At least the BITCH is transparent! You so-called men (or wimps to be precise) hide behind your big mouths and small penises, dishing out insults to defend yourself and think this will help your cause. Grow up!
anyone else see the hypocracy in this statement
actually i think this statement helps our cause the most-thank you!
I just love how all of those flaming retards jump on this forum in a futile effort to troll.
They troll because it makes
them feel better about their sorry existence!
I do agree with you that many Video Games do have female characters that are oversexed, there are plenty of games that have female lead characters that are represented normally.
Anyway, Bayonetta isn't a very good game.
I realize this comes pretty late into a thread that started some time ago, but I just joined and this one of the first things I read.
I can't comment on commercials from the 50's, as I really haven't seen those in any significant quantity. But with the exception of documentaries and a few standout series, all my wife and I watch is television from the 50's through the 70's to early 80's - we don't even have any kind of TV programming delivery in the house: no cable, satellite or digital feed. Anything we learn about current goings on comes from radio or reading. Anything we watch is streamed in over the Internet, on rental DVDs, or from our private collection.
So I can say this with some authority about American television from the 50's:
1. Women were roundly treated with respect, and were portrayed with respect as well, unless the character was a villain or some kind of undesirable (and there were usually men in those roles);
2. Many women were portrayed as home-makers, which was in reality a common female role for that era, but there are also many career women in 50's TV and they are not treated like jokes or freaks;
3. Women were commonly central to the proceedings - either lead characters or co-stars. They were no more relegated to secondary roles than men were, unless the show was about a predominantly male subject matter (i.e.: like a military show taking place on submarine);
4. Households in 50's TV were a team effort - everyone had an important role, including the women and girls, and everyone was involved in making decisions, and while the official stance was that dad had the final say, that was often not the case;
5. The patriarchal figure in the show would often falter and it would fall on the female lead to save the day;
6. Efforts by the patriarchal figure to take charge sometimes worked, but just as often they would backfire hilariously.
I think most importantly, many of these shows established that men are women are NOT the same, but they are equally important in what they bring to their world. This often came out in "battle of the sexes" episodes, which were being done even back then. The rather famous I Love Lucy episode "Job Switching" is a very good example of how this was typically handled: after walking a mile in the other sex's shoes, each admits that they grossly underestimated how difficult the other side has it and gains a new appreciation of their partner. Do you think the modern world could learn something from this?
i often make the rather silly comment that women should not be on TV unless they are pretty.. Its a visual media and no one wants to look at an ugly mug!
Folk of course rarely get the hidden point I am trying to get across, that being, that since there is no substance in what they are saying anyway, they may as well compensate for it by having attractive folk on!
I mean, what does "east enders" or "coronation street" teach us other than how to accept that women run the world and men have to be forever groveling or playing the villain if they want a chance at the axewound.. Not that most men would touch them in real life! (Rosie Webster excepted of course! Phwoar!!!)..
post edited - ranting
Last edited by Marx; 16th-August-2010 at 05:20 AM. Reason: ranting removed.
Hrm. These surveys that show women are as likely to abuse their male spouse as he is to abuse her include verbal abuse, don't they?
Just curious, because in terms of physically abusing their partner I can't see women measuring up to men (unless the abuse is mutual in the relationship or he's whipped to the point of just taking it- oh dear, yes I am insinuating women are smaller and weaker than men on average). That isn't to say verbal abuse is 100% a-okay or anything, just when you mention domestic violence and abuse the first thing that pops into some one's head is a brutal beating.
Also, what constituted abuse in these statistics? Slapping some one in the face, unless you do it hard enough to bruise or do it with extreme frequency, is not abuse in my book. Nor is getting angry for a legitimate reason and berating the hell out of some one that god damn well has it coming (depending on what you are angry about and depending on how apologetic the person you are tearing into is).
Likewise I have seen a poll that depicted upwards of 90% of men being 'potential rapists'. The information gathered considered the preference of being on top during intercourse to be a 'sign'. Not even kidding.
As Mark Twain once said; "There are three kinds of lies. White lies, outright lies and statistics."
On the subject of 'battery', feminists touted the claim that a "woman is battered every 15 seconds" as one of their anti-male soundbites, knowing that most folks assume 'battery' to mean a physical battering - not a verbal ranting/nagging. The very same study which concluded a woman was victimised every 15 seconds - also found that men were victims of battery ever 13 seconds (i.e. fractionally more often that women). Once men spoke out about the discrepancy (which feminists had been silent about until backed into a corner), they "suddenly" decided to explain that battery was verbal abuse, and so men shouldn't be affected by it - but it was ok to demand sympathy-votes when they were tricking the public into the belief that men were physically battering women every 15 seconds.
--Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.--
Antimisandry now offers it's members personal sub-forums
(click here to register yours)
►A Decade of Investment in YOUR Future. ►AntiMisandry.com
you shouldnt make generalizations about all feminists.
most feminists simply believe in equality between men and women and work to defend women's rights
feminists are usually not misandrists