Misandry versus Misogyny
07 Oct 2010, 12:58 pm
ikorack wrote:
Orwell wrote:
I think people underestimate the amount of pervasive misogyny that is still present in our society, as well as the extent to which bias in one direction is more often called out.
As far as which is "worse," in principle they are both equally bad. In practice I would be more concerned with the one that does more damage, and in most contexts that is misogyny.
As far as which is "worse," in principle they are both equally bad. In practice I would be more concerned with the one that does more damage, and in most contexts that is misogyny.
Could you be more specific about that? and if you could will you?
Partly what hyperlexian said. But there is a lot of implicit bias against women in our society. You can make cracks about women being lousy drivers, or bad at math, or any number of other things, without anyone making a fuss over it. Women are routinely seen largely as sex objects, and in most films and TV shows female characters exist primarily as a love interest for a male protagonist. There are far fewer strong female protagonists in media. Note that a misandrist will often be accused of being an angry lesbian or something along those lines, whereas no one is likely to question a misogynist's sexuality. The argument is typically over whether men and women are equal, or if women are inferior. You seldom, if ever, hear people seriously arguing that men are inferior, and if they do, they are denounced and derided as crazy or radical, whereas those who say women are inferior may be criticized by the media (if they are sufficiently high-profile) while many people continue to support their statements.
I could go on, but the point is, we take a certain level of misogyny for granted to the point where we hardly ever even notice it anymore. The slightest sign of misandry stands out in stark contrast as something completely unexpected, and tends to upset people more.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
07 Oct 2010, 1:40 pm
number5 wrote:
And of course Cliff Huxtable was supposed to be silly - he's the comedian. I find it more significant that Claire Huxtable was one of the first successful working women to be portrayed on TV.
I loved Claire's character - strong, successful, intelligent, sexy - but never bitchy or full of herself.
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
07 Oct 2010, 1:55 pm
Orwell wrote:
Women are routinely seen largely as sex objects, and in most films and TV shows female characters exist primarily as a love interest for a male protagonist. There are far fewer strong female protagonists in media.
What about Ripley in the Aliens quadrilogy? Chihiro in Spirited Away? Lucy in The Lucy Show (not The I Love Lucy Show, but the one which went after it)? Betty Mahmoody in Not Without My Daughter? Karen McCann in Eye for an Eye? Thelma & Louise in Thelma & Louise? Sarah Connor in Terminator 1 & 2 (though you could claim that Sarah Connor was a love interest for Kyle Reese, Sarah is actually the main character).
07 Oct 2010, 3:13 pm
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Women are routinely seen largely as sex objects, and in most films and TV shows female characters exist primarily as a love interest for a male protagonist. There are far fewer strong female protagonists in media.
What about Ripley in the Aliens quadrilogy? Chihiro in Spirited Away? Lucy in The Lucy Show (not The I Love Lucy Show, but the one which went after it)? Betty Mahmoody in Not Without My Daughter? Karen McCann in Eye for an Eye? Thelma & Louise in Thelma & Louise? Sarah Connor in Terminator 1 & 2 (though you could claim that Sarah Connor was a love interest for Kyle Reese, Sarah is actually the main character).
Orwell said that the female characters are RARELY strong protagonists, not that they NEVER are. your list includes some characters going back nearly 30 years... in a given year, you would not see as many strong female characters as strong male characters.
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105
07 Oct 2010, 3:23 pm
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Women are routinely seen largely as sex objects, and in most films and TV shows female characters exist primarily as a love interest for a male protagonist. There are far fewer strong female protagonists in media.
What about Ripley in the Aliens quadrilogy? Chihiro in Spirited Away? Lucy in The Lucy Show (not The I Love Lucy Show, but the one which went after it)? Betty Mahmoody in Not Without My Daughter? Karen McCann in Eye for an Eye? Thelma & Louise in Thelma & Louise? Sarah Connor in Terminator 1 & 2 (though you could claim that Sarah Connor was a love interest for Kyle Reese, Sarah is actually the main character).
See Hyperlexian's comments. Unfortunately, I am ill-equipped to trot out large numbers of examples in modern media, but if you care to simply apply a bit of healthy empiricism to the issue go ahead. Look at, say, the top 10 grossing films each year for the past several years, and compare the number of strong male characters to strong female characters.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
07 Oct 2010, 3:39 pm
Orwell wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Women are routinely seen largely as sex objects, and in most films and TV shows female characters exist primarily as a love interest for a male protagonist. There are far fewer strong female protagonists in media.
