FSTDT Forums

Community => Society and History => Topic started by: rageaholic on March 10, 2014, 06:28:11 pm

Title: # BanBossy
Post by: rageaholic on March 10, 2014, 06:28:11 pm
Link (http://abcnews.go.com/US/sheryl-sandberg-launches-ban-bossy-campaign-empower-girls/story?id=22819181)

Words fail me.  This woman literally wants to ban the word "bossy" because she thinks it's used to put down girls and discourage them from leadership.

1.  Last time I checked, both boys and girls can be bossy.  It's a gender neutral word. 

2.  Banning one word won't stop people from calling out bossy people, nor will it stop them from discouraging girls.

3.  Fucking google endorses this as do several celebrities (Beyonce who uses much worse B words).

Just... WTF? 
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: Dakota Bob on March 10, 2014, 07:18:43 pm
Oh shit, Tumblr is leaking!
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: I am lizard on March 10, 2014, 07:37:02 pm
Wait, I though it was meant to end the stigma against females in leadership positions, this is just fucking stupid.
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: I am lizard on March 10, 2014, 07:52:54 pm
Oh shit, Tumblr is leaking!

This is the same person who wrote Lean In, so this doesn't really surprise me much. She's been roundly criticized by other feminists for her very superficial understanding of feminism (and her desire to distance herself from it to make herself more "palatable" to mainstream audiences), as well as her general lack of awareness of intersectional issues and why her advice doesn't apply to all women. Basically her book is about how women can solve inequality by all becoming CEOs, never mind that there are already systematic barriers in place that prevent women, particularly lower-class women and women of color, from getting the same education and opportunities.
So basically the "It gets better" for women?
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: rageaholic on March 10, 2014, 08:15:47 pm
I think this bitch also supports an even bigger bitch, Amy Chua (aka Tiger Mom). 

Me thinks the reason she was called bossy is because she is bossy.  Now she wants everyone else to refrain from using that word. 
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: RavynousHunter on March 10, 2014, 08:19:33 pm
I think this bitch also supports an even bigger bitch, Amy Chua (aka Tiger Mom). 

Me thinks the reason she was called bossy is because she is bossy.  Now she wants everyone else to refrain from using that word. 

Okay, then.  We can stop calling Mrs. Chua bossy...if we can instead call her a bitch, dickhead, asshole, or cunt.  Her choice.
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: Rabbit of Caerbannog on March 11, 2014, 12:00:51 am
Couple of things:

1. Are they literally trying to ban a word or do they actually mean people should refrain from using it?

2. "Bossy" is gender neutral but is often used in a gendered way. In other words it may be applied to women more often than men, or applied to women when they show the same leadership qualities that are expected of a man.

Seems to me that not using the word, at least in that way, isn't a bad thing at all.
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: I am lizard on March 11, 2014, 12:04:04 am
Couple of things:

1. Are they literally trying to ban a word or do they actually mean people should refrain from using it?

2. "Bossy" is gender neutral but is often used in a gendered way. In other words it may be applied to women more often than men, or applied to women when they show the same leadership qualities that are expected of a man.

Seems to me that not using the word, at least in that way, isn't a bad thing at all.
I hope it's a complete ban, I don't want to have unfollowed those people for nothing.
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: Rabbit of Caerbannog on March 11, 2014, 12:05:29 am
Or we can just ban this dude:

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-b5BPStWsswA/UINT5Peyj1I/AAAAAAAAE8w/DmufVcY4iNM/s1600/bossy_auto.jpg)
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: Rabbit of Caerbannog on March 11, 2014, 12:12:00 am
Couple of things:

1. Are they literally trying to ban a word or do they actually mean people should refrain from using it?

2. "Bossy" is gender neutral but is often used in a gendered way. In other words it may be applied to women more often than men, or applied to women when they show the same leadership qualities that are expected of a man.

Seems to me that not using the word, at least in that way, isn't a bad thing at all.
I hope it's a complete ban, I don't want to have unfollowed those people for nothing.
Nope. Looks like it's just discouraging double standards in the words we choose to describe men and women in order to encourage young women to get involved in leadership roles. Which may be ineffective, I dunno. But it doesn't sound nearly as draconian as the OP made it sound.
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: kefkaownsall on March 11, 2014, 01:05:02 am
I've noticed when a man is assertive its good woman bossy
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: chitoryu12 on March 11, 2014, 01:35:34 am
On page 2 (http://abcnews.go.com/US/sheryl-sandberg-launches-ban-bossy-campaign-empower-girls/story?id=22819181&page=2) she does indeed confirm "we want to get rid of a word." So while the intention behind it is good, she's legit trying to get people to stop using such a term altogether in society no matter the gender it's applied to.

Which is the exact wrong way to go about it. Trying to ban a word doesn't get rid of the underlying societal problems that cause it to be overwhelming used in relation to females.
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: Dakota Bob on March 11, 2014, 07:00:00 am
Or we can just ban this dude:

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-b5BPStWsswA/UINT5Peyj1I/AAAAAAAAE8w/DmufVcY4iNM/s1600/bossy_auto.jpg)

52, 53, 54! Bossy's record is no more!
(http://i.imgur.com/wyriVrg.jpg)
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: RavynousHunter on March 11, 2014, 09:40:47 am
On page 2 (http://abcnews.go.com/US/sheryl-sandberg-launches-ban-bossy-campaign-empower-girls/story?id=22819181&page=2) she does indeed confirm "we want to get rid of a word." So while the intention behind it is good, she's legit trying to get people to stop using such a term altogether in society no matter the gender it's applied to.

Which is the exact wrong way to go about it. Trying to ban a word doesn't get rid of the underlying societal problems that cause it to be overwhelming used in relation to females.

