@Tim Notice how c-dub likes to deflect from the actual debate by attempting to tear down a person's character and pretending he's somehow morally superior? Yeah, he's the type that on a jury, would be against convicting a rapist because the victim wore a short skirt. And that is why he is not worthy of my attention at this point.
@c-dub Obviously you are simply trying to be nasty toward me, because you are twisting everything I say to fit your perception of me. I think we covered earlier that I realize what it's taken for me to have the rights I have today several posts back. Your not worth my repeating myself because you obviously aren't paying attention. I also think that you're just really wearing out the "it's all about you" crap because I know that it isn't. I have drawn on my personal experiences simply to illustrate that it is possible to get what you want if you work hard enough for it, even if you are a woman. There are a million women out there far more successful than I am who have worked harder and made it in a "man's world", and they've done it without hiding behind this radical feminist agenda that likes being offended by everything they see whether it's merited or not. That's not striving for change, it's a desperate attempt to remain relevant in a world that doesn't need the radical agenda any more. I'm not saying sexism is eradicated or that it's a perfect world, but this is desperate and unworthy of a real woman's concern when there are real issues out there for the woman that feels like taking them on. I would like to think that women are above the pettiness and feigned victimization that this stinks of.
Furthermore, I don't care who said it, and I don't care how easy the signs were to change. They are a waste because there are still plenty of usable signs that could have remained in use until they were ready for replacement. Someone outside of Public Works whined, they figured why not, and wasted the money and resources to get it done. And that's the bottom line. It's waste, and so have the last ten minutes I have wasted responding to your drivel.
@Lenore Fact is, on that statement, I only really half agree. So that's where the disagreement lies... in facilitation, and I missed that, so I apologize.
In calling my statement stupid, the implication was that I am stupid for making it. The tone of the post spoke volumes. So that's how I took it. If that's not what you meant, cool.
Sarcasm doesn't translate well because my own response was riddled with sarcasm. And quite frankly, after responding to someone like c-dub, who accuses everyone of being this or that without even knowing what the high road is, then it all flowed out that way.
When those little things mean nothing, like this sign, c-dub, it's not helping anything. So why do something for a false sense of victory/accomplishment? Do something meaningful. I'm not saying small in and of itself is crap, but when it's so small that it isn't going to make a scrap of difference, then it is useless. Like this sign. If someone wants to call me a man, they are welcome to if it means that no one is going to run me over while I am working out there. Again, why not wait until the signs were worn out? It's not that big a deal. Oh no, instead, some whack job decides that they have to go RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE OH MY GOD IT'S SO SEXIST AND WRONG. CAN'T YOU SEE THEY HAVE BOOBS? THOSE POOR OPPRESSED WOMEN CAN'T STAND UP FOR THEMSELVES AND DEMAND EQUAL TREATMENT!!!! OH THE HUMANITY!! Give me a break. Those women do a great job, their co-workers and superiors know it, or they wouldn't be on that road crew at all. They don't need saving, and if they didn't get what they wanted they didn't want it bad enough when they tried to get it. They can bite me.
And this is about radical feminism, because that's what it is. Radical feminism isn't useless because three of them wanted to beat me up. It's useless because the attitude of those radical feminists, which is ultimately creating hatred and division, is driving these stupid little things like the sign issue. I don't have a chip on my shoulder, but if it makes you feel better to think I do, go for it. But that is a prime example of that sort of attitude. I've said it already, I am all for a gender neutral sign if it means so much, but don't waste the money on it until the other signs are unusable. There are better things to spend taxpayers' money on.
Weak does not equal wrong, but acting weak does. We aren't weak as women. We have laws to protect us against discrimination, we have more respect from men than we've ever had, and we are individuals who have the power to make our own way. But as long as women keep acting like victims, seeing discrimination where it doesn't exist, rather than tackling issues where it does, they will never have my support. I've done fine without them. So have a lot of other women in the modern age. And if you think we have to have some crutch in order to be strong, or whine about stupid signs for recognition, then you are sexist yourself.
@c-dub Sorry I was busy looking at myself in the mirror to determine my good side.
Your analogies, with all due respect, suck.
First of all, you are taking things out of context not to expose anything, but to twist them around for the sake of being contrary. First of all, would you kill a chicken for dinner with a Spork or an axe? The Spork is useless and is only going to annoy the chicken and everyone else waiting for dinner. That's what this sign issue is. If you are going to take up a cause, you go big or don't go at all. Otherwise, you are making excuses for failure when the Spork doesn't work.