What about Ripley in the Aliens quadrilogy? Chihiro in Spirited Away? Lucy in The Lucy Show (not The I Love Lucy Show, but the one which went after it)? Betty Mahmoody in Not Without My Daughter? Karen McCann in Eye for an Eye? Thelma & Louise in Thelma & Louise? Sarah Connor in Terminator 1 & 2 (though you could claim that Sarah Connor was a love interest for Kyle Reese, Sarah is actually the main character).
See Hyperlexian's comments. Unfortunately, I am ill-equipped to trot out large numbers of examples in modern media, but if you care to simply apply a bit of healthy empiricism to the issue go ahead. Look at, say, the top 10 grossing films each year for the past several years, and compare the number of strong male characters to strong female characters.
Okay, but first what is "strong" specifically supposed to refer to?
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
07 Oct 2010, 3:47 pm
hyperlexian wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Women are routinely seen largely as sex objects, and in most films and TV shows female characters exist primarily as a love interest for a male protagonist. There are far fewer strong female protagonists in media.
What about Ripley in the Aliens quadrilogy? Chihiro in Spirited Away? Lucy in The Lucy Show (not The I Love Lucy Show, but the one which went after it)? Betty Mahmoody in Not Without My Daughter? Karen McCann in Eye for an Eye? Thelma & Louise in Thelma & Louise? Sarah Connor in Terminator 1 & 2 (though you could claim that Sarah Connor was a love interest for Kyle Reese, Sarah is actually the main character).
Orwell said that the female characters are RARELY strong protagonists, not that they NEVER are. your list includes some characters going back nearly 30 years... in a given year, you would not see as many strong female characters as strong male characters.
I'm sorry, the best movies and shows I've watched are all really old. More recently there would be the Pirates Of The Caribbean trilogy and the Alice in Wonderland movie.
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
07 Oct 2010, 3:52 pm
My wife did an interesting experiment on Yahoo Answers for her psychology class,
Quote:
Even if the mother can afford to, and wishes to, stay home, there are still social pressures put on her not to. There is a social shun in being “just a house wife”. This pressure is not just put on the woman but also on the man. On yahoo answers the question was asked “What do you think of a man who wants his wife to stay home with the kids?” The replies were not kind to such a man. Some of the words used were “controlling”, “unnerving”, “lazy”, “unrealistic”, and some even went as far as to suggest such a man is abusive. However, most also mention as an afterthought that it would be okay if that was also what the woman wanted. A similar question was posed “What do you think of a woman who wants her husband to stay home with the kids?” The responses to this were quite different. Almost every responder said it was fine, one person even said it was becoming the norm. No one accused the woman of being unrealistic or controlling. This clearly illustrates a double standard in our society.
07 Oct 2010, 4:09 pm
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Orwell wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Women are routinely seen largely as sex objects, and in most films and TV shows female characters exist primarily as a love interest for a male protagonist. There are far fewer strong female protagonists in media.
What about Ripley in the Aliens quadrilogy? Chihiro in Spirited Away? Lucy in The Lucy Show (not The I Love Lucy Show, but the one which went after it)? Betty Mahmoody in Not Without My Daughter? Karen McCann in Eye for an Eye? Thelma & Louise in Thelma & Louise? Sarah Connor in Terminator 1 & 2 (though you could claim that Sarah Connor was a love interest for Kyle Reese, Sarah is actually the main character).
See Hyperlexian's comments. Unfortunately, I am ill-equipped to trot out large numbers of examples in modern media, but if you care to simply apply a bit of healthy empiricism to the issue go ahead. Look at, say, the top 10 grossing films each year for the past several years, and compare the number of strong male characters to strong female characters.
Okay, but first what is "strong" specifically supposed to refer to?
i suppose the semantics can be nitpicked, but according to the article Female Sterotypes Persist in American Films (link):
Psychcentral article wrote:
A new study shows that although female characters are displayed as "tougher" and more "violent", women continue to take a non-dominant role in most movies.
Women are also frequently involved in a romantic relationship with the male lead.
Over 58 percent of violent female charcters were protrayed in a submissive role to the male hero in the film, and 42 percent were romantically involved with him [of the 112 highest-grossing action films between 1991 and 2005].
Women are also frequently involved in a romantic relationship with the male lead.
Over 58 percent of violent female charcters were protrayed in a submissive role to the male hero in the film, and 42 percent were romantically involved with him [of the 112 highest-grossing action films between 1991 and 2005].
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
07 Oct 2010, 4:16 pm
hyperlexian wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Orwell wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Women are routinely seen largely as sex objects, and in most films and TV shows female characters exist primarily as a love interest for a male protagonist. There are far fewer strong female protagonists in media.
