Dear Daddy. How sexist jokes can promote violence against women women

And, of course, not being sexist, you include men in that definition....

 

When did they say they did???????

 

You didnt answer my question

Is there an insult you could aim at a young male that has the same impact as “slut”?

 

Yes and it is interesting that it is the opposite of the insult to young girls. Calling someone a “dick” is just one of those things and often done with a laugh whereas calling someone a “Kunt” is demeaning. (Deliberately misspelled)

 

Many insults. Calling a man an InCel is as damaging as calling a woman a slut. I use a more polite euphemism Victim of Patriarchal Exploitation.

In my opinion, boys should be respectful to girls as long as girls are respectful to them. Girls who use phrases like "boys are stupid, throw rocks at them" deserve no respect.

 

Young male -- not off the top of my head. Calling a boy a Potential Rapist or an Oppressor is much worse then calling a girl anything.

For men over 25, the worst insult is InCel. Most men are involuntary celibate, but very few subscribe to InCel ideology.

 

My favorite insult is Enemy of Humankind.

Both Liberals and Conservatives can be in that category. A Conservative who believes in Social Darwinism is an Enemy of Humankind. A Liberal who supports Censorship and views all men as oppressors falls into the same category.

Are there any Classical Liberals left?

 

There is and it manifests itself in the shape of physical violence. As I pointed out earlier, boys and girls bully in different ways.

 

I can't relate to that description at all. Both are considered insults of equal magnitude.

 

Boys who judge females on their sexual activity deserve no respect.

 

The sexual past of my partner is none of my business - just as mine is none of his. As long as we are both healthy, I truly could care less. And I certainly wouldn't judge or label him for it.

 

Surely you must be joking?

Past relationships tell a lot about a given person's character - How many have they had? Why did they end? How long did they last? All of these are very important questions to help one figure out if a candidate is a trustworthy longterm partner. If the given person in question has had a lot of sexual partners, it is a huge red flag because there is nothing that tells that you will not be just another of their temporary "hump n dumps".

Additionally, it is already proven that the more sexual partners one has had, the more difficult it is for them to commit.

 

I appreciate your right to judge another by their past. I'm happy with my choice not to...

 

You don't think behavior is important in judging people especially if it concerns a committed relationship and it's future? Especially if children may be involoved?

 

Sure, I would consider a person's past infidelity. Or a criminal past. But the number of people a person has slept with - when single - doesn't tell me about what kind of husband or father they would be. I don't think that a person who sleeps with many - while single - speaks to their character.

 

It can tell lots about how commited person can be but thanks for admitting it is OK to judge people by their past.

 

What we have here are feminists and beta male type leftists declaring -- sans any proof -- that joking around or even being ugly with words causes assaults on women and then offering up that baseless hypotheses as proof.

For decades now scientists have supported the hypothesis that watching violent video games makes young males become violent. There never was any proof, mind you, just a 'feel good' style assumption. Guess what today's scientists are currently concluding? Oops! The one has got nothing to do with the other. What is actually happening is that long term exposure to violent video games shortens attention spans among males . . . and that's it. Game over.

You wanna posit that telling bad jokes or even issuing aggressive words cause males to become abusers of females than next time provide actual . . . proof. Otherwise it is just yet one more baseless leftist 'feel good' hypothesis.

 

That is interesting because to me you said "I'm happy with my choice not to [judge people by their past]." So, which one is it?

So, hypothetically speaking, you would be fine with a man who had slept with 200 thousand women?

Of course it does! All actions speak to one's character.

 

Taking one's past into consideration isn't judging it. At least, not by my standards. As for the rest, we can agree to disagree.

 

Eh, yes it is. Otherwise there would be no reason to take it into consideration in the first place. Why do employers ask for your resume? Why do people go on dates? Why do we chose to make some people who we meet our friends and reject others?

 

When I take something into consideration, I think about it...how it will affect future actions. When I judge someone, I am labeling them.

We can go at this all day, but you and I disagree...which is fine. No point in flogging this horse...its dead.

 

"Yo mamma!" "F@ggot." Something that would hurt as much as telling a girl all the boys like her would be telling a boy none of the girls liked him. Something like, "You're never getting laid as long as you live," or, "You're gonna die a virgin."

 

I've known a guy who was called a slut for sleeping around. He resented it but it didn't slow him down any.

2010 meme that answers your question:

 

Oh stop, you knew ONE guy ONE time who was called a slut....hardly negates the FACT that slut is used to refer to women who some think have too much sex.

 

Ahhh well yes it is.