherwise we are just as bad as the problem.

I remember reading this on the chive a few years back and it literally stopped me in my tracks about all of these types of arguments.

Edit: that doesn't mean I like what Gayle did, I don't, I'm just dumbfounded when this happens in reverse and no one blinks.

 

[edgie]

Brock is exactly right. For equality to really work going forward, we need to wipe the slate clean. Intolerance and objectification in past times as an argument/point of view has to be forgotten to truly move ahead.

Til then, it isn't a case of double standards, just different standards. Cause everybody is different, right?

Sent from my Lumia 800 using Tapatalk

 

[TimmyD11]

I think you're missing the point about people bringing up double standards. As I've said before when various issues get brought up on this board, I'm all for everyone having equal rights. That means we don't cherry pick at all and have a completely unbiased view from this point on. If we don't, we have a ' well you had more cake last week so I'll have more than you this week' which just oscillates who is getting the raw end of the deal. If we want to move forward with sexism, racism etc - we need to take the higher ground, otherwise we are just as bad as the problem.

I remember reading this on the chive a few years back and it literally stopped me in my tracks about all of these types of arguments.

Edit: that doesn't mean I like what Gayle did, I don't, I'm just dumbfounded when this happens in reverse and no one blinks.
View attachment 205012

100% Agree. I'm a nurse so naturally I'm a guy working with predominantly women which I don't have a problem with but some of the conversations or comments I hear would be deemed anywhere from mildly to actually quite offensive if it was me and my friends saying similar things in the presence of a girl/woman. The thing is I don't care or take offensive with the comments themselves, but I get frustrated knowing that if I said a similar thing even in jest I could be roasted for it and I think that whilst sexism, objectifying and discrimination as well as domestic violence directed at men is far less prevalent and as bigger issue than it is for women I feel that not acknowledging or making similar behaviour towards men socially acceptable does create a double standard and it does polarise people when you are trying to change people's behaviour.

I 100% agree Gayle's behaviour was out of line and even if he meant it as a joke he should have had the insight to see that it made her feel uncomfortable and have apologised as it was not appropriate nor did she find it funny but the thing is if he had that insight he probably wouldn't have said it in the first place and he therefore doesn't think he has done anything wrong and won't be changing who he is because the person he is, is a selfish, self-centred dick who treats everyone with the same lack of respect, just on this occasion instead of being a selfish player to his teammate it has manifested as being a w***er to a female reporter. So really we should be campaigning for people to be less of a dickhead because all of the secondary behaviours will therefore improve.

Another thing I find frustrating when it comes to controversial issues is that so often there are people who are so one-sided that even if they do have a fair point because their argument is so one-sided and biased you hate their opinions. I've listened to Simon Hill's interviews on FiveAA the last few weeks on the soccer hooliganism issue and he said that even if some of the points Rebecca Wilson says have some merit the fact she is so one-sided and biased so he and every soccer fan has taken so much issue with and give nil credibility to her views. I'm an AFL fan first and foremost but before I moved to Victoria I went to 3-4 Adel Utd games a year and have never had a problem not any more so than at any 150 Power games I've been to, but I've never been to a game when Adel Utd has played Melbourne Victory as in those games especially a few years ago there was just a stupid mentality where it just seemed like there was a problem at those games, which isn't necessary. I also think that there is an element of soccer hooliganism that is unique to soccer which goes along with the culture of chanting and what not. But I don't think it's as bad as has been reported and as Simon Hill said, if there's an incident at an A-League game it's labelled hooliganism but if it's at an AFL game it's labelled something else.

Why do I bring this up, well I think this is the issue with so many other controversial issues played out in the media whereby some people take a too extreme and biased stance which causing people to ark up despite having some fair points. This for mine was a massive issue with the Goodes saga. I believe Goodes given the treatment of his parents and family and people in general is entitled to feel aggrieved with some of the things other people celebrate as part of being 'Australian'. I also agree he was a bit petulant towards the end of his career and his acting was not pleasant but he's not the first or the worst for this stuff but coped more for it. Yes other indigenous players don't get booed or others do for similar behaviour such as maybe Lindsay Thomas and other players were similarly disliked who aren't indigenous like Steven Milne. I didn't have an issue with him calling out a 13 year old girl if she was blatantly racist, but I still agree it could have been done less publicly than pointing and singling her out. I think another hard thing to judge is that when a person thinks that why should they have to please the people that get offended over everything or if you do something differently to the way other people think you should do things. For example I think it's good that any indigenous player celebrates their heritage as any player of any background should be able to, but I also think that Goodes' war dance was quite provocative and inflammatory to the point it was always going to provoke negative reaction from opposition fans. Goodes' thinks why pander to the people who already don't like him, just go for it and stand up and be a leader but in that process he polarises everyone more and it's almost counter-productive in trying to get understanding across about indigenous issues but by being more of a 'yes man' quiet guy then you could say your voice doesn't get listened to and nothing gets done.

