Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
The Courts

Journal Some Woman's Journal: Don't use these words if you want me to listen to you 52

Journal by Some Woman

A while ago, the Perfessor himself wrote an entry on argumentation. It was quite good. I suggest you all read it again, or for the first time if you haven't already.

Once before, I wrote an entry on my dislike of ad hominem attacks. I would just like to take this opportunity to reiterate. I can deal with shoddy cites, weak arguments, and misrepresentations. But you start throwing around any of the following words, and I'm out of here faster than you can say "mudslinger."

Here Goes:

Liberal (not related to Liberal Party)
Conservative (not related to Conservative Party)
Nazi (not related to Nazi Party)
Feminazi
Moral/Integrity (because what follows usually has little to do with either.)

Obviously, this is just a sampling, but you get the idea. If you can't make your point with reasoning alone, then I suggest you rethink your position. It's cheap, dirty, and says more about you than the opposing viewpoint.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Don't use these words if you want me to listen to you More

Don't use these words if you want me to listen to you

Comments Filter:
  • Thank goodness neither 'boobies' nor 'juggies' are in that list. Nor any of Carlin/FCC's seven favorite words.
    • As long as you don't use them in the context "boobies are just a juggy conspiracy to take over the world." Because even if it's true, I expect a little more content.

  • In Defense of "Feminazi" (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bethanie ( 675210 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @10:32PM (#6208480) Journal
    SW --

    I deeply respect your list of words, and definitely agree with most all of the terms. The one I take exception to is "Feminazi."

    I think it's a shame that most of us associate this term with its (as far as I know) inventor, Rush "My Ego is So Big It Ate Manhattan" Limbaugh. And it's also a shame that it employs the term "nazi" outside of the context of the Holocaust. (But did you see the Seinfeld "Soup Nazi" episode? Did you watch it and laugh, or did you turn it off in protest of the use of the term? I'm just wondering if it's EVER acceptable. It certainly seems to have lost some of its more evil connotations as it has worked itself into popular culture. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad one.)

    Unfortunately, the term itself is a very apt description of the kind of women/people (are there male "feminazis"? Could be -- let's include them, shall we?) it's intended to describe. Those are the people who advocate the "cause" of "women's rights" beyond all limits of common sense. They want us to cut off our noses to spite our faces in order to identify with some political agenda that lost its relevance in this country a generation ago. In the most general terms, they are strident, castrating harridans who attack anything that counters their argument without pausing to consider what validity it might possess (like the fact that many women who choose to stay at home to care for their families are empowered by the decision to do so). But "strident, castrating harridans" is kind of an unwieldy term, hence the utilization of the shorthand "Feminazi." ("Wacky zealot" may be a lot nicer, but in this case, it just didn't seem to be the best choice.)

    I apologize if my utilization of the term in my latest Journal Entry [slashdot.org] (forgive me the conceit of believing that you may have read it) has offended you. Please believe that I do not use the term lightly. It was not an ad hominem attack on Maureen Dowd, actually, or any particular individual that I can think of. As I said, it was an apt shorthand term that I believe has become generally accepted and is accessible to many in our society.

    (BTW, let's not condemn everyone in the face of name-calling. It's human nature to degenerate to ad hominem attacks from time to time. Even the Venerable Perfessor has done it.)

    If the use of the term "feminazi" in my JE is preventing you from participating in the dialogue on the subject of feminism and its relevance in today's society, then that's a real shame. I'd be very interested to hear what you have to say on the subject.

    ....Bethanie....

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
      Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Funny, I find that "radical feminist" works just fine for me.

      As for the "soup nazi" episode, since the guy in question not only exists, but is an Israeli and, IIRC, the son of holocaust survivors, he found the term deeply offensive. As did his brother and several other family members involved in the business.
      Having it come out of a show done by a bunch of Jews (most of whom are NEVER actually referrred to as Jews in the program) was something he said he found particularly painful.

      Since the whole episode
      • "Radical feminist." Weaker, but less slangy. I don't know why I didn't think of it. I think I may just use it. Thanks, Perf.

