Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 70

Thread: In response to #Metoo, this year's Geneva Motor Show has replaced its "booth babes"

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Ash View Post
    First, you responded to the wrong post.

    Second, I have long opposed the use of the word 'whataboutery', by any side, as a way to shut down arguments that take an opposing view. It's just another magic word, like 'objectification' that is intended to shut people up.

    Third, despite previous indocrination by puritanical feminism, I now simply reject its prudish hatred of sex, together with all of the bull**** vocabulary which is used to bolster that position. You should too, my friend.
    I don't think they hate sex, just sex without consequences.

    Which is ironic really.

    Or whataboutery, I suppose
    "Plenty of strikers can score goals," he said, gesturing to the famous old stands casting shadows around us.

    "But a lot have found it difficult wearing the number 9 shirt for The Arsenal."

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Ash View Post
    First, you responded to the wrong post.

    Second, I have long opposed the use of the word 'whataboutery', by any side, as a way to shut down arguments that take an opposing view. It's just another magic word, like 'objectification' that is intended to shut people up.

    Third, despite previous indocrination by puritanical feminism, I now simply reject its prudish hatred of sex, together with all of the bull**** vocabulary which is used to bolster that position. You should too, my friend.
    Hmmm. Well some may argue that by delegitimising my use of words such as 'whataboutery' and 'titillation' by associating them with those who use them for nefarious, politically driven purposes, you are yourself shutting down debate and doing exactly the same thing you're criticising.

    Unless you think of me merely as a useful idiot, which would seem a leeeetle beet harsh.
    Last edited by Monty92; 03-08-2018 at 11:48 AM.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Monty92 View Post
    Hmmm. Well some may argue that by delegitimising my use of words such as 'whataboutery' and 'titillation' by associating them with those who use them for nefarious, politically driven purposes, you are yourself shutting down debate and doing exactly the same thing you're criticising.

    Unless you think of me merely as a useful idiot, which would seem a leeeetle beet harsh.
    I'm not delegitimising your words, dear, just disarming them.

    Look, we both know what this is really all about so lets say it, and let's use Mr SW's vulgar sexist vocabulary while we're at it. Some chicks, mostly upper middle-class, get sniffy about scantily-clad birds attracting the attention of their menfolk, and rather than having to admit that they're jealous, they have to make it out to be some kind of crime that men like to look at such a pleasing sight, because of biology.

    Upwardly-mobile young gentlemen like yourself, desperate to gain acceptance and approval among his newly-acquired middle-class social acquaintances, eagerly virtue-signals the approved feminist tropes to cement his hard-earned new status, initially grasped by shacking up with a posh bint.


  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Ash View Post
    I'm not delegitimising your words, dear, just disarming them.

    Look, we both know what this is really all about so lets say it, and let's use Mr SW's vulgar sexist vocabulary while we're at it. Some chicks, mostly upper middle-class, get sniffy about scantily-clad birds attracting the attention of their menfolk, and rather than having to admit that they're jealous, they have to make it out to be some kind of crime that men like to look at such a pleasing sight, because of biology.

    Upwardly-mobile young gentlemen like yourself, desperate to gain acceptance and approval among his newly-acquired middle-class social acquaintances, eagerly virtue-signals the approved feminist tropes to cement his hard-earned new status, initially grasped by shacking up with a posh bint.

    No, M is excused. He's paying for his sexist bigotry with his life.

    Everything else is just banter.
    "Plenty of strikers can score goals," he said, gesturing to the famous old stands casting shadows around us.

    "But a lot have found it difficult wearing the number 9 shirt for The Arsenal."

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Ash View Post
    I'm not delegitimising your words, dear, just disarming them.

    Look, we both know what this is really all about so lets say it, and let's use Mr SW's vulgar sexist vocabulary while we're at it. Some chicks, mostly upper middle-class, get sniffy about scantily-clad birds attracting the attention of their menfolk, and rather than having to admit that they're jealous, they have to make it out to be some kind of crime that men like to look at such a pleasing sight, because of biology.

    Upwardly-mobile young gentlemen like yourself, desperate to gain acceptance and approval among his newly-acquired middle-class social acquaintances, eagerly virtue-signals the approved feminist tropes to cement his hard-earned new status, initially grasped by shacking up with a posh bint.

    You forgot to mention that the birds who get the hump are usually fat and ugly. This is crucial.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Ash View Post
    I'm not delegitimising your words, dear, just disarming them.

    Look, we both know what this is really all about so lets say it, and let's use Mr SW's vulgar sexist vocabulary while we're at it. Some chicks, mostly upper middle-class, get sniffy about scantily-clad birds attracting the attention of their menfolk, and rather than having to admit that they're jealous, they have to make it out to be some kind of crime that men like to look at such a pleasing sight, because of biology.

