…his strange psychological need to verbally abuse women in physical terms.
Well, first off, it’s not THAT STRANGE, it’s pretty common. I had a teamster harass me every day telling me I needed breast implants. I have been verbally abused on most job sites in the entertainment industry, the worst of course being The Apprentice. Now, the man doing the verbal abusing was not who you think. In fact, that man was respectful and asked my opinion. But my direct supervisor was abusive, threatened to fire me (and anyone else he felt made some sort of mistake that he couldn’t figure out how to fix) so many times, it became a joke. The ‘physical’ terms took a twisted turn when he and a roomful of men ostracized me for leaving my underwear in the room where I had lived while shooting for 2 and 1/2 months. IT was a bathing suit, by the way, but it was actually illegal what he did, and he only had men in the room no women, which was interesting because this was a man who made sure there were women on set whenever a female cast member was being mic’d but never considered the inappropriate sexualization of my forgotten bathing suit ‘bottoms’ as some sort of PUBLIC humiliation with three other men present. TO SHAME ME.
My point is our President is no different than a disturbing majority of men in our current culture of chaos. The same guy who touts feminist slogans is most likely vile to the women who don’t fit his image of the ideal woman. Happens all the time. Our insecure, unqualified and belligerent commander in thief is no different.
What I am saying is: IT’S ACTUALLY NOT “STRANGE” at all. Strange implies that it is rare or somehow against the zeitgeist of our culture. I am saying it’s actually the standard operating procedure in our sadly degrading country from Uber to the White is Right House. Men have needed to psychologically and verbally abuse women for as long as women have existed. Physical or intellectual terms. Physical is the most common because most women are not perfect ’10s.’ Most men end up balding with guts but we women, well we must keep it together. We do this to ourselves through our addiction to invasive surgery, cattiness and competition. Women can be real jerks. They make other women feel insecure. Especially the ones getting admiration from men, usually for the size of their breasts. Those women seem to think their implants are genetic and they are superior to you because all the men salivate when they pass.
So, while I have no use for this buffoon I once ‘defended’ in a reasonable manner (because the AP reporter clearly had an agenda, misquoted me and in the end, was a total schmuck for how much of my time she took and then chose not to represent a damn thing I said in the correct light, that made me see that the ‘media’ issue is an issue and most people are so unprofessional now, no one actually knows what journalistic integrity is), I do have a ‘problem’ with his crash and white trash mouth not because it’s ‘unpresidential’ whatever that means — blow jobs in the oval office, blatant affair with Marilyn Monroe, screwing over the country for years to come, those are all presidential acts we’ve seen — but because he is ‘intellectually and emotionally” incapable of leading this once great country. I know this now, I knew this months ago.
But it’s the use of the word ‘strange’ by the National Review that I find misleading and ignorant. Really? Just him? Um, no. Here’s a list of all the men who do this who have been my boss. Oh wait, I need a second piece of paper.
OUR CULTURE CREATED THIS MONSTER. UNTIL WE REALIZE THAT, WE WILL SUFFER UNDER HIS AUTOCRATIC REIGN OF STUPIDITY.
In the modern workplace, people are expected to advertise their own achievements to get job offers, promotions and raises. Yet while men tend to be rewarded for it, women are punished if they do and punished if they don’t.
The report noted that while the two companies eventually erased almost all of the illegal hate speech, Facebook managed to remove only 39 percent within 24 hours, as demanded by the German authorities. Twitter met that deadline in 1 percent of instances. YouTube fared significantly better, removing 90 percent of flagged content within a day of being notified.
So they use ‘artificial intelligence’ to ban ‘fake news’ sources and “automatically” remove “potentially extremist material.” So they use robots to decide what is real and what is fake? And automatically assess the potential of ‘extremist.’ But extremism is only in relation to middle-of-the-road status quo and no good thing has come about without some form of standing up for what is right, which by all means could be eliminated by an algorithm that decides no one should question, say, a political leader (this won’t happen right away, but who’s to say FB, twitter and google are the best arbiters of what is extreme anyway. Aren’t they just conduits of expression, not editorial juggernauts?
It is strange that YouTube has networks of perverts that must be opposed by vigilantes to even get ‘flagged’ and the most benign platform has posted the most egregious acts, live killings, which we all thought was science fiction at one point not too long ago.
