Berberis Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 Men criticise other mens appearance in the same way women do? I have no experience of this.:confused I think you are confusing bitchiness with criticism. Men don't tend to bitch about it, but men are criticised for their appearance. If you think this is wrong, post a particularly ugly picture of yourself on a dating site and see how many women approach you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomjames Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 I think you are confusing bitchiness with criticism. Men don't tend to bitch about it, but men are criticised for their appearance. If you think this is wrong, post a particularly ugly picture of yourself on a dating site and see how many women approach you. It's men on men though...not women on men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted June 2, 2016 Author Share Posted June 2, 2016 That's what I want but the law prevents me from knowing this by forcing all businesses to serve me no matter how much they hate something about me. I think shop owners should be allowed to have signs in their windows saying no whites, no men, no tattoos, no nose piercings, no shorts. They shouldn't be forced to serve people they don't want to serve and I would prefer to know that they don't really want to serve me. Very peculiar. When I go shopping, an activity I generally dislike, the last thing on my mind is 'does this person really want to serve me?' Much better, from the shopper's perspective, to start from the assumption that shops exist to sell goods that people want; and, in civilised society, people should be allowed to shop where they want without fear of derision from a shop owner, or worker who takes an instant dislike to someone. I can see how a shop worker at say River Island or Topshop might relish the prospect of saying something nasty to a customer trying an item of clothing on, without fear of getting the sack....But other than that, why entrench and institutionalise conflict? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 I think you are confusing bitchiness with criticism. Men don't tend to bitch about it, but men are criticised for their appearance. If you think this is wrong, post a particularly ugly picture of yourself on a dating site and see how many women approach you. Are you deliberately conflating being ignored with unsolicited criticism by strangers? ---------- Post added 02-06-2016 at 14:08 ---------- You'd need to do research on modern feminism to understand. I'm a modern feminist... Perhaps it's you that needs to do more research. Oh, that was you dodging out of the clarification that you offered to make... Busted. ---------- Post added 02-06-2016 at 14:10 ---------- Some ideas are just too complicated for some people to understand. You obviously want people that hate you to be forced to serve you and despite the fact they hate you, you are happy to give them your money. I on the other hand would prefer to know if someone doesn't like me so that I can avoid giving them my money. Would you force someone to make you a sandwich or a coffee, if they don't really want to do it they are likely to do something nasty in it. What if instead we pass a law that puts them out of business when they air their opinions. Which they will, because they're invariably a bit on the dim side. Perhaps then people will come to understand that society doesn't and won't accept bigotry and discrimination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 It's men on men though...not women on men. What ever floats your boat No to be serious, I meant in general. Men's appearance is criticised too. Women criticise men, men criticise women and women criticism women. I don't see how this has anything to do with this debate though. Women do seem to have a harder time, but thats due to other women, not men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutty27 Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 Very peculiar. When I go shopping, an activity I generally dislike, the last thing on my mind is 'does this person really want to serve me?' Much better, from the shopper's perspective, to start from the assumption that shops exist to sell goods that people want; and, in civilised society, people should be allowed to shop where they want without fear of derision from a shop owner, or worker who takes an instant dislike to someone. I can see how a shop worker at say River Island or Topshop might relish the prospect of saying something nasty to a customer trying an item of clothing on, without fear of getting the sack....But other than that, why entrench and institutionalise conflict? Its simply a matter of opinion, you don't mind supporting racist, homophobic, sexist business owners as long as they are forced by law to serve everyone, and I would prefer to know who they are so that I don't support them. ---------- Post added 02-06-2016 at 14:34 ---------- What if instead we pass a law that puts them out of business when they air their opinions. Which they will, because they're invariably a bit on the dim side. Perhaps then people will come to understand that society doesn't and won't accept bigotry and discrimination. I don't like laws that stop people trading just because others are intolerant of their opinions. A bigot is a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnailyBoy Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 Its simply a matter of opinion, you don't mind supporting racist, homophobic, sexist business owners as long as they are forced by law to serve everyone, and I would prefer to know who they are so that I don't support them. ---------- Post added 02-06-2016 at 14:34 ---------- I don't like laws that stop people trading just because others are intolerant of their opinions. A bigot is a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions. Ohhh, we're getting closer to mention of a bigot being intolerant of intolerance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutty27 Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 Ohhh, we're getting closer to mention of a bigot being intolerant of intolerance. No a bigot is someone that is intolerant of someone else because of the opinions they hold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 I know women do it....men criticise women too. Men criticise women, correct, but women criticise women and women criticise men also. Its not exclusive to women to be criticised. Women do have the added bonus of being criticised by other women way more than men criticise each other, but that's hardly the fault of men. This idea that women being criticised is somehow evidence that women have it harder is purely the result of other women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milquetoast1 Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 Its simply a matter of opinion, you don't mind supporting racist, homophobic, sexist business owners as long as they are forced by law to serve everyone, and I would prefer to know who they are so that I don't support them. So you would support a society that allows people to discriminate, so you in turn can discriminate. Fantastic. So if you are ill and in desperate need of medication, you would be happy to be refused service in the only pharmacist in town because of <whatever> just so you could know not to use them again ... if you get better. If you are asking for a ticket on the last train home, you would be happy to be refused a ticket because of <whatever> just so you could know to go by bike next time. That's if the hotel that you need doesn't refuse you a room because of <whatever> and you don't freeze to death. At least you can put it all down to experience, and you will know who will not be getting your money in future, and you think this will help society somehow. This is assuming of course that all the bigots of the world seem to want to work in direct customer serving jobs somehow. That somehow all customers themselves are not bigots, so in your fantasy world this will help eradicate bigotry through the power of market forces. Have you not thought about the possibility that just as many customers are bigots as those serving customers, and allowing this to happen might actually reward bigotry. You might want to recall some of the queues to buy fast food chicken from Chick-fil-A after their CEO's homophobic comments. If sutty27 boycotts a place because they don't like the colour of sutty27's skin, but sutty28 and sutty29 make a point of giving them their custom precisely because they don't like the colour of sutty27's skin either, then how does that benefit society exactly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts