Feminism...Merriam Webster Word of the Year

[vta]

The BBC reported:

A leading US dictionary has named “feminism” as its word of 2017 following a surge in online searches.

Merriam-Webster said interest in the term was driven by women’s marches, new TV shows and films on women’s issues and the string of news stories on sexual assault and harassment claims.

The number of people searching for the word was up 70% on 2016, it said.

The dictionary defines feminism as “the theory of the political, economic and social equality of the sexes”.

It adds that it is also “organised activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests”.

 

[Water-]

oxford dictionary :

Definition of feminism in English:

feminism
NOUN

mass noun
The advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.

The issue of rights for women first became prominent during the French and American revolutions in the late 18th century. In Britain it was not until the emergence of the suffragette movement in the late 19th century that there was significant political change. A ‘second wave’ of feminism arose in the 1960s, with an emphasis on unity and sisterhood; seminal figures included Betty Friedan and Germaine Greer. A ‘third wave’ was identified in the late 1980s and 1990s, as a reaction against the perceived lack of focus on class and race issues in earlier movements

Origin
Late 19th century: from French féminisme.
Pronunciation
feminism/ˈfɛmɪnɪz(ə)m/

 

[Water-]

Interesting how Trumps sexism and abuse of power ("grab them by the pussy") brought the issue to the surface and allowed women to talk about it and make changes. Where as if Hillary was elected it never would have happened since she has a history of protecting men like that.

The world works in mysterious ways

 

[Midnite Toker]

Your post brings to mind the 2016 word of the year, "surreal" What pray tell, will 2018 bring? ~mT

 

[CosmicGiggle]

Your post brings to mind the 2016 word of the year, "surreal" What pray tell, will 2018 bring? ~mT

Omarosa writes her book

 

[DocTim420]

Like all returning boomerangs--the one thrown by the feminists, will return with an assortment of unintended consequences...more than anyone expected.

First, I am an old fucker (north of 60 but south of 70) and employed lots of people in my prior life. I prided myself in hiring the best (male or female) and paid my people accordingly. When people failed to do their job, they were replaced...but those that excelled were promoted and insanely paid.

Now fast forward to today: Would I hire a female today to work on my team? Probably not.

Why? If what people said/did 30 years ago can be taken out of context and used against them--then certainly, what I say today can also be taken out of context and used against me in 10, 20 or 30 years later. And if that 30 year old matter involves a "sexual harassment complaint", then a sanity check says: Avoid entering that lion's den (lioness actually) at all costs.

What a shame, because some of the best detailed orientated employees I have had were ladies...and those that know me, know I did will do most anything to defend the ladies I know (chivalry is not dead in my book).

As the King of the Hill, I have a duty to my company, my employees, my family, my livelihood, my wealth, etc to not take unnecessary risks. I fuck up--they lose. Can you spell: RESPONSIBILITY? Many mouths are dependent on my actions.

Unfortunately, the unintended consequences from the feminists' boomerang is now evident: There is no statute of limitations on sexual misconduct and claims going back decades are fair game. So...what I did or did not do 30-40 years ago is now open for prosecution...what will the legal landscape be in say 10-20 years from now when the words I say today...are then litigated?

If the objective is to avoid any potential sexual harassment litigation quagmire--both now and 10, 20 & 30 years from now)--and assuming all candidates are equally qualified, is it more prudent to hire: 1) team of ladies, or 2) team of men, or 3) mixed team of men and ladies?

Imo, the cost benefit of hiring ladies is not what is used to be once we add the cost of "potential litigation". Shame, this unintended consequence will be both long lasting and divisive.

Oh what webs we weave...

I enjoy reliving the days when ladies burned their bras (with their "artesians" puncturing through blouses), and "free love" and nudity was the norm for all.

 

[Water-]

It's called being held responsible for your actions .

Doesn't matter how long ago it was.

We can never escape our karma

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

Men and women cannot compete in every area of life. You look at say Tennis, and you don't see men and women entering the same matches in the same tournament to play against each other....a good male tennis player should be able to easily beat a good female player, and the same goes for just about any sport. Physically men are usually stronger than women.

Then there are things like having babies that men can't usually do, or a full menstrual cycle, spending hours walking around aimlessly at shopping malls etc. So women and men do have their differences and that affects how either sex lead their lives.

In most UK society women have equality already, and have had for quite some time, it its written into law, but still in some parts of the UK you find whole areas that live under religiously paternal social conditions where women are treated like cattle, abused, and mutilated by the men they have been forced into living under often within arranged marriages that the woman cannot ever escape from alive , so if feminists want or need to go after those sort of real injustices against women, they need look no further than any religious fundamentalists abode.

