Previous Debate: Bond wearing a dress: Acceptable?

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

I want to see more women be successful as women, not as women acting like men.

That's not going to happen unless you change the sexes' wiring, which I suppose is what's going on.

The differences between the sexes are all too apparent in my industry, where women tend to buy books on relationships, and men on how to run businesses. Where working men tend to be wealth creators (private sector), and working women wealth spenders (pubic sector).

Avarice wrote:

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

I want to see more women be successful as women, not as women acting like men.

That's not going to happen unless you change the sexes' wiring, which I suppose is what's going on.

It all comes the plain anti-science theory of tabula rasa, favoured by the social constructionist movement. That posits that we're all blank slates that can be molded by our environments, or worse - the state. It plays into the left's need for social engineering

Ian McEwan has the right idea.

Sharky wrote:

Ian McEwan has the right idea.

I abandoned McEwan after his marriage to Penny Allen and the foul The Child in Time. Still, I admire him for coming to the assistance of Martin Amis in his stand against Islamofascism, so what does McEwan have to say on the sex war?

Avarice wrote:

That's not going to happen unless you change the sexes' wiring, which I suppose is what's going on.

Remember this story from early summer about the Canadian couple who wanted to raise a "genderless" child so badly that they refused to tell their family and friends the sex of the child?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1389593/Kathy-Witterick-David-Stocker-raising-genderless-baby.html

*THAT* is where we're headed. That's one way to attempt to 'change the wiring'. Another way is to take away children's toys (like dolls and dump trucks) in pre-school and kindergarten because 'it leads to gender stereotyping'. I mean, this is just insanity. This sort of ultra-left-wing liberalism *IS* a mental condition. It's....insanity!

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

This sort of ultra-left-wing liberalism *IS* a mental condition. It's....insanity!

I agree, but it's a peculiarly Western illness that seems to be fuelled by white guilt, self-destructiveness, childishness, and wishful thinking. When I'm feeling generous, I add naïveté to that list, but most of the time I think it's entirely intentional.

Ellsworth Toohey for the win.

Avarice wrote:

Sharky wrote:

Ian McEwan has the right idea.

I abandoned McEwan after his marriage to Penny Allen and the foul The Child in Time. Still, I admire him for coming to the assistance of Martin Amis in his stand against Islamofascism, so what does McEwan have to say on the sex war?

Never really been a fan of McEwan myself, but I respect his attempts to sneak some right-wing skepticism into his novels, yet while getting Guardianistas wet. Nice job.

In SOLAR, there's a scene where the male protagonist suggests the reasons behind more women in the life and not enough in maths and physics, might be down to biology. Based on the Larry Summers controversy.

Ian McEwan in SOLAR wrote:

“There were no longer any institutional barriers or prejudices. There were other branches of science where women were well represented, and some where they predominated. … Although there were many gifted women physicists, it was at least conceivable that they would always remain in a minority, albeit a substantial one, in this particular field. from early in life, girls tended to be more interested in people, boys more in things and abstract rules. … And this difference showed in the fields of science they tended to choose: more women in the life sciences and the social sciences, more men in engineering and physics.”

Ok, it's not mind-blowing stuff, but it's something.

Sharky wrote:

Ok, it's not mind-blowing stuff, but it's something.

So we come full circle. It's been an interesting social experiment, but hardly worth the cost.

What does it mean that he pulls off his hair and becomes a man again at the end?

I can't wait to see Bond in a similar ad for PETA, child porn and worst of all, Obama 2012.

Mrs Aural Sects wrote:

I can't wait to see Bond in a similar ad for PETA, child porn and worst of all, Obama 2012.

I honestly wouldn't put it past the Babs Brigade. I know both Brozzer and Craig are Obamaniks so maybe the President will get two Bonds for the price of one.

CJB wrote:

Mrs Aural Sects wrote:

I can't wait to see Bond in a similar ad for PETA, child porn and worst of all, Obama 2012.

I honestly wouldn't put it past the Babs Brigade. I know both Brozzer and Craig are Obamaniks so maybe the President will get two Bonds for the price of one.

One of the questions I asked at the time was: Would this PSA have been as well-received as it has been (by people at the CBn forums) if, in an attempt to protest against racial discrimination and bigotry, Daniel Craig put on black-face and an afro or dreadlocks in an attempt to see what it felt like to be black?

My guess is that people who were so quick to fall all over themselves in praise of this PSA with Craig in a dress would have been the first people to condemn the ad if Craig had put on black-face. These same people probably would have accused the ad of being racist and patronizing, though since Mrs. Broccoli and Mr.Craig are part of the Hollywood community they would have been given an "A" for effort and a pass.

In fact, when Bill Maher says he wants President Obama to act like a real black man and pull out a gun in these budget negotiations and go all gangsta on the Republicans, the media barely reports on it, but when Duncan Hines releases a commercial showing cupcakes dancing when chocolate glaze is poured on them, people go all ape-shit and claim "Racist!!!!". :afro:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/10/duncan-hines-racist-cupcake_n_795156.html

There was a similar storm in a teacup (always wanted to use that phrase) when Naomi Campbell accused Cadbury's of racism over its advertising for a new bar of chocolate.

I think the point of the Craig-in-a-dress ad is that he is supposed to look humiliated. Humiliation being the condition of an oppressed woman. Or something.

