01-24-2014, 12:00 AM
Kaomea wrote:JJ, I have a few ideas and questions for you
1. The term bigot according to http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot is: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.
So would this imply you are a bigot in your approach to the appreciation of femininity? Also, the thread did not view men with hatred or intolerance. So how does femininity imply bigotry?
2. Your innocent swap of men into blacks and women into whites doesn't work. You're saying men are the weaker social class by calling them black. Traditionally women are the weaker social class. Look at history, women weren't allowed to vote, not even before the blacks. It took 50 years for women to gain voting rights, after the blacks gained theirs. Women were the subservient ones in history. Also, blacks were pushed down to the point where they became ashamed of themselves, hated themselves due to their race. Something they had no control over. So when they do black pride events, it's not bigoted of them to rejoice in their race. Especially not by the definition of bigotry.
They are simply celebrating who they are, beautiful individuals without the intent to put down or show intolerance for other groups.
So you should swap men into whites and women into blacks, and then maybe give it another look.
Answers
Question 1 - I disagree with that definition of bigotry. It requires hatred and as I mentioned earlier hatred is not a required component of bigotry.
Question 2 - I disagree here in several ways. First, you're using a 2 wrongs make a right argument. Second, I strongly disagree that women have historically been the weaker social class, and they are clearly the priveledged social class today and for all of mine and your lifetimes. Dr Warren Farrell debunks the historical myth of women as the weaker social class very thoroughly in his book "The Myth of Male Power" available at
Basically it comes down to what you pick as indicators of power, and once you stop looking at the few people who had power over others and look at how much power the masses had over their own lives a much different picture emerges. Also, many of the historical claims of oppression against women are exagerrated or simply made up. For example, the claims that women were not able to work or own property in the US at one time have been proven false by the thousands of examples of women working and owning property from the beginning of this country. Even the vote which you mentioned is exagerrated. It took men thousands of years to earn the vote, and cost them many lives. Also many men, (who were racial minorities not including just blacks, or who were simply poor), did not get the vote at this countries formation either. Most of the time the women were fighting for the vote the fight was to convince other women they wanted it. Some of the most outspoken opponents to the vote were other women. Once most women did decide they wanted the vote, the men quickly and freely gave it to them. Also, during the time that women weren't voting, the laws that men were writing protected women more than men. So while wrong, it wasn't quite the oppression we've been taught it was.
You do however make a good point about how biases regarding the specific groups I've switched too can still cloud our judgement. So I propose we change it to just Human Type A and Human Type B. Giving it another look from that perspective, I still see bigotry.
1. The term bigot according to http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot is: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.
So would this imply you are a bigot in your approach to the appreciation of femininity? Also, the thread did not view men with hatred or intolerance. So how does femininity imply bigotry?
2. Your innocent swap of men into blacks and women into whites doesn't work. You're saying men are the weaker social class by calling them black. Traditionally women are the weaker social class. Look at history, women weren't allowed to vote, not even before the blacks. It took 50 years for women to gain voting rights, after the blacks gained theirs. Women were the subservient ones in history. Also, blacks were pushed down to the point where they became ashamed of themselves, hated themselves due to their race. Something they had no control over. So when they do black pride events, it's not bigoted of them to rejoice in their race. Especially not by the definition of bigotry.
They are simply celebrating who they are, beautiful individuals without the intent to put down or show intolerance for other groups.
So you should swap men into whites and women into blacks, and then maybe give it another look.
Answers
Question 1 - I disagree with that definition of bigotry. It requires hatred and as I mentioned earlier hatred is not a required component of bigotry.
Question 2 - I disagree here in several ways. First, you're using a 2 wrongs make a right argument. Second, I strongly disagree that women have historically been the weaker social class, and they are clearly the priveledged social class today and for all of mine and your lifetimes. Dr Warren Farrell debunks the historical myth of women as the weaker social class very thoroughly in his book "The Myth of Male Power" available at
Basically it comes down to what you pick as indicators of power, and once you stop looking at the few people who had power over others and look at how much power the masses had over their own lives a much different picture emerges. Also, many of the historical claims of oppression against women are exagerrated or simply made up. For example, the claims that women were not able to work or own property in the US at one time have been proven false by the thousands of examples of women working and owning property from the beginning of this country. Even the vote which you mentioned is exagerrated. It took men thousands of years to earn the vote, and cost them many lives. Also many men, (who were racial minorities not including just blacks, or who were simply poor), did not get the vote at this countries formation either. Most of the time the women were fighting for the vote the fight was to convince other women they wanted it. Some of the most outspoken opponents to the vote were other women. Once most women did decide they wanted the vote, the men quickly and freely gave it to them. Also, during the time that women weren't voting, the laws that men were writing protected women more than men. So while wrong, it wasn't quite the oppression we've been taught it was.
You do however make a good point about how biases regarding the specific groups I've switched too can still cloud our judgement. So I propose we change it to just Human Type A and Human Type B. Giving it another look from that perspective, I still see bigotry.