What about Ripley in the Aliens quadrilogy? Chihiro in Spirited Away? Lucy in The Lucy Show (not The I Love Lucy Show, but the one which went after it)? Betty Mahmoody in Not Without My Daughter? Karen McCann in Eye for an Eye? Thelma & Louise in Thelma & Louise? Sarah Connor in Terminator 1 & 2 (though you could claim that Sarah Connor was a love interest for Kyle Reese, Sarah is actually the main character).
See Hyperlexian's comments. Unfortunately, I am ill-equipped to trot out large numbers of examples in modern media, but if you care to simply apply a bit of healthy empiricism to the issue go ahead. Look at, say, the top 10 grossing films each year for the past several years, and compare the number of strong male characters to strong female characters.
Okay, but first what is "strong" specifically supposed to refer to?
i suppose the semantics can be nitpicked, but according to the article Female Sterotypes Persist in American Films (link):
Psychcentral article wrote:
A new study shows that although female characters are displayed as "tougher" and more "violent", women continue to take a non-dominant role in most movies.
Women are also frequently involved in a romantic relationship with the male lead.
Over 58 percent of violent female charcters were protrayed in a submissive role to the male hero in the film, and 42 percent were romantically involved with him [of the 112 highest-grossing action films between 1991 and 2005].
Women are also frequently involved in a romantic relationship with the male lead.
Over 58 percent of violent female charcters were protrayed in a submissive role to the male hero in the film, and 42 percent were romantically involved with him [of the 112 highest-grossing action films between 1991 and 2005].
Using the same statistics in your quotation, if "over 58 percent of violent female char[a]cters were p[or]trayed in a submissive role to the male hero in the film", let's call it 59%, then 41% were not portrayed in a submissive role. Also, if 42% of violent female characters "were romantically involved with [the male hero]", then 58% of violent female characters were not romantically involved with the male hero.
Bethie
Veteran
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,817
Location: My World, Highview, Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Earth, The Milky Way, Local Group, Local Supercluster
08 Oct 2010, 1:58 am
Society plays a lot of lip service to women's rights, but has no qualms about women being hacked up, starved, and presented as sex objects in nearly every pop culture medium. And that's in the west.
Let's not even get into honor killings, illegal abortion, female infanticide, and female genital mutilation in the third world.
Hence why I voted for misogyny being for more acceptable.
_________________
For there is another kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions; indifference and inaction and slow decay.
08 Oct 2010, 8:58 am
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
hyperlexian wrote:
i suppose the semantics can be nitpicked, but according to the article Female Sterotypes Persist in American Films (link):
Psychcentral article wrote:
A new study shows that although female characters are displayed as "tougher" and more "violent", women continue to take a non-dominant role in most movies.
Women are also frequently involved in a romantic relationship with the male lead.
Over 58 percent of violent female charcters were protrayed in a submissive role to the male hero in the film, and 42 percent were romantically involved with him [of the 112 highest-grossing action films between 1991 and 2005].
Women are also frequently involved in a romantic relationship with the male lead.
Over 58 percent of violent female charcters were protrayed in a submissive role to the male hero in the film, and 42 percent were romantically involved with him [of the 112 highest-grossing action films between 1991 and 2005].
Using the same statistics in your quotation, if "over 58 percent of violent female char[a]cters were p[or]trayed in a submissive role to the male hero in the film", let's call it 59%, then 41% were not portrayed in a submissive role. Also, if 42% of violent female characters "were romantically involved with [the male hero]", then 58% of violent female characters were not romantically involved with the male hero.
41% of strong female leads is a minority. the only movies included in this analysis are the movies that had a female lead at all - keep in mind that female leads are rarer than male leads.
the researchers also only included films of a violent nature with violent leads. strong female leads in other genres may actually be less common.
this study shows that misogyny is supported in popular media. if you want to argue that misandry is more socially acceptable than misogyny, can you find any statistics from to back that up?
(the point about romantic involvement is that it reflects the assumption in ppopular media that a woman must be romantically attached to a man in order to have a strong character. the woman rarely stands alone)
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
08 Oct 2010, 9:39 am
hyperlexian wrote:
if you want to argue that misandry is more socially acceptable than misogyny, can you find any statistics from to back that up?
The answer to this question is: yes. But that is according to the nature of statistics and their usage in rhetoric though, same as the statistic you happened upon.
08 Oct 2010, 9:54 am
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
hyperlexian wrote:
if you want to argue that misandry is more socially acceptable than misogyny, can you find any statistics from to back that up?
The answer to this question is: yes. But that is according to the nature of statistics and their usage in rhetoric though, same as the statistic you happened upon.
well, without any sort of studies, statistics or research to support the opposing position, it would seem to be unsupported; the idea that misandry is more acceptable in society would be appear to be unsubstantiated.
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105