Secondly, I am far from anti social, and I have no desire or concern if you believe that or not. My point there is that a person is an individual first, then a man, woman, transsexual, whatever. You do things for yourself, stand up for yourself, and don't play the victim, as well as treat others fairly, then you will get respect from all those that you want it from. I don't need to hide behind a bunch of BS "You're discriminating because the ladies' toilet is two feet further away!!!!" or whatever. If a person wants to perceive sexism around every corner, it will be there, but a lot of the time, it isn't. It's like the woman that wrongfully accuses someone of rape. She screws it up for other women when they really do get raped because then there is a general mistrust. Well, in this case, the problem lies in the fact that if every, little, tiny, miniscule thing that isn't even intended to discriminate, is made a big deal out of, then no one will care about the bigger issues. So you look out for yourself and avoid the hens that want to cluck about things that don't matter. A mosquito is a mosquito. Talk to me when you are attacked by a real dragon.
If those women filed a complaint (and I haven't checked out your information because quite frankly, I just got back from a 7 mile walk and I am not in the mood), then they didn't complain loudly enough, did they? So why should anyone take up their "battle" if they can't fight it themselves? After all, no one is raping, circumcising them or not allowing them to make an honest living are they? Most of us don't care about the signs. You know what i care about? The fact that my family in the States is suffering with a poor economy. So wasting money to pacify a bunch of man haters s not a priority.
I'm not convinced. While I think this would be tickly good fun, I don't know that I would pay for it when I could find a pond somewhere and then just use a pumice stone to get rid of the dead, flaky skin.
I'm illiterate and narcissistic according to c-dub and Lenore, so maybe I shouldn't even answer.
@c-dub The idea behind tackling big issues, Drama Boy, is that if you are piddling around with the little things, and not dealing with the big ones, you are not getting anything done. That's what's wrong with people like you and some of these "movements". If they do too much, they lose relevance. If they twiddle their thumbs long enough, someone else might get it done for them. So why not whine about the meaningless things in the meantime? You sure like to take everything out of context, don't you?
Secondly, if it's narcissistic to look out for my own before I worry about anyone else, then so be it. I'm sure that you aren't such a bleeding heart that you wouldn't put yourself first in most issues. You examples of the starving kid were so far fetched and out of context with what was being said that I am sure now that you are just trying to bait people here. Yes, I am more concerned with what affects me and my family and friends first. They are the people that matter most in my life. Get off your high horse because unless you are the next incarnation of Mother Teresa, you are just pointing fingers in order to be dramatic.
@Lenore If that's not what you were saying all along, why have you bothered arguing the issue? I think I have made my points very clear all along. If we agree, then why is it that we are discussing it? I have said all along that language itself does not change attitudes. Perhaps you can't read, but no, let me go drool and be illiterate in the corner. Furthermore, you've called me stupid already. I thought that a debate, even while heated, wasn't supposed to be about name calling. But maybe I'm not supposed to know about that. See, I can't read.
I have to agree with Melissa on this one. Not only is it a low thing to do, but think about all the planning that goes into something like this. A person has to be really desperate, utterly insane, and verging on, if not sociopathic.
@c-dub If arrogance is not playing into the hands of fools who think that language changes everything and that a road sign is oppressive, then that arrogance is merited. Not because I feel that I am better than others who disagree, but because I feel that I have a load more common sense. Why should I care what others think if they do not directly affect my life? I'm sure you don't care about what I am thinking and that's not a mark against you. We don't know one another. Perhaps if people worried about the immediate things in their lives, they would be better off. And perhaps if people started going for the dragon's throat instead of its toes, people would take the womens' movement more seriously. And this road sign issue is a bit like that. Making an issue of the little things when there are bigger things to do is really almost cowardly, as if tackling real issues would leave some of these people with so little to do that they would lose purpose. And if it's arrogant that I would not associate myself with silly cows bent on creating division instead of real equality by pulling for the issues that really matter and not road signs, then cool, I'm arrogant.
Also, the more PC someone is, the more of their nature they are attempting to hide in most cases. In other cases, they are merely brainwashing themselves into thinking they sound more intelligent or enlightened. I'm not saying we should throw around offensive terms, or fail to be polite and have a bit of class, but changing language, again, doesn't change an attitude in an individual. What would you prefer? Changing actual individual's minds, or forcing an entire society into acting as though they care? I prefer sincerity myself.
Furthermore, Tim has never disrespected me personally. I don't care what he has posted elsewhere because he has treated me with respect since I have begun posting on this site. However, "warning" me about him when you have made it plain that I am far from your favorite person just makes it more difficult for me to take you seriously. And seriously, I mean no disrespect. I'm being honest. I can disagree with a million people and not dislike them for the disagreement, and I even feel that way about you despite lines you've crossed, but I am thinking that maybe you shouldn't have the benefit of the doubt. Badmouthing people in that manner is just ugly.