I'm a quiet, don't rock the boat person but sometimes it gets to the point you say; F- it, and you say or do what you want to do, which might piss a few people off but you get the job done instead of continually hitting your head against a brick wall. This is the paradoxical conundrum that so many people face with big issues. Everyone loves Michael O'Lauchlin (As all the anti-Goodes people point out) as he isn't as outspoken and assertive in his beliefs as Goodes which is why he isn't as polarising. I believe that some people boo Goodes for the reasons they say but it's undeniable that there is an element of racism, but by the same token even as I've said Goodes wants to be a voice for his people and feels as though why should he take the politically correct, quite indigenous boy (shut up in the corner) approach he still should realise that if he wants to get his message across with his community work that he can't just say that football is war and his war dance is a demonstration of war in the context of his culture. Yes I understand that but just because football is a war doesn't mean any other gesture that demonstrates this is acceptable, getting in the opponents cheer squads faces and giving them the bird or mouthing off or belting a bloke isn't acceptable, even if the context of indigenous round in the context of him doing it as part of his culture doesn't mean it wasn't a show of aggression to an opponents fans in a similar way and showing no understanding of that or care factor that he could have done a more positive celebration like African soccer players do when they dance together after scoring would have been better. Why do something negative and inflammatory, that's the part I didn't like about Goodes was that he didn't acknowledge that whilst the back-lash and booing was well over the top his actions made things a lot worse and whilst he shouldn't have to be a do-gooder why couldn't he just acknowledge this.

This is half the reason things blew up as badly as they did, people took massive issue with him 'having a cry' about people booing him when he's acting like a dick and not acknowledging that he's contributing to his own problems. Nothing is ever completely one way or the other if people were just more balanced in their approaches, beliefs and reporting of these tough issues then we wouldn't have these massive meltdowns. So to go back to the original point, yes a lot of the concerns and points about sexism and discrimination and all of that stuff is well founded, going to the extreme and taking a terribly biased view actually makes the issue worse as instead of helping people to understand it actually frustrates and angers people with hypocrites. And at the end of the day can't we just all treat each other with respect and recognise and apologise when we over step the line and not over react. That would be great!

 

[Blaggut]

I think the big picture is what people miss the most. You hear guys talking about how it was just a 'bit of fun' and how lefties are just trying to sanitise everything. That is totally not the point of stamping out behaviour like this, the aim is to reduce the social acceptance of harassing women.

Ask any woman in your life, wife, gf, mum, sister etc. and they will all have stories of being harassed by blokes, sexual, violent or both. I'm not talking about someone asking them out or chatting them up (at least not in their work space or in a place where they can't comfortable leave if they reject the advance) but bullying of some kind based solely on the fact that they are women. By kicking up a big stink about 'small' things like what Gayle did, it's just people saying "treating women like shit is not ok, you want to do that? You're a shit bloke".

I hear quite a bit from guys saying "well what about what happens to men? We shouldn't be doing more for women than we do for guys, that's not FAIR!" There's a ****ing difference, if you get hit on by a girl you're not interested, you are perfectly fine saying "no thanks" without the fear of her snapping and assaulting you verbally, physically or sexually. This is a genuine concern for women because it actually happens. Some random on the street starts following them in their car asking them to hop in (surprisingly common from the women i've talked to about this), drunk guys who won't take no for an answer and who get intimidating and pushy and the constant thought in the back of the mind that some fella could take what he wants from you, because let's be honest, most guys are bigger and stronger than most women.

There are things guy can do and gal's can't, or not that they can't do but if they did it, they increase the risk of some kind of attack. I talk with my fiance about some of the things I do, i'm a night person, and I'll sometimes head out at night for a walk down to the servo for a choc milk or golden gay time. For me, there is near zero threat, maybe some yobbo will shout something out of their car at me but I feel safe at midnight walking down a main road. My partner and her sisters however, laughs at the idea that they would even think of doing that. So many times they have copped shit from strangers in broad daylight so the idea of what they have to worry about in the middle of night on a relatively deserted street is horrifying to them.

This is an extreme bow to draw from what happened, but it's all connected, it's up to society to make a point of saying, "if you treat women like crap, you are a piece of human garbage" and say it in the firmest way.

