The Bitch Bracket (Deadspin)

Thats p.great.

redskins name change people lmao

looool the lack of self awareness on the commenter that was upset at twitter feminists being included

Yankees fans didn't make the list?

I hate that they put gun nuts and celebrity scientologists up against each other. How do I choose???

Secretly glad Raptor Truthers didn't make the list. That is one aggrieved, defensive fan base.

redskins name change people lmao

looool the lack of self awareness on the commenter that was upset at twitter feminists being included

Some days my entire Facebook feed is links from feminist outrage blogs. It is the worst.

redskins name change people lmao

looool the lack of self awareness on the commenter that was upset at twitter feminists being included

Some days my entire Facebook feed is links from feminist outrage blogs. It is the worst.

/nods

I posted about this in the chat the other day, and just facepalmed reading through it: http://modelviewculture.com/pieces/sex-and-the-startup-men-women-and-work

Hoodies and Bieber hairstyles are sexy now.

Pit bull owners are my early favorite.

Those are the most anecdotal fuckers out there.

"A pit bull mauled my three year-old!"

"Bu bu bu bu but I've had pit bulls all my life and they're the best, sweetest dogs EVER. Also, did you ever look up the stats on poodle maulings! They're just as dangerous!"

Jeff knows what I'm talking about.

redskins name change people lmao

looool the lack of self awareness on the commenter that was upset at twitter feminists being included

Some days my entire Facebook feed is links from feminist outrage blogs. It is the worst.

/nods

I posted about this in the chat the other day, and just facepalmed reading through it: http://modelviewculture.com/pieces/sex-and-the-startup-men-women-and-work

Hoodies and Bieber hairstyles are sexy now.

good lord that's a lot of words spent to say precisely nothing that makes any sense

For Duki and Reil

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/working-women-must-stop-blaming-men-for-their-troubles-says-sunrise-presenter-natalie-barr-who-has-never-been-discriminated-against/story-fni0cwl5-1226859496003

Now, i'm sure there are a lot of legitimate cases for sexism. But i like her common sense stance on the rapidly declining nature of everything MUST be someone elses fault.

For Duki and Reil

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/working-women-must-stop-blaming-men-for-their-troubles-says-sunrise-presenter-natalie-barr-who-has-never-been-discriminated-against/story-fni0cwl5-1226859496003

Now, i'm sure there are a lot of legitimate cases for sexism. But i like her common sense stance on the rapidly declining nature of everything MUST be someone elses fault.

It was basically nothing. "I don't feel I've been discriminated against, though others may currently be in that situation." It's pretty dumb of her to then ignore what she wrote and say 'maybe it's time to stop blaming men.' as if that's what feminism is.

For Duki and Reil

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/working-women-must-stop-blaming-men-for-their-troubles-says-sunrise-presenter-natalie-barr-who-has-never-been-discriminated-against/story-fni0cwl5-1226859496003

Now, i'm sure there are a lot of legitimate cases for sexism. But i like her common sense stance on the rapidly declining nature of everything MUST be someone elses fault.

It was basically nothing. "I don't feel I've been discriminated against, though others may currently be in that situation." It's pretty dumb of her to then ignore what she wrote and say 'maybe it's time to stop blaming men.' as if that's what feminism is.

Actually, her stance is, that is what modern feminism has devloved into, in the popularly mis-used but hid behind defense.

For Duki and Reil

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/working-women-must-stop-blaming-men-for-their-troubles-says-sunrise-presenter-natalie-barr-who-has-never-been-discriminated-against/story-fni0cwl5-1226859496003

Now, i'm sure there are a lot of legitimate cases for sexism. But i like her common sense stance on the rapidly declining nature of everything MUST be someone elses fault.

It was basically nothing. "I don't feel I've been discriminated against, though others may currently be in that situation." It's pretty dumb of her to then ignore what she wrote and say 'maybe it's time to stop blaming men.' as if that's what feminism is.

Actually, her stance is, that is what modern feminism has devloved into, in the popularly mis-used but hid behind defense.

So a strawman? The article isn't worth reading.

So a strawman? The article isn't worth reading.

Nope, not a strawman at all.

So a strawman? The article isn't worth reading.

Nope, not a strawman at all.