But that requires work and thought, and those are harrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrd.
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: Rabbit of Caerbannog on March 11, 2014, 12:20:10 pm
On page 2 (http://abcnews.go.com/US/sheryl-sandberg-launches-ban-bossy-campaign-empower-girls/story?id=22819181&page=2) she does indeed confirm "we want to get rid of a word." So while the intention behind it is good, she's legit trying to get people to stop using such a term altogether in society no matter the gender it's applied to.

Which is the exact wrong way to go about it. Trying to ban a word doesn't get rid of the underlying societal problems that cause it to be overwhelming used in relation to females.
Okay so they're trying to discourage the use of it altogether. Still like the message behind it though. I hope more people think about how we label assertive women.
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: Old Viking on March 11, 2014, 03:09:44 pm
Let's ban the phrase "Past Due."
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: rageaholic on March 11, 2014, 11:44:11 pm
Here's the thing, is there really a double standard where boys are encouraged to be assertive?  Okay, maybe in some contexts (bible belt towns), but it seems to be a dying trend.  That's not to say that women aren't being held back in other ways, but this doesn't sound like a good solution. 
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: Rabbit of Caerbannog on March 12, 2014, 01:07:28 am
Here's the thing, is there really a double standard where boys are encouraged to be assertive?  Okay, maybe in some contexts (bible belt towns), but it seems to be a dying trend.  That's not to say that women aren't being held back in other ways, but this doesn't sound like a good solution. 

Well, yes. Boys are encouraged to be aggressive and are penalized if they show signs of sensitivity or weakness - i.e., "Show them that you're a man!" I've seen a lot of guys who are very aggressive and pushy who get praised for how "tough" they are, but if a girl is anything less than sugar-sweet in a conversation people assume that she's "bitchy."

I strongly encourage you to watch Miss Representation if you get the chance because it provides many examples of how women who attempt to seek "male" roles (such as politicians) are degraded in the press in uniquely sexist ways that men don't face. For instance, Hillary Clinton being called a "nag" simply for speaking her view in a debate, Condoleeza Rice being described as a "dominatrix," Sarah Palin being asked if she had breast implants, and so on.
In the business world the phenomenon is referred to as "think manager, think male." The same attributes that would pay off for a man work to the detriment of a woman. In fact, one of the most famous SCOTUS cases on the subject was Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins. Give it a read if you wanna have your blood boil.
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: Ultimate Paragon on March 16, 2014, 05:36:30 pm
Here's the thing, is there really a double standard where boys are encouraged to be assertive?  Okay, maybe in some contexts (bible belt towns), but it seems to be a dying trend.  That's not to say that women aren't being held back in other ways, but this doesn't sound like a good solution. 

Well, yes. Boys are encouraged to be aggressive and are penalized if they show signs of sensitivity or weakness - i.e., "Show them that you're a man!" I've seen a lot of guys who are very aggressive and pushy who get praised for how "tough" they are, but if a girl is anything less than sugar-sweet in a conversation people assume that she's "bitchy."

I strongly encourage you to watch Miss Representation if you get the chance because it provides many examples of how women who attempt to seek "male" roles (such as politicians) are degraded in the press in uniquely sexist ways that men don't face. For instance, Hillary Clinton being called a "nag" simply for speaking her view in a debate, Condoleeza Rice being described as a "dominatrix," Sarah Palin being asked if she had breast implants, and so on.

That being said I still don't like Sheryl Sandberg.
This kind of thinking hurts both men and women.  If somebody wants to conform to gender roles, fine.  But it's also good if they want to do something that goes against the grain.
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: I am lizard on March 16, 2014, 05:39:21 pm
Here's the thing, is there really a double standard where boys are encouraged to be assertive?  Okay, maybe in some contexts (bible belt towns), but it seems to be a dying trend.  That's not to say that women aren't being held back in other ways, but this doesn't sound like a good solution. 

Well, yes. Boys are encouraged to be aggressive and are penalized if they show signs of sensitivity or weakness - i.e., "Show them that you're a man!" I've seen a lot of guys who are very aggressive and pushy who get praised for how "tough" they are, but if a girl is anything less than sugar-sweet in a conversation people assume that she's "bitchy."

I strongly encourage you to watch Miss Representation if you get the chance because it provides many examples of how women who attempt to seek "male" roles (such as politicians) are degraded in the press in uniquely sexist ways that men don't face. For instance, Hillary Clinton being called a "nag" simply for speaking her view in a debate, Condoleeza Rice being described as a "dominatrix," Sarah Palin being asked if she had breast implants, and so on.

That being said I still don't like Sheryl Sandberg.
This kind of thinking hurts both men and women.  If somebody wants to conform to gender roles, fine.  But it's also good if they want to do something that goes against the grain.
Feminism is about choice, if a girl truly wants to do something, then let her do it.
Some restrictions may apply.
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: TheUnknown on March 20, 2014, 04:49:46 pm
Just saw a news segment about this.  The headline at the bottom said "More politically correct garbage the world doesn't need to hear - especially from them" (I'm assuming 'them' is referring to the female celebrities who endorse it).  It didn't say where the quote was from, or if we're just supposed to assume it was said by the guy they were currently interviewing (though he didn't say it during the interview).
Title: Re: # BanBossy
Post by: I am lizard on March 20, 2014, 04:58:01 pm
Just saw a news segment about this.  The headline at the bottom said "More politically correct garbage the world doesn't need to hear - especially from them" (I'm assuming 'them' is referring to the female celebrities who endorse it).  It didn't say where the quote was from, or if we're just supposed to assume it was said by the guy they were currently interviewing (though he didn't say it during the interview).
I'm going to pretend it means jews.