    Upwardly-mobile young gentlemen like yourself, desperate to gain acceptance and approval among his newly-acquired middle-class social acquaintances, eagerly virtue-signals the approved feminist tropes to cement his hard-earned new status, initially grasped by shacking up with a posh bint.

    I really must object in the strongest way possible here.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Ash View Post
    I'm not delegitimising your words, dear, just disarming them.

    Look, we both know what this is really all about so lets say it, and let's use Mr SW's vulgar sexist vocabulary while we're at it. Some chicks, mostly upper middle-class, get sniffy about scantily-clad birds attracting the attention of their menfolk, and rather than having to admit that they're jealous, they have to make it out to be some kind of crime that men like to look at such a pleasing sight, because of biology.

    Upwardly-mobile young gentlemen like yourself, desperate to gain acceptance and approval among his newly-acquired middle-class social acquaintances, eagerly virtue-signals the approved feminist tropes to cement his hard-earned new status, initially grasped by shacking up with a posh bint.

    Hmmm. Hmmmmmm.

    I don't really recognise this jealousy you describe among chicks. I actually think most women (of every class) like the fact that blokes love perving. It gives them something to feel superior to us about.

    I actually think this whole movement is being driven by the economics of the media. I don't know how you'd do it, but I reckon if you could quantify the market value of the women's movement in terms of how much money it generates, it would be a serious eye-opener.

    In other words, it's the equality industrial complex, stoopid.

    As for your characterisation of me, if you'd had any insight into my private sphere in recently years you'd be aware how many middle-class acquaintances I've upset and alienated by talking about this stuff. Certainly, the idea of me ever virtue signally in front of my peers would elicit much laughter from my "posh bint" (who by he way grew up in a **** West Midlands town and spent her early twenties working as a cleaner and bartender).

    So, no.
    Last edited by Monty92; 03-08-2018 at 12:54 PM.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Monty92 View Post
    Hmmm. Hmmmmmm.

    I don't really recognise this jealousy you describe among chicks. I actually think most women (of every class) like the fact that blokes love perving. It gives them something to feel superior to us about.

    I actually think this whole movement is being driven by the economics of the media. I don't know how you'd do it, but I reckon if you could quantify the market value of the women's movement in terms of how much money it generates, it would be a serious eye-opener.

    In other words, it's the equality industrial complex, stoopid.

    As for your characterisation of me, if you'd had any insight into my private sphere in recently years you'd be aware how many middle-class acquaintances I've upset and alienated by talking about this stuff. Certainly, the idea of me ever virtue signally in front of my peers would elicit much laughter from my "posh bint" (who by he way grew up in a **** West Midlands town and spent her early twenties working as a cleaner and bartender).

    So, no.
    Fair enough about your social scene, I was just bantering you off. Though remember, we did all read her blog, and perhaps some tweets as well and she really didn't come over like a cleaner from Dudley.

    You make a good point about the identity-politics industry. I don't know if the politics is actually commercially driven though, rather than ideologically, but worth thinking about. It makes a change from some of the more eccentric right-wing theories about George Soros.

    I still think there's a fair chance that it's all about fashion though. 'Society' has always held certain principles as inviolable, with those principles changing from era to era. Prudery is in. As is the idea (despite all the 'inspirational journey' crap) that women are delicate flowers in need of protection. It's literally like the 19th century all over again, Clive.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Ash View Post
    Fair enough about your social scene, I was just bantering you off. Though remember, we did all read her blog, and perhaps some tweets as well and she really didn't come over like a cleaner from Dudley.

    You make a good point about the identity-politics industry. I don't know if the politics is actually commercially driven though, rather than ideologically, but worth thinking about. It makes a change from some of the more eccentric right-wing theories about George Soros.

    I still think there's a fair chance that it's all about fashion though. 'Society' has always held certain principles as inviolable, with those principles changing from era to era. Prudery is in. As is the idea (despite all the 'inspirational journey' crap) that women are delicate flowers in need of protection. It's literally like the 19th century all over again, Clive.
    So the chick learnt some big words and made something of herself. It's hardly an apocryphal journey

    It's the culture that's commercially driven, not the politics. The politics (in terms of laws and public policy) exists downstream from culture.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Monty92 View Post
    It's the culture that's commercially driven, not the politics. The politics (in terms of laws and public policy) exists downstream from culture.
    Which just makes the questions to be who/what sets the agenda that drives the culture? Commerce, fashion, or powerful interest groups? You think commerce, I'm not so sure because academia has been very instrumental.

    Anyway. Do you actually believe it or not? Their position which you have been sort-of defending, at least with some of their vocabulary.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •