Online Study: Women are just as likley to be "misogynistic" as men online

[Someone Depressing]

Wow. Not really that suprising, though. I've even been called a slut online; good times.

It's odd, and I wasn't expecting it to be that muh, but it's not suprising that it's major.

 

[Eamar]

Someone's sexual practices says a lot about who they are, especially in relation to finding a partner and someone to reproduce with.

Except that since the arrival of reliable and widely available contraception, one's sexual practices haven't had to be tied to the whole marriage and babies thing any more (unless you want them to be, of course).

All someone's sexual practices say about them is how they feel about sex. They might possibly give some indication of religious affiliation too, I guess, but other than that... not so much.

Unless you're religious or someone's sexual activities are in some way harmful, it makes no sense at all to attach any moral judgement to sex (or the lack of it).

 

[Vault101]

I don't follow reddit so thanks for introducing me to that, there's some hilarious stuff in there (aswell as a lot of threads with hilarious titles that are about less funny things..So my vagina is trying to kill me is about a hysterectomy D, ex from Weirdest thing a dude didn't know: "When I was a freshmen in college, a (19-year-old) guy asked me and my friend if women are born with vaginas or if they just... open up one day."

Favorited and hopefully will learn a thing or 2 about the other half whilst i'm browsing for lulz, cheers!

as a protest everyone started making threads about the graphic nature of periods (we're talking clots and enthusiastic bowel movements) to scare away guys

Someone's sexual practices says a lot about who they are, especially in relation to finding a partner and someone to reproduce with. It's perfectly natural to hold standards towards certain types of sexual behaviour - we have literally evolved to do so.

weather or not evo psych backs it up [footnote/]and thats a thing in of itself..since you give a bunch of people a basic knowledge and they use it to back up their own predjudices with "science")[/footnote] is irrelevant, "was" and "ought to be" are not the same things

where do our ideas of sex come from? (how much of a role did religion play?) and have they been the same for all of human history? because I seriously doubt it, "virginity" is more of a concept than it is a physical state and fetishisation of a woman's "purity" is an outdated institution alongside corsets and getting her off via clitoral stimulation to cure hysteria

blaming the woman for a guys insecurity over her number of past partners is pretty shitty, now of coarse you're free to have whatever standards you want, its your life. But judging someone for the crime of enjoying lots of sex is...quite frankly bullshit

and you know...locks keys and double standards...

 

[Frankster]

as a protest everyone started making threads about the graphic nature of periods (we're talking clots and enthusiastic bowel movements) to scare away guys

>_< Lovely..

Well if it comes to that, I can handle it, when I was in boarding school I was only one out of 4 boys in a class of 26, (and one of the guys was a flamboyant stereotypical gay dude).
So..I've heard my fair share due to being marooned for so long in a classroom dominated by women.

 

[JimB]

Someone's sexual practices says a lot about who they are.

Okay, I'll bite. Like what?

 

[PirateRose]

This one time at work, I was telling a woman about the features on a computer. She stopped me, looked me directly in the eye and said "You don't know what you are talking, do you? Are their any men around that can help me?"

Now the fun part is, yes there are men in the department, but no, they were unable to help her because they were not computer savvy in the slightest. Television stuff, yeah they'd give you an ear full, but I as the unofficial computer/gaming/cellphone queen of the staff. The men always directed the customers to me for that stuff and wouldn't bother to learn even when I tried to teach them.

This woman tried going around to every man in the department and they'd send her back to me to help her pick out a computer.

That was not the only time that kind of thing happened, I just remember it so well because of her determination of going to every penis in the department looking for help because she was so convinced I was making stuff up to sound smart. Usually people, men and women alike, stop at the first guy that says to go talk to me cause I'm the only one that would know. Never once did I ever get an apology though.

So yeah, after working 7 years in a electronics department, I know well women can be just as misogynist. When your social structure is set up to hate women, women will hate themselves and the women around because they are raised in it.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

I don't see how using "slut" or "whore" as an insult is automatically "misogynist". The second does not automatically follow the first. It's quite possible to call a woman a slut and not hate women as a whole, but just the one against whom the insult is directed. And why are men unfairly assumed to be the sole source for the insults to the extent that this report is even newsworthy? Women are more horrid to each other than men are from as early as childhood.

I don't care what abuse people hurl at each other and don't see how these examples are supposed to be "proof" of anything. Someone can insult a woman and not be a miogynist. This is more feminist bullshit looking for another place where they have yet to play the victim.

 

[WindKnight]

What's wrong with "slut shaming"? Is it purely because men don't get "slut shamed", so it is therefore unfair to call out women on it?

Slut shaming is telling women that them enjoying and having control over their own sexuality is dirty and wrong, but men are free to enjoy and have control over their own sexuality. Its a nasty and pernicious double standard.

 

[Something Amyss]

as a protest everyone started making threads about the graphic nature of periods (we're talking clots and enthusiastic bowel movements) to scare away guys

I'm still amazed that simple biology can be sufficient to severely squick half the population out.