Who exactly is she even addressing? Is there a "blame men for our problems" movement in Australia or something? It's like saying minorities need to stop blaming white people for their problems.

So a strawman? The article isn't worth reading.

Nope, not a strawman at all.

Who exactly is she even addressing? Is there a "blame men for our problems" movement in Australia or something? It's like saying minorities need to stop blaming white people for their problems.

read the article reilo linked.

So a strawman? The article isn't worth reading.

Nope, not a strawman at all.

Who exactly is she even addressing? Is there a "blame men for our problems" movement in Australia or something? It's like saying minorities need to stop blaming white people for their problems.

Just so I'm clear - are you saying feminism doesn't blame men/the patriarchy for gender inequality?

Someone else's bullshit doesn't make her bullshit less....bullshit.

I was under qualified for the job, I didn't get it. I got an entry job and felt I was treated fairly. I climbed the ladder and consider myself successful. Maybe people need to stop blaming men. How she reaches that conclusion based solely 2 personal experiences is hilarious. It's not worth reading.

Just so I'm clear - are you saying feminism doesn't blame men/the patriarchy for gender inequality?

At it's inception of course, because that's what it was combating. Modernly however it's institutionalized and not a group of men making decisions to directly harm a women's advances (usually). "blaming men" is just a silly simplification of feminism.

To be perfectly clear there are sects and off chutes of feminism that go to absurd extremes, but they're basically the Scientologists of the feminists.

For Duki and Reil

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/working-women-must-stop-blaming-men-for-their-troubles-says-sunrise-presenter-natalie-barr-who-has-never-been-discriminated-against/story-fni0cwl5-1226859496003

Now, i'm sure there are a lot of legitimate cases for sexism. But i like her common sense stance on the rapidly declining nature of everything MUST be someone elses fault.

It was basically nothing. "I don't feel I've been discriminated against, though others may currently be in that situation." It's pretty dumb of her to then ignore what she wrote and say 'maybe it's time to stop blaming men.' as if that's what feminism is.

Actually, her stance is, that is what modern feminism has devloved into, in the popularly mis-used but hid behind defense.

The feminist professors that I worked with in college were definitely not limiting themselves to such weak and generalized arguments, so calling this a straw man is a pretty apt description in my anecdotal experience. Pop feminism might be different, but the hardcore feminists working to make changes behind the scenes really can't be bothered with that kind of us vs them bullshit.

well i mean moris and lawloh i dont get your complaint, she wasnt talking about feminism as an academic or intellectual concept, nor the academics and thinkers that work in the field

its not about feminism per say, its about ordinary people using concepts of outside oppression as an excuse for personal failure

i mean, its tough to talk about and have anyone give a shit about what I say since... im not a woman. or even a leer worthy man. so aint no one leering at me or objectifying me at work or whatever they get on a daily basis. i dont know what that shits like.

but i think its definitely the case that people sometimes use the fact that theyre in some kind of marginalised group (which, apart from very wealthy old men, is pretty much everyone in some capactiy) as a crutch for their own failure

god knows ive been there

the problem is that people start believing because a group is in some way statistically marginalised that this experience applies to all members of the group. they forget to treat themselves as individuals with their own life experiences and their own responsibilities for success and failure. its easier to blame an oppressive force of some kind than admit you might have fucked up along the line. its... an inelegant application of statistics you could call it. "women were historically marginalized" becomes "a large number of women are still marginalized" which becomes "women are marginalized" which becomes "i am marginalized because i am a woman", without ever thinking through whether you yourself were, in any practical way, actually marginalised or hindered from being a woman. id wager many girls today arent really, especially middle class and upwards women who have all sorts of education and other opportunities growing up. idk. certainly not professionally anyway. more in other, cultural ways if you want to argue about those

shes talking about regular people essentially, and the way they misuse concepts and ideas and end up blaming others

well i mean moris and lawloh i dont get your complaint, she wasnt talking about feminism as an academic or intellectual concept, nor the academics and thinkers that work in the field

its not about feminism per say, its about ordinary people using concepts of outside oppression as an excuse for personal failure

i mean, its tough to talk about and have anyone give a shit about what I say since... im not a woman. or even a leer worthy man. so aint no one leering at me or objectifying me at work or whatever they get on a daily basis. i dont know what that shits like.