 

[DocTim420]

Gypsy, you can have equality and "equality". If the task is something that "anyone" can do (similar education & skill sets), than it should go to the best candidate. I've made lots of dough--for both me and others--by adhering to this simple philosophy: Do what you do best, hire the rest. So when I do need to "hire" a person, I want the best and conduct my search accordingly. Their chromosome pairings is of no concern.

Problem now is....there is this new surge of populism that "allegations" equate to "guilt", and followed with swift, mob mentality-styled "punishment". So instead of reserving "punishment" for the guilty, it is now delivered after each and every "allegation"--who needs to wait for "evidence" before making "judgement"?

Consider this scenario--

After working 40 years I retire and become a spokesman for a particular cause (aka public figure) and someone that does not like that particular cause decides to cause me a bit of mischief and anonymously claims she was my employee 38 years ago--alleging I conducted certain "inappropriate sexual behavior". There she stands hidden from TV cameras with Gloria Allred standing by her side.

Bingo I am toast and my life is ruined. To claim my good name back, I must invest an inordinate amount of time and money (which I will never be reimbursed).

Am I permitted to meet my accuser? Not if she wants to remain "anonymous". How do I "prove" I did NOT do something 38 years ago? What are the odds my business records are still available--much yet how about those that could vouch for my innocence (aka witnesses). Are they still available or alive? Can they remember the incident...much yet remember the employee?

And what exactly does "inappropriate sexual behavior" mean? Do we judge the alleged action with the norms and standards of 1979 (38 years ago when this allegedly happened) are do we use today's norms and standards (re-litigate history)? Are there different "degrees" or a 1-10 rating for the different types of "inappropriate sexual behavior"?...or do we lump a friendly pinch on the ass (on purpose) with the accidental bump that occurs when the person in front of you suddenly stops walking--and your walking too fast to stop. Or was she that nympho receptionist at the Christmas Party--that I brought home for more drinking and a wild night of headboard banging sex? You know, those "oops" but consensual one night stands that work themselves out amicably at the workplace.

No, if these are the new rules, then I doubt there will ever be a shortage of qualified females seeking employment (since fewer will be hired), and conversely the men:women ratio will begin to skew towards more men being hired (since men don't wait 38 years before making sexual misconduct allegations).

 

[iTarzan]

Every guy who ever lived did some hard core sexual stuff, said some stuff or thought some stuff about woman they knew or saw in their lives. Anybody who says different is flat out lying. So I am sure Trump did too. There is some unfairness about all this though.

If "insert any big time rock star name here" said the exact same thing Trump said about the groupies nobody would say a thing or deny it was true. Woman groupies throw their bras and panties on stage, go back stage to have sex, strip and do anything those rockers want them to do. They can kiss them and grab their pussies. And all us normal guys lived our lives vicariously through them. We believed the stories, saw it happening and would gladly trade places with them. That was what Trump meant. He was a rich guy, a "rock star of money". Woman certainly threw themselves at him. But now the haters want to hate on him.

Rock stars are not the same as these pukes that sexually harassed and assaulted employees under them or woman, men or children they had an advantage over. There is no group of men you can say haven't either. Priests, boy scout leaders, TV, news, movies, teachers, doctors, politicians on all sides and whatever others you can name.

Remember the backstabbers are smiling in your face, your best friend is having thoughts about your wife and the male teachers all know your daughter has a nice set of tits they wouldn't mind bouncing around.

I guess people forgot that men are cock hounds at heart.

 

[Water-]

I think people are more concerned with abuse of power than the small stuff.

The way to avoid being accused of inappropriate behavior is to always conduct your self the honor, dignity and integrity

 

[Water-]

Every guy who ever lived did some hard core sexual stuff, said some stuff or thought some stuff about woman they knew or saw in their lives. Anybody who says different is flat out lying. So I am sure Trump did too. There is some unfairness about all this though.

If "insert any big time rock star name here" said the exact same thing Trump said about the groupies nobody would say a thing or deny it was true. Woman groupies throw their bras and panties on stage, go back stage to have sex, strip and do anything those rockers want them to do. They can kiss them and grab their pussies. And all us normal guys lived our lives vicariously through them. We believed the stories, saw it happening and would gladly trade places with them. That was what Trump meant. He was a rich guy, a "rock star of money". Woman certainly threw themselves at him. But now the haters want to hate on him.