So while it’s easy to see how Germany would want to ‘control’ the bad, it’s quite scary how they trust the very platforms who have done little about it to suddenly respond according to their tastes and social mores, because, well, they are now legally bound to do so, or pay for allowing ‘hate’ to proliferate.
How do you even begin? Is this an effort to wrangle our hate mongering leader? It will only backfire. You have to take the good with the bad in what is a messy political process called ‘democracy,’ even though it really doesn’t exist, there is enough push back on the notion of free speech that I don’t see how this can be adopted. Let’s say the US adopted a similar law, would then ever four to eight years, the definition of what was extreme be shifted, according to who runs the FCC? Would it be open season on any ‘extreme’ anti-status quo thought such as ‘resist’ – resist what exactly, I don’t know, but it seems like it could be conferred as illegal by Jeff Sessions. It’s very close to reefer, you know.
Regarding the sexual harassment plaguing the tech industry, COO of Facebook just published a book outlining how it’s women’s fault they aren’t more successful. I’m really not sure, as I read excerpts (which, in turn, reveal her ‘process’ of thinking, which seems interested in proving some point which serves her experience, and prejudices), I am taken aback by her examples. She cites clearly aggressive and misguided moves by women while setting up how fair and egalitarian the men in charge are. This falls right into the whole stereotype of bra-burning harpies, who bring up “the specter of legal action” (over pretty much anything it seems) thus ‘creating barriers’ to the conversation she thinks we should be having instead.
I just don’t get how simplistic this is and how much it ignores the whole culture of power that has delivered us here. The film industry has been doing these things for years and will continue to pay Gillian Anderson much less than David Duchovny, and she will continue to accept it because no woman can afford to be a crusader for this cause. There is no way to separate your personal survival from your moral high ground when you must find work to support yourself and whoever your family might be.
So while it may be all good and well for powerful, well-heeled know it all female executives to write these books, giving us advice on how we should negotiate better and basically, do all these things that we have already done, ad nauseum, to no avail, for years, only to have ‘a chilling effect on discourse’ be the end result. The final crumb of insight given by a corporate shill.
Ultimately, if how we ‘view performance’ gives us a higher assessment of men yet a lower assessment of women (she’s a bitch, he’s a straight shooter; she’s bleeding from her facelift, he’s fat and fine with it), then why are we even bothering? If you have to have this discussion with a man, and worry about his being put off, then you are still his subordinate, still concerned with how to approach him for what you perceive as basic equal and fair treatment (hahahah isn’t that funny), but he already thinks he’s bending over backwards (although the jokes are all about you bending over, as you know) for you and all your kind, according to the COO of all things light and fluffy, and thus, you sour the deal by being too, well, too much something. You didn’t raise your hand enough in class, you were too afraid, you were too pushy, aggressive. By adding that men who take sick leave to care for their sick child, face being made fun of, she cements the sentiment that we should shut up already, really. Look at this poor guy who can’t get a raise because he is working from home. This after the example of how there weren’t even bathrooms for women in one country and how proud she was of the woman for not quitting but wasting her precious time ‘winning over’ her co-workers just to get a place to pee.
It’s awfully precious this analysis and recommendation, coming off the ‘victories’ that laid waste to the ‘patriarchy’ at a network and resulted in a few choice headlines showing girl power through outing the worst offenders of such neanderthal practices.
Perhaps it’s the cynical side of too much of this bullshit for too long, but unless you carve out your own enclave with your own corporate climate, which you will be criticized for, and possibly sued for being unfairly favorable to some, while choosing not to reward others for whatever reason — it will all be reduced to your discrimination of another. The idea is to see who can walk in your shoes for a mile. Or even a few feet. I think not many. That makes me feel not victorious at all, I haven’t won anything by forging new ground, by doing everything she says we should be doing and still not getting the results you think should follow.
You see, here’s why. You can do everything according to these books and commencement speeches and still not get the results you want. Why? Because you don’t control the universe. You and your belief systems and actions are still only part of your desired outcome. You will encounter assholes who will hate you for being kind, undermine you for being more talented than them and backstab you because they can. Simply because they want your title and perceived status, without having to do the work that you did to get there.
That’s the reality, not some book written by someone who is COO of Facebook, sorry. While it may help younger women, and I hope it does, it rings false to me every time I try to glean some insight from its pages.
This was the ‘news’ today and I found nothing new.