3 Results

Posts Tagged political correctness

October 23, 2011

WTF, sweden is seriously fucked up

I’ve been hearing and reading that Sweden is fucked up for years. It’s apparently literally up to a twilight zone level of PC and misandry. Pelle Billing had a post tackling it here…

But today I ran across this weird-ass story… The swedish goverment is banning and ad for having attractive women in it… Wtf holy shit what? Apparently in Sweden you need to feature Andrea Dworkin look-alikes for ads to not offend. See the below.

The Jack & Jones clothing retailer has been rapped by Sweden’s advertising watchdog for a “sexist” ad campaign which utilised scantily clad women to market a line of men’s clothing.

“The Swedish Advertising Ombudsman (Reklamombudsmannen, RO) Jury finds that the commercial is sexist. It therefore violates Article 4 of the International Chamber of Commerce’s rules for advertising and marketing communications,” the ombudsman wrote in a statement on Monday.

Most complainants argued the adverts amounted to “offensive” and “objectifyingly sexist stereotypes of both men and women”.

Others complained that the Jack & Jones campaign also discriminated against homosexuals because it only showed heterosexual situations.

The company’s humour and irony was lost on the jury at Sweden’s advertising watchdog, which issued a unanimous ruling condemning the campaign.

“Through their clothing and poses, the women are portrayed as pure sex objects and in a way that can be considered offensive to women in general,” the jury wrote in its ruling.

“In an overall assessment, the committee finds that the advertisment can be considered offensive and that the conventions expressed in it give a stereotypical view of gender roles which is degrading to both women and men.”

The commenters on the news story were interesting though

So I guess to satisfy everyone, a model used in advertising should be a ugly middle age, multi-race, multi-faith, bisexual hermaphrodite.

 

This is quite simple really. Women who don’t want to be sex objects will be rewarded by not having the opportunity to pass on their genes to another generation. Which will be a good thing.

 

It’s great and it’s inspiring men to be fit! I would think the women that are offended are either lesbians, desperate or have a circle of gravity around them that is double the normal strength.

 

So let me get this straight: The Victoria Milan ads that urge Swedish people to ‘have an affair’ and cheat on their partners are cleared of wrongdoing, and these men’s clothing ads that simply portray some attractive women in underwear and provocative poses are condemned??? This demonstrates two things to me about Swedish society – firstly that its institutions reflect a social amorality, and secondly are purveyors of ethical fascism. Moreover there seems to be a deficit in the area of basic democracy: It says here a ‘number’ of complaints provoked this ridiculous judgment of sexism supposedly based on international marketing rules. Yet the former Victoria Milan website ads were said to have resulted in record numbers of complaints yet were given a green light by the ombudsman (why not ombudsperson!?) – who is therefore hardly a good arbiter of free expression in the public space. To be honest, I’m personally a little sad I won’t be exposed to these ads any more, but as somebody pointed out – for the same thing of overall slightly lower quality one can glance at the terribly sexist weekly photo galleries of The Local.

 

Over-regulation at its finest. So long as women are treated fairly (in other words given the same rights as men, same wages, etc), we should have nothing else to ask for. Feminists are far more sexist than your average person, just like Al Sharpton is more racist and my local priest is more of an angry alcoholic… The point is, don’t let hypocrites get involved in policy making. Lighten up people

 

The ‘authorities’ still don’t get it. The presence of scantily clad women in an ad is meant to exploit the weakeness of MEN. Women in bikinis or lingerie have been used to market everything from high-end automobiles to chewing gum, from the 1960′s when the navel of Teri Garr was displayed to sell iced tea.

 


 

April 17, 2011

How PC creates nice guysTM and why girls can’t find a decent boyfriend

Making Boys ‘Bad’ – Misandry Strikes Again « Quiet Riot Girl

Random anecdotal story. I actually met an a guy when he was 18 and he wanted to commit suicide due to never having kissed a girl. I’ve mentored and coached him through it…

Guess what… He actually looks like a male model, face-wise he looks like a catwalk model, and body wise he can be on the cover of any fitness magazine. He’s got a ripped six-pack year round, and yes, he’s a virgin (he’s now 20). AND HES AN ACTUAL NICE GUY. Like not “nice guy TM”, but an actual good-hearted good guy, who happens to look like a male model.