but i think its definitely the case that people sometimes use the fact that theyre in some kind of marginalised group (which, apart from very wealthy old men, is pretty much everyone in some capactiy) as a crutch for their own failure

god knows ive been there

the problem is that people start believing because a group is in some way statistically marginalised that this experience applies to all members of the group. they forget to treat themselves as individuals with their own life experiences and their own responsibilities for success and failure. its easier to blame an oppressive force of some kind than admit you might have fucked up along the line. its... an inelegant application of statistics you could call it. "women were historically marginalized" becomes "a large number of women are still marginalized" which becomes "women are marginalized" which becomes "i am marginalized because i am a woman", without ever thinking through whether you yourself were, in any practical way, actually marginalised or hindered from being a woman. id wager many girls today arent really, especially middle class and upwards women who have all sorts of education and other opportunities growing up. idk. certainly not professionally anyway. more in other, cultural ways if you want to argue about those

shes talking about regular people essentially, and the way they misuse concepts and ideas and end up blaming others

That would make sense if that's what she wrote, the title of her article is literally "Working women must stop blaming men for their troubles, says Sunrise presenter Natalie Barr who has ‘never been discriminated against’" It's one thing to tell your story and express your attitude about it, but to use sensationalized lines and use bad generalization like she did does no one any favors. It's extremely poorly written, as a journalist she should be embarrassed.

The feminist professors that I worked with in college were definitely not limiting themselves to such weak and generalized arguments, so calling this a straw man is a pretty apt description in my anecdotal experience. Pop feminism might be different, but the hardcore feminists working to make changes behind the scenes really can't be bothered with that kind of us vs them bullshit.

It's not a strawman.

Just because you've mis-understood the target/source of the article, doesn't make it a strawman.

Strawman is a really bandied around term.

well i mean moris and lawloh i dont get your complaint, she wasnt talking about feminism as an academic or intellectual concept, nor the academics and thinkers that work in the field

its not about feminism per say, its about ordinary people using concepts of outside oppression as an excuse for personal failure

i mean, its tough to talk about and have anyone give a shit about what I say since... im not a woman. or even a leer worthy man. so aint no one leering at me or objectifying me at work or whatever they get on a daily basis. i dont know what that shits like.

but i think its definitely the case that people sometimes use the fact that theyre in some kind of marginalised group (which, apart from very wealthy old men, is pretty much everyone in some capactiy) as a crutch for their own failure

god knows ive been there

the problem is that people start believing because a group is in some way statistically marginalised that this experience applies to all members of the group. they forget to treat themselves as individuals with their own life experiences and their own responsibilities for success and failure. its easier to blame an oppressive force of some kind than admit you might have fucked up along the line. its... an inelegant application of statistics you could call it. "women were historically marginalized" becomes "a large number of women are still marginalized" which becomes "women are marginalized" which becomes "i am marginalized because i am a woman", without ever thinking through whether you yourself were, in any practical way, actually marginalised or hindered from being a woman. id wager many girls today arent really, especially middle class and upwards women who have all sorts of education and other opportunities growing up. idk. certainly not professionally anyway. more in other, cultural ways if you want to argue about those

shes talking about regular people essentially, and the way they misuse concepts and ideas and end up blaming others

That would make sense if that's what she wrote, the title of her article is literally "Working women must stop blaming men for their troubles, says Sunrise presenter Natalie Barr who has ‘never been discriminated against’" It's one thing to tell your story and express your attitude about it, but to use sensationalized lines and use bad generalization like she did does no one any favors. It's extremely poorly written, as a journalist she should be embarrassed.

what are you on about, "should be embarrassed". shes a tv reporter writing a quick blog post on some newspapers website. it wasnt an in depth piece of investigative journalism or something. it was a quick opinion column. how deep did you want her retelling her personal thoughts and experiences to be man

and her sub editor would have written the headline, she wouldnt have shit to do with that

the actual content of the article is very much along the lines of what i said sooo

well i mean moris and lawloh i dont get your complaint, she wasnt talking about feminism as an academic or intellectual concept, nor the academics and thinkers that work in the field

its not about feminism per say, its about ordinary people using concepts of outside oppression as an excuse for personal failure

i mean, its tough to talk about and have anyone give a shit about what I say since... im not a woman. or even a leer worthy man. so aint no one leering at me or objectifying me at work or whatever they get on a daily basis. i dont know what that shits like.