And sometimes a little amused.

 

[The Lunatic]

Ah yes, as we all know, the words used when talking about something are significantly more important than any meaning behind them.

 

[Phasmal]

What's wrong with "slut shaming"? Is it purely because men don't get "slut shamed", so it is therefore unfair to call out women on it?

Ok, so men get praised for having loads of sex but women shouldn't be having loads of sex? Stupid.

Women are not supposed to admit to enjoying sex- which is kind of ridiculous.
They're held to this bullshit purity stuff based on `virginity`, which isn't really as clearly defined as people pretend it is.
What exactly about having sex ruins someone's personality?

Someone's sexual practices says a lot about who they are, especially in relation to finding a partner and someone to reproduce with. It's perfectly natural to hold standards towards certain types of sexual behaviour - we have literally evolved to do so.

Actually, judging someone by their sexual practices (as long as they are not harmful), says a hell of a lot more about you than it does about them.

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

Pfff. THAT'S their method of collecting misogynistic material?

"Whore" is interchangeable with "girl I don't like", and it's used by girls on my Facebook far more than the guys (they tend to stick with "crazy chick"). I can't remember the last time I've seen it used in a sexual context.

So is ******. Plenty of people just havent figured this out yet.

Sometimes, yes, but the thing is there's a reason why it's used so exclusively as an insult. I agree that for most people it's unthinking, but the fact that one of the worst insults you can call a woman is accusing her of having sex a lot is kind of indicative of some sexism in our language. And plenty of people still use it just like it's intended. For example just yesterday my girlfriend's brother said, "Hahaha, he's a fucking ******" when we mentioned someone we knew was gay, (also said that the korean people working at the gas station were being so difficult because they were "chinks").

At a later point in the night her mother was saying how this one woman was a failure of a mother because one of her daughters is a complete whore. Then went to clarify she literally thought she was a prostitute, just because word had gotten around about her having sex with several guys.

People like this aren't exactly common, but the more you see people in private situations where they're comfortable, the more you see opinions like this come up. And it's really not so much about it being used in a sexual context, it's still using the idea of them having sex a lot or being attracted to men as an insult. That's how they started as insults, and that's how a lot of people continue to use them, even if everyone else just uses them because they were made by popular by homophobes, sexists or racists.

 

[JimB]

Ah yes, as we all know, the words used when talking about something are significantly more important than any meaning behind them.

But the words are the only way we have of determining that meaning. If I ask for a screwdriver, I don't get to climb up on my high horse because you handed me a screwdriver instead of a bowl of Rice Krispies, which is what I actually meant despite my choice of words.

 

[Something Amyss]

So...Have we yet verified this study is legit? Because I'm still finding it suspiciously absent from my web searches.

Ok, so men get praised for having loads of sex but women shouldn't be having loads of sex? Stupid.

And who are these men having sex with, if women aren't supposed to have and enjoy sex?

I mean, especially since we also go after gays as a culture.

 

[the December King]

So, I'm unclear as to what's happening in this thread... is the consensus now that women calling each other a 'slut' or 'whore' is basically an individual attack, and not misogynistic, but when men do it, it is? Or is it that men or women who use these terms to judge all other women they don't like, that that's misogyny?

I think it's the latter... right?

But the words are the only way we have of determining that meaning. If I ask for a screwdriver, I don't get to climb up on my high horse because you handed me a screwdriver instead of a bowl of Rice Krispies, which is what I actually meant despite my choice of words.

As an observation on your screwdriver anecdote, if I'm in a bar, and you don't pass me a vodka and orange juice when I ask, but instead hand me a phillips or a flathead, I'll be pretty upset- sometimes, context can assist meaning, me thinks.

...

No, actually I'd have a good laugh- it'd remind me of Faulty Towers.

 

[Something Amyss]

No, actually I'd have a good laugh- it'd remind me of Faulty Towers.

My first thought was "Airplane[footnote]They pulled gags like that, and I think one of the Zucker/Abrams movies used that exact version[/footnote]," though that works, too.

 

[the December King]

No, actually I'd have a good laugh- it'd remind me of Faulty Towers.

My first thought was "Airplane[footnote]They pulled gags like that, and I think one of the Zucker/Abrams movies used that exact version[/footnote]," though that works, too.

It's been forever since I've seen Airplane! Does it hold up?

 

[Something Amyss]

It's been forever since I've seen Airplane! Does it hold up?

Ehhhh...It's still pretty funny. I prefer Naked Gun, myself.

Here http://www.demos.co.uk/publications/misogyny
Download link in the lower left. I assume the article didn't provide a source to maintain it's "exclusive" status, despite the publication being free.

I'd assume it was more because all appearance is that they were attempting to sensationalise it. Then again, my line of thinking could be contaminated by the fact that I spent the morning reading/watching/listening to bits on British newspapers misrepresenting climate science, then later blaming the scientists for sensationalism. Still, it appears sensationalised, which is exactly why I was skeptical.

But thanks. I always like to go to the primary source.