@Lenore has it occurred to you that a change in attitude might have been the reason for a decrease in the N word? Or does that make far too much sense and go against your rabid defense of a tired argument about language?
@Xael Nothing to add here other than your posts are eloquent, they make sense, and you've brought much to this discussion and said a lot of things that I have been too bored to type out myself or could never have expressed as well.
@IggyKoopa The hijacking of words like history are exactly another issue I have with the radical feminists. I really wasn't even going to go there, but Xael did, so I am going to add my two cents. It's ridiculous, childish, and another one of those things that make a person lose respect for the womens' movement. For one, it goes back to the idea of the oppressed becoming the oppressor, which is the goal of the true radical and utterly wrong. Secondly, it's inaccurate if you look at most hijacked words etymologies, as well as useless. The problem that arises with gender neutrality is that society is not meant to be androgynous. Though Lenore will go off on Spanish language minorities for my saying this, that is one of several languages where nouns are masculine or feminine. Will that have to change too? It would ruin those languages if the change went forward, but I doubt it ever would, nor should it. Of course, only American women matter *big eye roll* so I expect a big backlash on that. Point is, changing the language stinks of the types of people that would revise history to their benefit and is again, like hammering the dragon in the toe. It's a time wasting exercise when real issues could be tackled. Sure, there's no problem with gender neutral road signs, but why the drama about changing it right now and wasting the resources and money instead of waiting until the original ones were no longer functional? Oh yeah, less publicity and posturing.
Ultimately, if we as women want equal respect, we have to throw some of these radical feminist ideas to the wayside that a. make no sense, b. are outdated notions that someone had while on an LSD trip in the 60's, and c. prove ourselves as individuals and not allow ourselves to be victimized, and d. not cry sexism and play victims when we are not. In regard to d. Xael was right. The sign's intent was not to disparage women, but that's what this woman has made it out to be. Who can respect a nut job like that?
Furthermore, I don't care who said it, and I don't care how easy the signs were to change. They are a waste because there are still plenty of usable signs that could have remained in use until they were ready for replacement. Someone outside of Public Works whined, they figured why not, and wasted the money and resources to get it done. And that's the bottom line. It's waste, and so have the last ten minutes I have wasted responding to your drivel.
And thanks again for recognizing what I have been trying to put across.
In calling my statement stupid, the implication was that I am stupid for making it. The tone of the post spoke volumes. So that's how I took it. If that's not what you meant, cool.
Sarcasm doesn't translate well because my own response was riddled with sarcasm. And quite frankly, after responding to someone like c-dub, who accuses everyone of being this or that without even knowing what the high road is, then it all flowed out that way.
And this is about radical feminism, because that's what it is. Radical feminism isn't useless because three of them wanted to beat me up. It's useless because the attitude of those radical feminists, which is ultimately creating hatred and division, is driving these stupid little things like the sign issue. I don't have a chip on my shoulder, but if it makes you feel better to think I do, go for it. But that is a prime example of that sort of attitude. I've said it already, I am all for a gender neutral sign if it means so much, but don't waste the money on it until the other signs are unusable. There are better things to spend taxpayers' money on.
Weak does not equal wrong, but acting weak does. We aren't weak as women. We have laws to protect us against discrimination, we have more respect from men than we've ever had, and we are individuals who have the power to make our own way. But as long as women keep acting like victims, seeing discrimination where it doesn't exist, rather than tackling issues where it does, they will never have my support. I've done fine without them. So have a lot of other women in the modern age. And if you think we have to have some crutch in order to be strong, or whine about stupid signs for recognition, then you are sexist yourself.
Your analogies, with all due respect, suck.
First of all, you are taking things out of context not to expose anything, but to twist them around for the sake of being contrary. First of all, would you kill a chicken for dinner with a Spork or an axe? The Spork is useless and is only going to annoy the chicken and everyone else waiting for dinner. That's what this sign issue is. If you are going to take up a cause, you go big or don't go at all. Otherwise, you are making excuses for failure when the Spork doesn't work.
Secondly, I am far from anti social, and I have no desire or concern if you believe that or not. My point there is that a person is an individual first, then a man, woman, transsexual, whatever. You do things for yourself, stand up for yourself, and don't play the victim, as well as treat others fairly, then you will get respect from all those that you want it from. I don't need to hide behind a bunch of BS "You're discriminating because the ladies' toilet is two feet further away!!!!" or whatever. If a person wants to perceive sexism around every corner, it will be there, but a lot of the time, it isn't. It's like the woman that wrongfully accuses someone of rape. She screws it up for other women when they really do get raped because then there is a general mistrust. Well, in this case, the problem lies in the fact that if every, little, tiny, miniscule thing that isn't even intended to discriminate, is made a big deal out of, then no one will care about the bigger issues. So you look out for yourself and avoid the hens that want to cluck about things that don't matter. A mosquito is a mosquito. Talk to me when you are attacked by a real dragon.