but i think its definitely the case that people sometimes use the fact that theyre in some kind of marginalised group (which, apart from very wealthy old men, is pretty much everyone in some capactiy) as a crutch for their own failure

god knows ive been there

the problem is that people start believing because a group is in some way statistically marginalised that this experience applies to all members of the group. they forget to treat themselves as individuals with their own life experiences and their own responsibilities for success and failure. its easier to blame an oppressive force of some kind than admit you might have fucked up along the line. its... an inelegant application of statistics you could call it. "women were historically marginalized" becomes "a large number of women are still marginalized" which becomes "women are marginalized" which becomes "i am marginalized because i am a woman", without ever thinking through whether you yourself were, in any practical way, actually marginalised or hindered from being a woman. id wager many girls today arent really, especially middle class and upwards women who have all sorts of education and other opportunities growing up. idk. certainly not professionally anyway. more in other, cultural ways if you want to argue about those

shes talking about regular people essentially, and the way they misuse concepts and ideas and end up blaming others

That would make sense if that's what she wrote, the title of her article is literally "Working women must stop blaming men for their troubles, says Sunrise presenter Natalie Barr who has ‘never been discriminated against’" It's one thing to tell your story and express your attitude about it, but to use sensationalized lines and use bad generalization like she did does no one any favors. It's extremely poorly written, as a journalist she should be embarrassed.

what are you on about, "should be embarrassed". shes a tv reporter writing a quick blog post on some newspapers website. it wasnt an in depth piece of investigative journalism or something. it was a quick opinion column. how deep did you want her retelling her personal thoughts and experiences to be man

and her sub editor would have written the headline, she wouldnt have shit to do with that

the actual content of the article is very much along the lines of what i said sooo

Don't be silly, It's still a reflection of her as a reporter/journalist. It's under her name and it's a new format.

It's not a matter of depth, it's a terrible op-ed even if she shortened it to a paragraph or lengthened it to a book. It's like Anderson Cooper saying he never faced discrimination for being gay and though some gays and lesbians may face discrimination, they should stop blaming society and ask maybe the person who got the promotion was more qualified. Despite acknowledging the trouble some of the group may face she still managed to be dismissive of the issue.

...

Thanks for ruining my thread ruiners

Gotta add OPs to the bitch bracket.

The feminist professors that I worked with in college were definitely not limiting themselves to such weak and generalized arguments, so calling this a straw man is a pretty apt description in my anecdotal experience. Pop feminism might be different, but the hardcore feminists working to make changes behind the scenes really can't be bothered with that kind of us vs them bullshit.

It's not a strawman.

Just because you've mis-understood the target/source of the article, doesn't make it a strawman.

Strawman is a really bandied around term.

Because straw man is a reference to many separate argumentative fallacies. This is a straw man because she is inventing a cartoon of a feminist who blames men for all sexist institutionalization, and while that feminist may exist, he or she is not representative of feminism as such.

The feminist professors that I worked with in college were definitely not limiting themselves to such weak and generalized arguments, so calling this a straw man is a pretty apt description in my anecdotal experience. Pop feminism might be different, but the hardcore feminists working to make changes behind the scenes really can't be bothered with that kind of us vs them bullshit.

It's not a strawman.

Just because you've mis-understood the target/source of the article, doesn't make it a strawman.

Strawman is a really bandied around term.

Because straw man is a reference to many separate argumentative fallacies. This is a straw man because she is inventing a cartoon of a feminist who blames men for all sexist institutionalization, and while that feminist may exist, he or she is not representative of feminism as such.

t's not a strawman.

Just because you've mis-understood the target/source of the article, doesn't make it a strawman.

Android fanboys should be on there. There isn't a tech conversation in all the Internet they won't shit up.

Android fanboys should be on there. There isn't a tech conversation in all the Internet they won't shit up.

A good nomination, although I think members of the Crackberry forum are more deserving.

Truly pathetic and supremely defensive.

Android fanboys should be on there. There isn't a tech conversation in all the Internet they won't shit up.

A good nomination, although I think members of the Crackberry forum are more deserving.

Truly pathetic and supremely defensive.

Man, Crackberry.....Crackberry is at another level.