        The added context that the subject of the "Soup Nazi" episode was deeply offended by the use of that term does not change my belief that the term "nazi" (with a little "n") has worked its way into our culture. It is used almost interchangeably (but with, I would contend, more offensive connotations) with "fascist," even in non-political contexts. I think it's intended to be a sharper
    • the term itself is a very apt description of the kind of women/people it's intended to describe.

      Funny. I think they would disagree. "Anti-war" is a description of a group of people. "Feminazi" is just name-calling. If the people you are describing would take this word as an insult, chances are it doesn't capture their belief.

      Furthermore, when you use the word "feminazi" the discussion is pretty much over. There is no room for disgreement with your position because you've already villified the "othe
      • Thank for the opportunity.

        Strident: having a shrill, irritating quality or character

        Castrating: to remove the testes of; emasculate; geld/to render impotent, literally or metaphorically, by psychological means, esp. by threatening a person's masculinity or femininity/to deprive of strength, power or efficiency; weaken

        Harridan: a scolding, vicious woman; hag; shrew

        I don't know WHY they are shrill, emasculating, vicious women set on depriving a specific segment of our population (i.e., the men) of pow
        • Emasculating men is the worst thing you can do for society and for families. Their masculinity and impulse to protect and provide for a family is what makes it possible for women to fulfill their roles as caregivers and nurturers! This is what it takes to raise strong, healthy, disciplined children, which is what builds a better society. It's a dichotomy, it's a symbiosis. It works.

          And this type of thinking is exactly why feminism is still a viable movement. The idea of inborn roles of protecter vs. nur
          • That's one of the dumbest things i've ever heard in regards to the subject. First off, men and women are wired differently for a reason. Secondly, I don't give any kind of rat's ass about your mother's law career. All she seems to have managed to do in the process of raising you is give birth and instill a hatred. Last time I checked, even the least of all petty dictators managed to create that in their people. Tell me how she provided a great boon to society that nobody else could have. Tell me how g
            • So all you can say is that you assume I am a hateful bitter shell of a woman who can't accept her destiny and that it is all my mother's fault.

              Intermodal, you have reminded me just why the Woman's Movement is not over, thank you.
              • That's a bit contrary to what I actually think. For one, I don't think that you're a hateful bitter shell, I simply think that you may be depriving yourself in the future of some of the greatest joys in life simply by trying to fit the mold your mother placed in front of you as being the right way to be. I don't doubt that you believe everything you said, and I can't fault you specifically for it. I simply think that you, along with countless other women, have fallen short of the real single unit in soci
                • Families just aren't efficient. What we need are kid farms that control the production of humans to correspond to the death rate. This way, we don't have to deal with the problem of a population increasing beyond its means. Additionally, we avoid the inefficiency that exists when one man raises only one or two kids. Seriously, I think that we could have 7-12 kids per man-farmhand, and then all of the other men would be able to toil in the office with the women.
          • I wasn't going to respond because I really have nothing to add, but I don't particularly care for the way Intermodal attacked yourself and your mother instead of your argument. I thought your post was insightful. Thanks for adding to the discussion.
        • There you go. Doesn't that feel better?

          Now to address your points.

          **Disclaimer: One of my life goals is to never become pregnant, and my position is tainted as such.**

          Feminism Defined

          There are first a few general points I would like to make. I should let you in on my view of the feminist movement. When I say "feminism" I am speaking about the idea of equal opportunity to make choices. There didn't used to be choices for women. They used to get married, have kids, and spend their lives devoted to
          • I think the key here is understanding that not all feminists are considered "feminazis." Rather, as you stated, there are fringe members of the feminist movement and these people are the ones considered radical. While there may be individuals who can be characterized as "feminazis," it would be rare indeed when one would be conversing with another whom he/she considered to be a feminazi as there is certainly implied "radical" and has a very negative conotation.
          • Wow, this is turning into quite a thread.
            But for now I'll stick to one brief thought.
            A friend of mine says that she thinks that things made a lot more sense when it was considered reasonable to the point of typical for men (upper class at least) to go out in the morning, dive into bloody battle, duel, challenge, manage their estates, tear their way down mountain trails, then go home, put on a lacy, scented dressing gown, and write poetry about it.