Rock stars are not the same as these pukes that sexually harassed and assaulted employees under them or woman, men or children they had an advantage over. There is no group of men you can say haven't either. Priests, boy scout leaders, TV, news, movies, teachers, doctors, politicians on all sides and whatever others you can name.

Remember the backstabbers are smiling in your face, your best friend is having thoughts about your wife and the male teachers all know your daughter has a nice set of tits they wouldn't mind bouncing around.

I guess people forgot that men are cock hounds at heart.

Holding "rock stars" to the same standard as the leader of the most powerful Nation in the world and who is responsible for hundreds of millions of peoples lives, indicates a pretty weak intellect.

 

[iTarzan]

Holding "rock stars" to the same standard as the leader of the most powerful Nation in the world and who is responsible for hundreds of millions of peoples lives, indicates a pretty weak intellect.

He wasn't president back then. He was just rich and famous. Ronald Reagan became president. He would have many "rock star" Hollywood stories. Milton Berle said Nancy Reagan gave the best blow job in Hollywood. LBJ evidently had a large penis and would whip it out to shut up people saying something like "let's see who the bigger man is". Bill Clinton...enough said on him.

Lastly... JFK and the entire Kennedy clan. Jackie didn't even stay at the White House so she could avoid the parade of woman.

Not knowing that most every world leader of every country that every was had the same low standards you speak of is clearly indicates who has the weaker intellect.

 

[Water-]

And now you are an authority on the integrity of leaders throughout history as well?

Don't worry, I understand the evolutionary drives behind this sort of behavior.

 

[DocTim420]

I think people are more concerned with abuse of power than the small stuff.

The way to avoid being accused of inappropriate behavior is to always conduct your self the honor, dignity and integrity

LOL...now that's funny. The roads are littered with "men that are good, honorable, dignified and loaded with integrity" that can't keep their dick in their pants.

Let's talk about the Kennedy Clan; they are "honorable", walk with great "dignity", and welded political power for decades with great "integrity".

1. Ted Kennedy. Following a party with six young female campaign workers on the island of Chappaquiddick, Kennedy was giving Kopechne a ride back to her hotel when he drove off a bridge. Kopechne drowned in the car, and Kennedy left the scene to consult with Kennedy family advisers. In fact, he never reported the incident, which was discovered independently the next morning! Kennedy was charged only with leaving the scene of an accident.

2. John and younger brother Bobby had closely contiguous sexual liaisons with Marilyn Monroe. Numerous conspiracy theories have been developed around the Kennedys' involvement in Monroe's death, which occurred in the aftermath of these affairs. At a minimum, the relationships were extremely damaging to Monroe's fragile mental health.

3. In 1991 Kennedy nephew William Smith was charged with rape while staying with uncle Teddy in the family's seaside estate in Palm Beach, FL. The woman claimed she met Smith at a night club at which he was accompanied by Ted Kennedy and his son, Patrick. Later, while ostensibly showing her around the estate, Smith began pursuing and pawing her as she tried to escape. Other women were found who described having similar experiences with the Kennedy nephew, but Smith was acquitted.

4. Stories of sexual assaults, infidelity, and religious hypocrisy began with the family's patriarch, Joe Kennedy. In Swanson on Swanson, silent screen star Gloria Swanson revealed having an affair with Kennedy when, she claimed, he forced himself on her during his business trips to Hollywood when he left his saintly wife, Rose, at home in Massachusetts. (Swanson was most pissed off that, despite his legendary financial acumen, Joe lost a ton of her dough.) Other Kennedy family historians report that the elder Kennedy made advances on his sons' girlfriends!

5. An extremely unappetizing Kennedy scandal involved Joe's brother and campaign manager, Michael. Like his brother and sister, Michael was stably married with children when it was revealed he had been having an affair with a family babysitter, beginning when the girl was 14! This, of course, is a crime that would get a non-Kennedy registered as a sexual predator. For some reason (perhaps bribery and threats to her and her family), the girl refused to press charges, and Kennedy entered treatment for sex and alcohol addiction. Michael Kennedy had been keeping an extremely low profile when he died in an accident on a family skiing trip.

6. One of the storied political couplings of the twentieth century was between Andrew Cuomo, son of former New York Governor Mario Cuomo, and Kerry Kennedy, daughter of Robert Kennedy. The younger Cuomo was forced to withdraw his own bid for the governorship (although he is now the governor of New York) in 2002 when it was revealed that his wife, to whom he had been married 13 years and with whom he had three daughters, had been having a long-term affair with a married man. Kerry Kennedy's philandering shows that Kennedy disregard for marital niceties extends to the distaff side of the family as well.