Your disdain for the public sector has always fascinated me Ambler. It's not that you argument doesn't hold some merit - the public sector could do with a more efficient and stream-lined re-invention for the 21st century - but do you really think society would be better off if none of those people showed up for work tomorrow?

I think it's more Ambler's disdain for the NHS worshiping socialists in the country, who have a tendency to public sector workers as compassionate, caring, down to earth people. While those in the private sector are nasty, money grabbing, ruthless bastards.

The beeb mentality.

Salomé wrote:

Your disdain for the public sector has always fascinated me Ambler.

Your disdain for my penis has always fascinated me, Oppers.

I guess life is sometimes hard to understand.

Avarice wrote:

There was a similar storm in a teacup (always wanted to use that phrase) when Naomi Campbell accused Cadbury's of racism over its advertising for a new bar of chocolate.

I think the point of the Craig-in-a-dress ad is that he is supposed to look humiliated. Humiliation being the condition of an oppressed woman. Or something.

In total agreement. And, I would just like to add, that when you set the bar so low...when the threshold of "racism" is so minimal that a line of chocolate bars or muffin glaze or referring to Dallas city budgets as a "black hole" or Hallmark greeting cards pulls a line of astronomy-based graduation cards because the L.A. chapter of the NAACP found the use of the term "black hole" racist.....it's not hard to incite riots and violence like we saw in Tottenham or Wisconsin because there is a steady mindset in those communities that they are constantly under attack from racists, and since just about anything said or done these days can be labelled as an act of racism, you're bound to have more situations like London recently went through.

I don't buy Hallmark Cards because they capitulated to this nonsense, and I've already put EON on notice that if there is any more social engineering of this series like we saw in the PSA, they can count me out as a fan, and likely millions of other fans as well.

There's a sex war going on? Must have missed that...

Salomé wrote:

There's a sex war going on? Must have missed that...

Must be the one we'll win by just shouting NO!

Salomé wrote:

There's a sex war going on? Must have missed that...

Add this to your reading list. If you can find a copy that is.

After 'No More Sex War' was published, author Neil Lyndon was vilified in the Western media, lost his first wife, his children, his job with The Sunday Times, and was declared bankrupt. Of course, he may have imagined all that as you suggest.

The job at the Sunday Times, is that really considered a loss?

Bankruptcy is though. What does anything else matter when one is seperated from one's treasures. Can't put a price on wealth.

Avarice wrote:

Salomé wrote:

There's a sex war going on? Must have missed that...

Add this to your reading list. If you can find a copy that is.

After 'No More Sex War' was published, author Neil Lyndon was vilified in the Western media, lost his first wife, his children, his job with The Sunday Times, and was declared bankrupt. Of course, he may have imagined all that as you suggest.

So he spoke truth to power and lost.

Still doesn't quite refute my earlier point, in that the so-called sex war will be a foreign notion to the majority of Western men and women.

Salomé wrote:

Avarice wrote:

Salomé wrote:

There's a sex war going on? Must have missed that...

Add this to your reading list. If you can find a copy that is.

After 'No More Sex War' was published, author Neil Lyndon was vilified in the Western media, lost his first wife, his children, his job with The Sunday Times, and was declared bankrupt. Of course, he may have imagined all that as you suggest.

So he spoke truth to power and lost.

Still doesn't quite refute my earlier point, in that the so-called sex war will be a foreign notion to the majority of Western men and women.

The majority of Western men and women are ignorant so I fail to see the point you're making. Are we to say that Charles Fourier didn't exist simply because the plebs have never heard of him?

Anyway, there's no point debating this again, Oppers. It always ends with me telling you to get your tits out, and you telling me to go fuck myself.

Avarice wrote:

Salomé wrote:

Avarice wrote:

Salomé wrote:

There's a sex war going on? Must have missed that...

Add this to your reading list. If you can find a copy that is.

After 'No More Sex War' was published, author Neil Lyndon was vilified in the Western media, lost his first wife, his children, his job with The Sunday Times, and was declared bankrupt. Of course, he may have imagined all that as you suggest.

So he spoke truth to power and lost.

Still doesn't quite refute my earlier point, in that the so-called sex war will be a foreign notion to the majority of Western men and women.

It always ends with me telling you to get your tits out, and you telling me to go fuck myself.

A causal binary if there ever was one.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Salomoppers,

From an academic standpoint there are two types of feminism. The first, equalitarian feminism, holds that women should be equal before the law, and, all other circumstances being equal, should be paid the same as men for doing identical work. There's absolutely nothing wrong with this form of feminism, and I support it.

The second form of feminism is gender feminism. This more radical version holds that "gender" is socially constructed, and in a manner that harms women. Gender feminists believe there is no fundamental, essential (read genetic) difference between men and women. They believe all difference is merely apparent rather than real. As such, they seek to deconstruct gender by insisting that men behave like women and women like men. Masculinity and femininity are to be jettisoned, and once this is accomplished, the human race will live in an androgynous utopia. Ultimately, gender feminism is an attack on men, and I oppose it completely.

I suspect Babs is a bit of a gender feminist. Putting Bond in a dress is a very direct way of stripping him of his masculinity. Having the goddess Dench browbeat a mute Bond with trumped up stats about the evils of men and the oppression of women further degrades Bond and emasculates him. That this exercise is enacted against the ultimate man heightens its significance.

That's fine but you are still wearing the dress.

Say what?

Failed joke on my part. I was trying to force you to wear a dress.