            Rustin
          • the feminist movement

            Um...movement? I haven't been seeing much forward motion on this lately, so I must of course ask. For someone whose nesting instinct has obviously not yet set in, how does the rising number of wives staying at home these days affect your position if at all? I realize parts of this are adressed later, but certainly there may be some morale issues in the feminist mobs.

            I am speaking about the idea of equal opportunity to make choices.

            That's called equalism.

            They used to get marri
            • ...AK-47 or AK-74...

              What are you, some kind of communist? ;)
            • That seems redundant, to find a life partner and then not procreate as you stated above. Why go to all that effort with no end product?

              Oh, I forgot to clarify one point. I said that I never want to be pregnant, not that I don't want to be a mother. I can't see the utility in creating new life just so that I can feel good about spreading my genes when there are so many children who don't have parents. But that's a whole different subject.

              That, and I don't see relationships as a manufacturing process.
              • Everything is a manufacturing process. Raising a child is a manufacturing process, so why would creating one be any different? Without being pregnant, you cannot be a mother per se. You can be one in nomenclature through adoption, but to truly become one you must create one yourself.

                Also note that there are a lot of children without parents who live with both of them. Keep that in mind should you ever be in custody of one, and don't try to pawn off this mothering responsibility you sound like you want
                • don't try to pawn off this mothering responsibility you sound like you want to take on on your poor husband.

                  I don't presently plan to employ a caretaker, but thank you for your concern. Nor do I particularly care to be a parent at this point or in the next few years. Perhaps I will reevalute my position when that time comes, but for now I choose only to not rule it out. I find that it's a little short sighted to believe at any time that you know how you will live the rest of your life. Just my prefere
            • No they haven't. That's called TCP/IP. With ubiquitous computers, even children post in forums, so why not women, even without the misguided efforts of the past fifty years? The impoverished, the wealthy, the young and old alike post on these forums.

              On the Internet nobody knows you are a dog, or a woman, or a child. ;-)

              Of course on the Internet, should you choose to share your point of view, everyone knows if you are a fool or wise. So post carefully!
            • 1) Women will never be seen as equals to men by hiring managers due to the ever present possibility that he may have to let her go on maternity leave.

              Only true to some extent. The Family and Medical Leave Act gives men the right to maternity leave of the same length as women. In a recent SCOTUS decision the act was held to apply to employees of the State of Nevada for the very reason that prior to the law women were discriminated against in hireing. Even more supprising it was Renquist who wrote this deci
          • YES YES YES!! Now THIS is what I wanted to see!! You are BRILLIANT!! :-)

            And NOW I will continue on to agree with you on more points than I'm sure you EVER thought possible!!!

            Feminism gave women choice. Now, when a woman stays home, she does it because she chose to. And that, my friend, is the difference between exploitation and empowerment.

            Excellent point. This is what has been given to us by the feminist movement. Choice to work or stay home. But it has also exerted PRESSURE on us to live up to the

            • Wow! (Score:1)

              by joggle ( 594025 )
              That was a great post :-). I really enjoyed reading it.

              And you know what she goes for? The stuffed animals. The clothes. The personal grooming items. You give her a set of Hot Wheels. Does she push them around and make car noises? No. She makes one the mommy, one the daddy, and one the baby, and then she finds something to wrap around it like a blanket and/or diaper.

              This is so true (at least for some kids). I'm embaressed to say this (being a guy and all) but when I was really young (about 5 or 6), I oc

              • While these may be exceptional cases, they didn't seem to be overly rare and I would argue that what is best for each individual family greatly depends on their situation and mental well being of the parents.

                This is why I don't think that stay at home parents are the "best" for a kid. I think that what matters is that you love them, listen to them, and let them grow up. I think that there are two ways to guarantee your kids will be fucked up:

                1. Give them 0% of your time
                2. Give them 100% of your time

                To
                • How about 100% minus all the time you spend composing inciteful, flamebait posts on Slashdot?

