babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Relationship Wisdom or Sexist Drivel?
September 5, 2008 - 4:13am
Do all advice columns get these weirdos or just this one?
What is wrong with this person that she feels she needs to correct 100% of people who have different world views? Has she been living in an ultra bubble or something where this is somehow feasible?
Does she not realize that virtually every dating book out there distinguishes between men and women? Does she not realize that regardless of the nature/nurture mix, men and women do turn out different on a statistical basis and so there is validity to these statements?
Some advice columnists even write the letters themselves, to provide an opportunity to expound on some subject that has caught their fancy.
Don't know how you missed that one.
Being offended implies not being desensitized, and for that to be true it might need to be the first time she's ever heard corporate media dating advice.
I think it would have been okay for the writer to Ms. Communicate to make a comment to the reader of the book. At the same time, sharing “left-wing awareness” with some stranger is a bit like sharing one’s belief in Jebuz with a stranger.
For example, I’ve read Anne Coulter’s book. Do I agree with one word she’s ever said – probably not? But as a lefty, I still have a right to pick up a book from the far-right, read it, let my blood boil, and reference it in conversations about how f’ed up she can be. Does this give anyone the right – righty or lefty – to come spew their political ideas in a coffee shop? I would say no.
If it makes a person feel better to express their moral views (whether political or religious) to a stranger, have at it. But, most people are simply not receptive to listening to a stranger telling them their thinking is wrong, no matter how nice one says it.
I guess, but that just seems like a nice gesture after he noticed her looking at the book. I personally wouldn't say anything, though of course this woman has every right to start a discussion if she feels it necessary. It just seems belittling to me.
[ 05 September 2008: Message edited by: Caissa ]
But suddenly it's rude to point out sexism? Be polite in the face of sexism? That just seems to be reinforcing the gender sterotype that women should polite gracious always. No one is saying she should tell this guy to "fuck himself" but she could say many things "politely" that would indicate that as a feminist that book is offensive. Then she could walk away. "No thanks guy, that's offensive to me as a women to be generalized about like that. Have a nice day though."
Women didn't get their rights by being nice. And we won't keep them by being nice either. But we can be assertive without being rude. Though why we shouldn't be rude boggles.
Hmmm, I can see what you are saying, however, he was looking at a book on how to develop a relationship with women based upon a premise, of the author's, on what men and women need. He also said it was "great", as he passed it to her. People look at books I am reading all the time, in public, and I never pass it to them and make comments. So, I believe that he was trying to use the book as a way to get an in with a woman.
The women in question, who read the back flap, obviously felt it belittled women. I would not think it rude of her to say so, under those conditions. Now if she knew the book, and just let loose about it, without any interpersonal interchange, I would have then felt she was rude, and wrong to inset herself into his privacy.
Women who accept sexism tools, as advanced by patriarchy, because it may be rude or belittling, are doing themselves no favours, nor other women. And indeed they are doing men no favours either, as that man who had the book, could now believe he knows what women need in a relationship, and in fact what he needs. Which clearly may not be the case.
Women's fear of using their voice, because it may be seen as being rude or belittling, to men, is actually an instilled patriarchial control mechanism.
As such, books such as this one, and other material along the same lines, which appear to be rude and belittling to women, should be challenged when a reasonable opportunity presents itself. And I believe this occassion was a reasonable opportunity.
I think the issue here lies more in the fact that for a women to openly disagree with a man (or a book/ideology promoted by a man) is more chancy than to nod along, especially if you are disagreeing with a book spouting dominant ideology... of men needing Respect, no less! (It was simpler when we could just be dismissed as being from Mars...) [img]tongue.gif" border="0[/img]
[ 05 September 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]
[img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]
Your typical judgmental arrogance on display.
Lots of people read books in cafes and they don't need nor want your approval. And some people sometimes read books that are about relationships. Personally, among the hundreds of books I myself have bought over the years I admit that one of them is about relationships.
Grow some modesty.
[ 05 September 2008: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]
He may smell like Cheetos and dirty socks, but he can quote all the good Star Wars lines. [img]tongue.gif" border="0[/img]
One who's trying to pick up maybe? Talk about gauche. [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]
There is something classist and sexist about this need to never be rude.
Of all the words you could have picked, you picked "modesty". I can't even imagine what you meant by it as it seems utterly out of context - I guess you are accusing catchfire of being arrogant? Which is weird and kinda snotty but I guess it maintain a polite facade. It's still a personal attack no matter how polite.
Maybe you should just avoid all threads involving feminism in any way shape or form, then you won't have to put your foot in it by using words like "modesty" in a thread where women are being encouraged to shut up and smile when a guy offers up a slice of sexism to them as to respond would be "rude". It's like a red flag and someone might be rude and gauche. And that is worse than anything else!!!
[img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]
First of all, as far as I know, you're not the moderator.
Now to address something else,
I think you have some sort of complex with me. I don't really know from where, but you tend to interpret a lot of my posts in some really contrived, sinister way. I find it very frustrating, and at this point I can no longer remember where your hostility originates. Clearly my comment had nothing whatsoever to do with the fashion interpretation of modesty.
It's quite rich of you to criticize me for personal attacks. 100% of your posts where you adress me are personal attacks, so forgive me for not carefully considering your concerns.
[ 05 September 2008: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]
P.S.: 500_Apples, you are dead wrong... and lucky that someone takes the time to explain it to you. In a real cafe, you'd have latte down your shirt front...
1-If he had simply been reading, with no interaction with the lady, then to interupt his reading and give her opinion is intrusive and rude, and harassing.
However, having drawn her into his reading world, he deserved to hear her opinion. He was kind of asking for it with his actions. (and I dont mean asking for it as 'he was asking for it' is said when something bad happens to someone, I mean it literally)
I'm against violence and violent people, and I would not associate with the type of person who throws their coffee at someone's lap every time they're unhappy. Certainly that's never happened to me, and the last time I was in a fight was eleven years ago, I was 14.
Oh I read alone in public all the time. Nothing wrong with that. I was just trying to picture what kind of person would choose to read in public, alone, in public, conspicuously, a book whose subtitle was 'The Love She Most Desires; The Respect He Desperately Needs'. And the vision my imagination returned was: douchebag.