7. Joe Kennedy, son of Robert Kennedy and former Congressman, secretly had his 12-year marriage to Sheila Rauch annulled by the Vatican. Rauch only found out about the annulment years later, after Kennedy remarried. She wrote a very angry book about the experience, Shattered Faith, since the Church's decreeing that the marriage never existed left her twin sons in everlasting limbo. Rauch pointed out that only powerful people like the Kennedy's could unilaterally cancel 12 years of marriage. (This raises the question of whether the Church can gain entry to Heaven for powerful people who have sinned.)

And that is just one "family". Shall we investigate more "honorable" families?

 

[DocTim420]

Sorry for the back-to-back, but comments by Tucker Carlson are, imo, rather appropriate.

The noble effort to eliminate sexual harassment has turned into “something dark and menacing,” Tucker Carlson warned Thursday, commenting on PBS host Tavis Smiley’s firing.

On his Fox News Channel program, Carlson said that Smiley’s politics are irrelevant to the charges being leveled against him:

"For what it's worth, Tavis Smiley has never said anything we agree with politically. But, that's not the point. The point is, what began as a noble effort to eliminate sexual harassment from American life, an effort we agree with vehemently, is rapidly turning into something dark and menacing.”

Carlson warned that allegations are now being made against innocent people to gain revenge and political power:

“Innocent people fear persecution and that's always the hallmark of a witch hunt. Others use allegation to settle scores or gain power and that’s the opposite of justice.”

But, it’s not just public figures who should be worried, Carlson said:

“The rest of the country looks on bewildered and afraid, unsure of what the new rules are, but certain of the punishment for violating them. It is grotesque.

“Imagine if you were accused by someone whose name you didn't know, of a misdeed you couldn't remember or didn't commit. How would you respond to that?”

Source: https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister/tucker-sexual-harassment-charges-being-used-against-innocent-people-settle

 

[CosmicGiggle]

Tucker Carlson (Fox News) doesn't name names but we all know who he's protecting and exactly where this is headed!

 

[Water-]

LOL...now that's funny. The roads are littered with "men that are good, honorable, dignified and loaded with integrity" that can't keep their dick in their pants.

Let's talk about the Kennedy Clan; they are "honorable", walk with great "dignity", and welded political power for decades with great "integrity".



And that is just one "family". Shall we investigate more "honorable" families?

I never mentioned any person or family in my statement.

I'm not sure what you are going on about.

Direct your angry old man rambles at someone else. I don't read them.

 

[iTarzan]

I never mentioned any person or family in my statement.

I'm not sure what you are going on about.

Direct your angry old man rambles at someone else. I don't read them.

Quit playing dumb when you are cornered. You posted this...

Holding "rock stars" to the same standard as the leader of the most powerful Nation in the world and who is responsible for hundreds of millions of peoples lives, indicates a pretty weak intellect.

You were implying that leaders of the most powerful nation in the world had higher standards. You were wrong. Don't pretend you don't know what you said and don't pretend the people challenging you are crazy or rambling angry old men.

You are wrong again when you don't think this has been similar for every country in the world.

You know exactly how the conversation flowed. You just didn't like it when you were washed away in a tidal wave of your wrongness.

How about Martin Luther King. He had as many woman as any Kennedy. Issues with domestic violence too. He would never survive a #MeToo screening today. If the revisionist spotlight gets turned on him his statues will be coming down too.

I am waiting for a #MeToo Obama scandal to drop one day.

Trump has some issues but he isn't even close to the worst.

Men often think with their dicks and it gets them in trouble. Kings, presidents and prime ministers can be serious cock hounds.

 

[Water-]

Quit playing dumb when you are cornered. You posted this...



You were implying that leaders of the most powerful nation in the world had higher standards. You were wrong. Don't pretend you don't know what you said and don't pretend the people challenging you are crazy or rambling angry old men.

You are wrong again when you don't think this has been similar for every country in the world.

You know exactly how the conversation flowed. You just didn't like it when you were washed away in a tidal wave of your wrongness.

How about Martin Luther King. He had as many wuoman as any Kennedy. Issues with domestic violence too. He would never survive a #MeToo screening today. If the revisionist spotlight gets turned on him his statues will be coming down too.

I am waiting for a #MeToo Obama scandal to drop one day.

Trump has some issues but he isn't even close to the worst.

Im not playing dumb. The problem is that you have reading comprehension issues.
I wrote that the president of the US should be held higher standards than a rock star.
I never made claims about any individual persons integrity.