                  That's sure to do wonders for the mental health and emotional well-being, right? :-)

                  ....Bethanie....
                • Don't get me wrong, I didn't say that all of the stay-at-home families were screwed up, just some of them (just like the potential failure for any family). The pluses of having someone there to help with homework and give you guidance are great when you're growing up. The key, really, is that the mother (and father) is a really good parent, which is never obvious until the situation comes up (although the opposite is sometimes obvious, but I degress...). I knew plenty of kids with moms who worked from home
                • well how many stay at home parents do you actually think give 100% of their time to the kids? surely they must sleep, eat, cook, and clean at some point.
            • I too agree with much of your actual view. If you want to be a stay-at-home mom and that works for you, great, more power to you. If not, don't. Raise your child(ren) as you see fit (within some broad limits). It's not anybody's job to tell you or me or anyone else how to lead their life.

              It has also turned out that the powers that be are re-structuring the economy to reflect expectations based on two-income families. This means the tax system. And one of my personal/political beliefs is that families
              • Your example of the twins is a bad one, and here's why.

                you're looking at them too young. I want to see how they turn out when they're married and have kids. Never judge a man by what he did when he was in his youthful stages. It is when he creates a family of his own that you'll truly see the end result of parenting.
    • I think it's a shame that most of us associate this term with its (as far as I know) inventor, Rush "My Ego is So Big It Ate Manhattan" Limbaugh. And it's also a shame that it employs the term "nazi" outside of the context of the Holocaust.

      Ironic, since that's precisely the context in which he was using it. It is not shorthand for "radical feminist" - it's an abortion reference, specifically to those who promote abortion so vocally. If you start from the position that killing any human - born or unborn -

  • Thanks for the mention and the link.
    Thank you for the compliment of referring to it (and me) as you did.
    And, hoo boy, having just gone back and reread it, my, kinda looks like my own words neatly impale my recent "hand 'em fifty pages of unformatted stuff and let 'em wade through it".

    Mea culpa.
    Oops.

    Well at least my most recent JE is better. (Less bad?) Maybe in a few days I'll go back and revise with the *ahem* list tag.

    Rustin

  • I actually use that one, but I always use it to mean some very specific things. Honesty, being true and open about one's nature, and avoidance of hypocrisy are the values I associate with integrity.

    Even a thief or murderer can have integrity under my definition. An adulterer most likely wouldn't, though someone who engaged in such relationships with the full knowledge of their spouse and the other party would fit my definition.

    • I mean in such a context as "we need to bring integrity back to the White House." Non-sequitor.

      There are times when it is appropriate to speak of integrity, but this seems to, very often, not be the case.

      • Yes, then the qualities most often referred to are the person's own political or moral agenda insted of any standard of behavior implying self-consistency. I agree.

  • Your journal entry has the morale of a liberal and the integrity of a conservative, which is really a quite nazi opinion, or, knowing your feminist tendencies, I'd say a feminazi opinion.

    *flash*. Did you see that flash? That was Some Woman running out at the speed of light! ;-)

  • I've seen that term bandied around a few times, but for the life of me I've no idea what it means. The other words on your list, I do understand, although I have a feeling that the US versions of Liberal and Conservative are more than a bit different from the ones we have over here in the UK...

    I don't do the labelling thing myself. I go by the motto 'Better to be a silent fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt' - forget where that one comes from, but I agree with it.
  • Moral/Integrity (because what follows usually has little to do with either.)

    Does this apply to
    • Nope. You're good. :)
      • d'oh!

        I meant to say "does it apply to discussions that are about morality, rather than discussions where morality is brought into a morality-neutral discussion?"

        But my sig works, too. ;)
        • I thought that seemed a little odd, but it completed a grammatically correct sentence, which is really as much as I can ask for.

          But, yes, morality is perfectly fine when the topics warrants it- i.e.: when you are explicitly discussing whether or not something is moral or where the consequences of morality are relevant.

          Now, we all know how people just can't get enough of Bill Clinton's penis, so I present the following example of inappropriately invoking morality:

          Fred: Should Bill Clinton be impeached?
          Ma

Slashdot Top Deals

Space tells matter how to move and matter tells space how to curve. -- Wheeler

Close