- This topic has 13 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 1 minute ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Iāve been thinking about all the names women have been called throughout history.
Witch. Hysterical. Spinster. Prude. Slut. Whore. Harlot. Fallen woman. Bossy. Frigid. Difficult. Desperate. Bitch.
Good grief. Weāve practically got our own dictionary of disapproval.
But what interests me isnāt simply the names themselves. Itās the extraordinary power behind them.
Throughout history, labeling women has been an effective way to silence them. Why bother challenging a womanās ideas when you can simply discredit the woman expressing them?
Call her hysterical, and her anger becomes a symptom rather than a response. Call her promiscuous, and her sexuality becomes evidence against her character. Call her difficult, and suddenly the conversation shifts from what sheās objecting to whether sheās entitled to object at all.
The label becomes the argument. And the woman herself disappears behind it.
And this isnāt merely about hurt feelings.
Women accused of witchcraft were imprisoned, tortured, and executed. Women deemed mentally unstable could be institutionalized. A womanās sexual reputation could cost her a livelihood, her independence, or the protection of her community.
Different centuries, different consequences. But the same disturbing pattern: once a woman was discredited, it became easier to justify what happened to her next.
We havenāt entirely abandoned the practice. Weāve simply updated the vocabulary.
Now sheās attention-seeking, high-maintenance, dramatic, crazy, needy, bossy, bitter, desperate, a pick-me, a Karen, or my personal favorite, intimidating.
Some of these words can describe genuine behavior. But how often do we reach for them before bothering to understand the woman weāre describing?
Heaven forbid a woman should take up the space sheās standing in. š
But hereās the uncomfortable part.
Sometimes weāre the ones handing out the labels.
Women have inherited centuries of judgments about what makes another woman respectable. And sometimes, without realizing it, we become the very people enforcing them.
We can be quick to condemn another womanās sexuality or question choices weād never make ourselves. But why should our personal preferences become the standard by which another woman is judged?
Consider where we are. An adult breastfeeding community. Hardly the headquarters of conventional living. š
Yet even here, itās worth asking whether weāve challenged societyās assumptions or simply brought them along for the ride.
Feminism isnāt about telling women which choices to make. Itās about protecting their freedom to make them.
That doesnāt mean abandoning accountability. We can criticize harmful behavior without shaming someoneās identity. And we can defend another womanās autonomy without wanting her life for ourselves.
Iād love to see more women challenge these judgments rather than pass them along. Weāve spent enough generations being measured against standards we never agreed to.
So, letās talk.
Ladies š©· Whatās a label youāve struggled to escape? Have you ever caught yourself judging another woman by a standard you wouldnāt want applied to yourself?
Gentlemen š Whatās a label youāve heard used against women that you now recognize as unfair? Have you ever challenged another man for using it?
Iām interested in honest answers, not perfect ones.š«¶š»
For centuries, women have been labeled, silenced, and punished for refusing to know their place. Itās time we stopped reminding one another where that place is! š
Lola, a very interesting and thought provoking article. I have to agree with you, this is spot on.
We definately have become a society of labelers, I think taking the easy way out sometimes.
It has become much easier to label a woman as something rather to look into that person and understand their views.
I think it has become much too easy to give a woman a label rather than to try and determine why she thinks that way.
We don’t think beyond the label that we give to someone and look at the damage that we are doing to someone by giving that label.
Don’t throw stones if you live in a glass house.Right now they’re calling them “Mid” .
As in “oh yeah I know her she kinda mid”
Man shut up ššI have never challenged anyone based on their opinion of someone else. She could be the bad guy in his story or the savior in someone else.
I have notice men usually turn on two kinds of women , the ones they can’t have or the ones they use to have.