If those women filed a complaint (and I haven't checked out your information because quite frankly, I just got back from a 7 mile walk and I am not in the mood), then they didn't complain loudly enough, did they? So why should anyone take up their "battle" if they can't fight it themselves? After all, no one is raping, circumcising them or not allowing them to make an honest living are they? Most of us don't care about the signs. You know what i care about? The fact that my family in the States is suffering with a poor economy. So wasting money to pacify a bunch of man haters s not a priority.
@c-dub The idea behind tackling big issues, Drama Boy, is that if you are piddling around with the little things, and not dealing with the big ones, you are not getting anything done. That's what's wrong with people like you and some of these "movements". If they do too much, they lose relevance. If they twiddle their thumbs long enough, someone else might get it done for them. So why not whine about the meaningless things in the meantime? You sure like to take everything out of context, don't you?
Secondly, if it's narcissistic to look out for my own before I worry about anyone else, then so be it. I'm sure that you aren't such a bleeding heart that you wouldn't put yourself first in most issues. You examples of the starving kid were so far fetched and out of context with what was being said that I am sure now that you are just trying to bait people here. Yes, I am more concerned with what affects me and my family and friends first. They are the people that matter most in my life. Get off your high horse because unless you are the next incarnation of Mother Teresa, you are just pointing fingers in order to be dramatic.
@Lenore If that's not what you were saying all along, why have you bothered arguing the issue? I think I have made my points very clear all along. If we agree, then why is it that we are discussing it? I have said all along that language itself does not change attitudes. Perhaps you can't read, but no, let me go drool and be illiterate in the corner. Furthermore, you've called me stupid already. I thought that a debate, even while heated, wasn't supposed to be about name calling. But maybe I'm not supposed to know about that. See, I can't read.
Also, the more PC someone is, the more of their nature they are attempting to hide in most cases. In other cases, they are merely brainwashing themselves into thinking they sound more intelligent or enlightened. I'm not saying we should throw around offensive terms, or fail to be polite and have a bit of class, but changing language, again, doesn't change an attitude in an individual. What would you prefer? Changing actual individual's minds, or forcing an entire society into acting as though they care? I prefer sincerity myself.
Furthermore, Tim has never disrespected me personally. I don't care what he has posted elsewhere because he has treated me with respect since I have begun posting on this site. However, "warning" me about him when you have made it plain that I am far from your favorite person just makes it more difficult for me to take you seriously. And seriously, I mean no disrespect. I'm being honest. I can disagree with a million people and not dislike them for the disagreement, and I even feel that way about you despite lines you've crossed, but I am thinking that maybe you shouldn't have the benefit of the doubt. Badmouthing people in that manner is just ugly.
@Lenore has it occurred to you that a change in attitude might have been the reason for a decrease in the N word? Or does that make far too much sense and go against your rabid defense of a tired argument about language?
@Xael Nothing to add here other than your posts are eloquent, they make sense, and you've brought much to this discussion and said a lot of things that I have been too bored to type out myself or could never have expressed as well.
@IggyKoopa The hijacking of words like history are exactly another issue I have with the radical feminists. I really wasn't even going to go there, but Xael did, so I am going to add my two cents. It's ridiculous, childish, and another one of those things that make a person lose respect for the womens' movement. For one, it goes back to the idea of the oppressed becoming the oppressor, which is the goal of the true radical and utterly wrong. Secondly, it's inaccurate if you look at most hijacked words etymologies, as well as useless. The problem that arises with gender neutrality is that society is not meant to be androgynous. Though Lenore will go off on Spanish language minorities for my saying this, that is one of several languages where nouns are masculine or feminine. Will that have to change too? It would ruin those languages if the change went forward, but I doubt it ever would, nor should it. Of course, only American women matter *big eye roll* so I expect a big backlash on that. Point is, changing the language stinks of the types of people that would revise history to their benefit and is again, like hammering the dragon in the toe. It's a time wasting exercise when real issues could be tackled. Sure, there's no problem with gender neutral road signs, but why the drama about changing it right now and wasting the resources and money instead of waiting until the original ones were no longer functional? Oh yeah, less publicity and posturing.
Ultimately, if we as women want equal respect, we have to throw some of these radical feminist ideas to the wayside that a. make no sense, b. are outdated notions that someone had while on an LSD trip in the 60's, and c. prove ourselves as individuals and not allow ourselves to be victimized, and d. not cry sexism and play victims when we are not. In regard to d. Xael was right. The sign's intent was not to disparage women, but that's what this woman has made it out to be. Who can respect a nut job like that?