 

[1954]

I got 33no in a T20 last night.

I want you!

 

[Peck]

She was top billed and top paid before Sutherland, Harrelson, Hemsworth, Seymour Hoffman, all males and also acting talents that I would consider better than herself.

She's in absolutely no position to complain about sexism in Hollywood.

So in the one movie in probably 100 that has a lead female, she gets paid more than the supporting male actors.

Is she not allowed to comment on shitty standards for women because she isn't one of the unlucky women that missed out on a role because there WERE NO OTHER ROLES FOR WOMEN, or simply because she is getting paid the most for a movie SHE IS CLEARLY WORTH THE MOST IN.

#carn

 

[BIG MATTY WHITE]

I think the big picture is what people miss the most. You hear guys talking about how it was just a 'bit of fun' and how lefties are just trying to sanitise everything. That is totally not the point of stamping out behaviour like this, the aim is to reduce the social acceptance of harassing women.

Ask any woman in your life, wife, gf, mum, sister etc. and they will all have stories of being harassed by blokes, sexual, violent or both. I'm not talking about someone asking them out or chatting them up (at least not in their work space or in a place where they can't comfortable leave if they reject the advance) but bullying of some kind based solely on the fact that they are women. By kicking up a big stink about 'small' things like what Gayle did, it's just people saying "treating women like shit is not ok, you want to do that? You're a shit bloke".

I hear quite a bit from guys saying "well what about what happens to men? We shouldn't be doing more for women than we do for guys, that's not FAIR!" There's a ******* difference, if you get hit on by a girl you're not interested, you are perfectly fine saying "no thanks" without the fear of her snapping and assaulting you verbally, physically or sexually. This is a genuine concern for women because it actually happens. Some random on the street starts following them in their car asking them to hop in (surprisingly common from the women i've talked to about this), drunk guys who won't take no for an answer and who get intimidating and pushy and the constant thought in the back of the mind that some fella could take what he wants from you, because let's be honest, most guys are bigger and stronger than most women.

There are things guy can do and gal's can't, or not that they can't do but if they did it, they increase the risk of some kind of attack. I talk with my fiance about some of the things I do, i'm a night person, and I'll sometimes head out at night for a walk down to the servo for a choc milk or golden gay time. For me, there is near zero threat, maybe some yobbo will shout something out of their car at me but I feel safe at midnight walking down a main road. My partner and her sisters however, laughs at the idea that they would even think of doing that. So many times they have copped shit from strangers in broad daylight so the idea of what they have to worry about in the middle of night on a relatively deserted street is horrifying to them.

This is an extreme bow to draw from what happened, but it's all connected, it's up to society to make a point of saying, "if you treat women like crap, you are a piece of human garbage" and say it in the firmest way.

Lets not pretend women don't f*** s*** up if you reject them...

surely you have heard of the phrase hell hath no fury like a woman scorned...

The main thing I hate is the boys club bullying woman in general sects of the community...and pass it off as a bit of fun

 

[edgie]

So in the one movie in probably 100 that has a lead female, she gets paid more than the supporting male actors.

Is she not allowed to comment on shitty standards for women because she isn't one of the unlucky women that missed out on a role because there WERE NO OTHER ROLES FOR WOMEN, or simply because she is getting paid the most for a movie SHE IS CLEARLY WORTH THE MOST IN.

#carn

Quit the hyperbole. Its

Hollywood, it is art. You get paid what your worth, and they make the movies with the characters that people would like to see.

I'm a fella. I identify with fellas more, naturally. I'd rather watch The Expendables than Charlies Angels. That isn't sexism, its demographics.

There was a movie a few years back featuring all black leads. All major studios refused to fund it, so the director paid for it out of his own pocket. That's a real problem. Not who has a dick and who doesn't and her feeling hard done by because the best in the industry happen to be men.

Also, the movie apparently wasn't good, but good on George Lucas for trying.


Sent from my Lumia 800 using Tapatalk

 

[Peck]

I think you're missing the point about people bringing up double standards. As I've said before when various issues get brought up on this board, I'm all for everyone having equal rights. That means we don't cherry pick at all and have a completely unbiased view from this point on. If we don't, we have a ' well you had more cake last week so I'll have more than you this week' which just oscillates who is getting the raw end of the deal. If we want to move forward with sexism, racism etc - we need to take the higher ground, otherwise we are just as bad as the problem.

I remember reading this on the chive a few years back and it literally stopped me in my tracks about all of these types of arguments.

Please show me the example of a woman sexually harassing many different men off and on camera, all the while not being encouraged by a single one of them?