Buys a girl a drink at the bar she refuses to give him her number and suddenly this midnight vigilante gentleman turns into a sour puss because she didn’t like him. Or of course we have all seen and heard the crazy baby momma or ex gf but what did YOU do to her ???? To make her act that way.There is one sub category of women I choose to stay away from I dont call it a label but its a quality that becomes them if not careful and its prevalent and overlooked in female groups. And also found in some very weak, insecure, and desmaculated men. Women with “viperish” tongues. To which in this instance means women who’s words inflict pain and creates a lot of unnecessary trouble, yk… venomous??. They play the “He-said, She-said” game. The old saying that people of low standards and IQ only speak about other people which usually only leads to trouble, but highly intelligent people such as the write of this forum. Often discuss ideas or topics.
The double standards and hypocrisy are astonishing, especially in the workplace and politics.
In the workplace, heās assertive, sheās bossy. Heās confident, sheās arrogant. Heās passionate, sheās emotional. Heās ambitious, sheās power-hungry. He stands his ground, sheās difficult. Heās a natural leader, sheās intimidating.
Same behavior. Different gender. Different verdict.
And politics? Same hypocrisy, just with a bigger microphone.
Heās tough, sheās abrasive. Heās outspoken, sheās shrill. Heās commanding, sheās controlling. Heās passionate, sheās hysterical.
Look at Kamala Harris. Agree or disagree with her politics, but how much time was spent mocking her laugh, calling it a ācackle,ā instead of discussing her policies? Since when did a womanās laugh become a political qualification?
I even heard some WOMEN say they wouldnāt vote for Kamala because she might have a hot flash and start a war.
Crikey! A hot flash? Thatās our national security concern? š
Correct me if Iām wrong, but havenāt men started the overwhelming majority of wars throughout history? Weāve had centuries of male rulers invading countries, conquering empires, and sending millions into battle without a single hot flash required!
Apparently, a man can start a war and be called a strong leader, but a woman might experience menopause and suddenly sheās a threat to world peace.
Meanwhile, weāre paying over $4 a gallon for gas.
Thanks, Obama! š
Hereās what bothers me most: We tell women to be strong, independent, confident, and ambitious. Then we turn around and punish them for displaying those very qualities.
We demand strong women, then complain when they refuse to be submissive.
And hereās the real hypocrisy: Sometimes women are the harshest enforcers of these double standards against other women.
Criticize someoneās ideas. Challenge their decisions. Hold them accountable. Absolutely! But when your strongest argument is that a woman is too loud, too emotional, too ambitious, or laughs the wrong way, perhaps her character isnāt the one that needs examining.
Different centuries. Different labels. Same tired playbook.
But fear not, fair maidens of this site! For I, SirNurseAlotā¦ oh, wait, that nameās already taken.
Ahem. For I, Sir Lancelactate, Knight of the Round Lactation Table, shall ride forth to thy rescue! Clad in shining armor, wielding the mighty Sword of Equality, and mounted upon a magnificent invisible steed! š°āļø
And let it be proclaimed throughout the kingdom that any maiden may herself become a knight! Slay thine own dragons! Rescue thine own princes! Equal opportunity knighthood for all! Though thou must bring thine own coconuts. Two halves, preferably, so thy loyal squire may follow behind making galloping noises. Actual horses are beyond the royal budget. š„„š
For what do we fight, brave citizens?
Freedom! Liberty! Equality! Fuck yeah! šŗšøāļø
Would you like to know more?
Actually, yes. What does this job pay?
Apparently, the reward is the honor of defending freedom itself.
Splendid! But can freedom pay my mortgage? Does liberty come with dental? And why has my squire just unionized?
Alas, mine coffers are empty, my horse is imaginary, and my coconuts have been repossessed.
I came to rescue the damsels, and now Iām the one in need of a bloody rescue! š
@georgeh š
Thank you! You know me, I canāt resist poking the hornetās nest occasionally. Especially when thereās a good conversation hiding inside. š¤
@robaz š
Thank you, Rob! And youāre right, labeling someone is often just a lazy substitute for getting to know them. I think the really unfortunate part is how easily we start believing our own assumptions. Once weāve decided who someone is, we rarely bother finding out if weāre right. Makes you wonder how many perfectly wonderful people weāve misunderstood along the way.š
@mr-french š„°
āMidā?! š Are we rating women like used cars now? Good grief!