Why does this happen? COZ THE GUY HAS BEEN RUINED BY PC! He has so much guilt of the very thought of talking to a girl and “not offending her”. He’s been brutalized into submission by PC.

I mean, I walk down the street with this guy, and girls stare and start dripping wet seeing him…

Guess what? All those girls who dream about him don’t have the fortune of dating him because he’s been beaten to submission by the system. He’s been driven insane with guilt for merely being born a guy and being attracted to females.

His guilt is so deep that he REJECTS advances out of guilt. Yes, he gets hit on all the time, but ends up shutting down and like “backing away”, because he’s afraid of “hurting the girl”…

What evidence is there that he could possibly hurt a girl? He was born with a penis… That he’s the most kind-hearted person i’ve ever met doesn’t seem to matter.

That’s what PC does to you…

Here’s what QRG said in response, and how PC has influenced her experiences with boys early in life

 

 

Making Boys ‘Bad’ – Misandry Strikes Again « Quiet Riot Girl

Im getting on a bit now Alek but even looking back at my teenage years, I was partly desperate for a man to just ‘take control’ and be assertive with me. I resisted having sex for a long time even though I was dating. And partly it was because I didn’t want to be the one taking the inititative. I look back and make this analysis as now I know I am quite submissive. But at the time I just thought I was scared of sex. I tended to go out with genuinely nice guys, who wouldn’t hurt me. But also, they wouldn’t really, you know, DO ME! The kind of boys/men who would DO ME I thought of as ‘bad’. or even looking for that kind of assertive man might make me a ‘bad girl’. Which I very much wasn’t.

I don’t know for sure how it is for girls now but I think it may be even worse. There are more information campaigns about rape etc. for example. But I think girls are scared to allow for men to be dominant, and men are scared to be dominant, for fear of being labelled ‘rapey’ or ‘rapists’ or bad boys.

 

 

January 22, 2010

The fallacies that create left-wingers and right-wingers

An amazing find. One of my favorite authors ever, Satoshi Kanazawa has this piece explaining the morallistic and naturalistic fallacies. They explain the irrational behaviour of both extreme leftists (marxists, feminists, political correctness crowd) and extreme rightists (super conservative religious nuts, people who like to go back to the 18th century rules)…

In short, here’s what the two fallacies are:

Two logical fallacies that we must avoid | Psychology Today

The naturalistic fallacy, which was coined by the English philosopher George Edward Moore in the early 20th century though first identified much earlier by the Scottish philosopher David Hume, is the leap from is to ought – that is, the tendency to believe that what is natural is good; that what is, ought to be. For example, one might commit the error of the naturalist fallacy and say, “Because people are genetically different and endowed with different innate abilities and talents, they ought to be treated differently.” 

The moralistic fallacy, coined by the Harvard microbiologist Bernard Davis in the 1970s, is the opposite of the naturalistic fallacy. It refers to the leap from ought to is, the claim that the way things should be is the way they are. This is the tendency to believe that what is good is natural; that what ought to be, is. For example, one might commit the error of the moralistic fallacy and say, “Because everybody ought to be treated equally, there are no innate genetic differences between people.” The science writer extraordinaire Matt Ridley calls it the reverse naturalistic fallacy.

And here’s a practical example I like:

Both are logical fallacies, and they get in the way of progress in science in general, and in evolutionary psychology in particular. However, as Ridley astutely points out, political conservatives are more likely to commit the naturalistic fallacy (“Nature designed men to be competitive and women to be nurturing, so women ought to stay home to take care of the children and leave politics to men”), while political liberals are equally likely to commit the moralistic fallacy (“The Western liberal democratic principles hold that men and women ought to be treated equally under the law, and therefore men and women are biologically identical and any study that demonstrates otherwise is a priori false”). 

Since academics, and social scientists in particular, are overwhelmingly left-wing liberals, the moralistic fallacy has been a much greater problem in academic discussions of evolutionary psychology than the naturalistic fallacy. Most academics are above committing the naturalistic fallacy, but they are not above committing the moralistic fallacy. The social scientists’ stubborn refusal to accept sex and race differences in behavior, temperament, and cognitive abilities, and their tendency to be blind to the empirical reality of stereotypes, reflect their moralistic fallacy driven by their liberal political convictions.