You make a really interesting point about rejection, though. Itās remarkable how quickly a woman can go from beautiful to bitch simply because she doesnāt hand over her phone number.
Now, I did get a little tickled when you introduced the āviperish tongueā category in a thread about labeling women. š You walked right into that one, Mr. French!
I absolutely agree that malicious gossip can be ugly, but I think thatās where we have to distinguish between someoneās behavior and who they are as a person.
And that was a very sweet compliment tucked in there. Thank you. ā¤ļø Although Iām not above a little gossip myself, provided itās sufficiently scandalous and nobody gets hurt. š
One of the most demeaning labels in my opinion is āusedā or āused goodsā to describe a woman whoās had multiple sex partners. Which I find interesting since lately it seems to be popular to want a ātraditionalā woman which typically turns out to just mean wanting a housemaid to take care of you and your children. And a part of that fantasy is for the woman to be this incredible sex guruā¦but without the experience?
And to your last point, I agree itās very unfortunate when women themselves are the ones withholding the chains shackling down other women with all these labels. And when someone finally speaks out on it or tries to change the narrative, they get so much heat and backlash from the ones who should understand and benefit the most from supporting instead.
@showerthiughts š¤
Sir Lancelactate! šš I was thoroughly enjoying your commentary on gender bias, and then suddenly weāre in Monty Python territory with a unionized squire and repossessed coconuts. What a ride!
But you really did nail something important. A womanās competence is so often judged through the lens of her likability, while a manās competence is allowed to speak for itself. And the menopause argument? Apparently centuries of warfare, testosterone, and spectacularly questionable male decisions are perfectly acceptable, but one hot flash could bring civilization to its knees. š
I especially appreciate that you recognized how women participate in perpetuating these attitudes. Thatās the uncomfortable conversation I was hoping this article would start.
And while I appreciate your offer of rescue, I think weāll manage our own dragons. You can keep the coconuts, though. I suspect youāre going to need them. š
@midwestnoob š
Cass, āused goodsā makes my skin crawl. As though a womanās value depreciates with every sexual experience. Are we people or pre-owned vehicles?!?!
And the contradiction you pointed out is hilarious. Apparently, some men want a woman whoās sexually inexperienced but somehow knows every trick in the book. Where exactly is she supposed to acquire these skills? Through osmosis? š
And yes! Thatās precisely why I brought up women policing other women in my original post. Itās difficult enough fighting against centuries of judgment without finding some of our own holding the measuring tape.
I really appreciate a man who recognizes the absurdity of all this. ā¤ļø
I’ve hear women refered to all those names sometimes I’ll use a few in the bedroom during lovemaking and sometime I use a few because of the way the females are acting
@georgeh š¤
Well, thereās quite a difference between two consenting adults enjoying a little dirty talk in the bedroom and calling a woman names because you donāt like how sheās behaving. š
Iām curious about that second part, though. What exactly does a woman have to do to earn one of those labels from you? Because thatās really the point of this entire discussion.
Very interesting topic. I think one of the unfair labels is slut. A man with numerous sexual partners is considered a hero, but a woman is somehow “unclean”. The irony is, in my experience, other women are the ones attaching this label to a woman a lot of the time. Not to mention there is usually no basis for the label. There are a lot of double standards in the world. One that comes to mind is a student who is groomed by a teacher. If it’s female student and male teacher, then he is a monster and she is a victim. Male student and female teacher, she is a cougar and he is a hero in a lot of people’s eyes. Female student and teacher, student is the victim and teacher is a monster. Male student and male teacher, same thing, student victim and teacher monster. The reality is all the students are victims and all the teachers monsters. Why do a lot of people want to congratulate the male student who was groomed by the female teacher? I have even seen a few people say the male student was the aggressor and the female teacher is a victim. I’m sorry, but the teacher is the adult in the situation and bears the responsibility.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.