Women-only screening of Wonder Woman: Reverse Sexism at its Finest

fael wrote:

Not an Oppressed Male wrote:

1. I haven't lost sleep over this. See: Augusta Country Club.

2. Black colleges seem just fine. Note: they are ADVERTISED as such.

3. The injustice here is that standards are applied inconsistently. You call it "discrimination"; some call it "redefinition".

1. It upset you enough to start a thread.

2. Point me to a black-only college where whites can't get in, please. I didn't think that was legal.

3. You need to look up the definition of discrimination. It hasn't changed. What standards are applied inconsistently?

1. But I sleep fine.

2. Not black-only... but Historically Black. Plus, there are certainly Black-only and Native-American-only (I am actually kinda OK with this one...) scholarship opportunities. NAACP? UNCF? Imagine the tables turned on those, lol.

3. "Marriage" was redefined, not "discrimination". The cake maker just happened to voice their stance at the moment when our society decided to reverse a few millinea worth of understanding. If someone had wanted a cake to celebrate their marriage with their goldfish, I wonder how society would have responded...and I wonder how we will respond in 50 years?

I really don't think this is a case of double standards at all, certainly not to the extent of "reverse sexism." Imagine if a one time men's night was held for a film screening and discussion on men's issues, say perhaps about the struggle of developing a healthy sense of masculinity in modern culture. No one would criticize an event like that. People would only be upset if:

1. Security was forcibly prohibiting women from the event instead of just asking

2. The theater was exclusively men-only at all times

3. The topic of the event was implicitly negative towards women or other people.

I have never heard of an example men being criticized in a comparable situation, and although I'm sure it's happened I just don't think it's a widespread thing.

So it seems like you've answered your own questions. There are no white-only colleges because it is illegal, same as black-only colleges, and private businesses can discriminate against potential customers' sexuality in states where it isn't a protected class.

Such CRAZY double standards shown there.

fael wrote:

So it seems like you've answered your own questions. There are no white-only colleges because it is illegal, same as black-only colleges, and private businesses can discriminate against potential customers' sexuality in states where it isn't a protected class.

Such CRAZY double standards shown there.

You are not being intellectually honest.

We have colleges that advertise as "Historically Black". Imagine if any establishment advertised as being "historically white".

The wedding cake maker lost that case, son. The court explicitly rejected his claim that in refusing to decorate the cake with a celebratory message, he wasn't necessarily engaging in discrimination. (Remember, he even offered them other baked goods, including a "blank" cake.) Try again.

Not an Oppressed Man wrote:

fael wrote:

So it seems like you've answered your own questions. There are no white-only colleges because it is illegal, same as black-only colleges, and private businesses can discriminate against potential customers' sexuality in states where it isn't a protected class.

Such CRAZY double standards shown there.

You are not being intellectually honest.

We have colleges that advertise as "Historically Black". Imagine if any establishment advertised as being "historically white".

The wedding cake maker lost that case, son. The court explicitly rejected his claim that in refusing to decorate the cake with a celebratory message, he wasn't necessarily engaging in discrimination. (Remember, he even offered them other baked goods, including a "blank" cake.) Try again.

"Imagine if" - you are presenting conditions that don't exist to try to make your argument. What injustice is befalling our country that no universities are advertised as "historically white"? How is that bringing us down? Who is that harming? How harmful is it?

The ruling in the bakery case was that you can't discriminate against sexual orientation in Colorado. I'm afraid the baker lives in a state where that is considered discrimination against a protected class and is therefore illegal.

Not an Oppressed Man wrote:

We have colleges that advertise as "Historically Black". Imagine if any establishment advertised as being "historically white".

Umm, there really isn't any need to since a vast majority of colleges in the US are "historically white"

Not an Oppressed Male wrote:

I am not going to sit here and say that women have it better than men; they don't. This isn't mindless trolling. This IS, however, yet another example of the double standard in our society.

Can you imagine the outcry if there was a men-only screening of some war movie?

No, this isn't capital murder... but the parking tickets of what our society collectively tolerates are adding up.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2017/05/27/furor-over-women-only-wonder-woman-screenings-alamo-drafthouse-cinema/102235390/

Dude, get a life,

And this is a running board, cuck

WTFBBQ wrote:

Women and gays are whiny? Have you taken a look at our president's twitter account lately? I cannot think of a bigger crybaby than that sad excuse for an grown up man.

Maybe you're onto something here. There is a consistent trend of self-hating homosexuals trying to hard to proclaim their manliness as our president does.

In general I think it's pretty silly to whine about a double standard as the more privileged class. How do you expect the playing field to be evened out if there aren't occasional moves made to the preference of those under-privileged? Without action, nothing changes.

Way to fall right in the trap of the theater, OP. They just wanted faux outrage to draw attention to the event and you've given it to them.

BS wrote:

Not an Oppressed Man wrote:

We have colleges that advertise as "Historically Black". Imagine if any establishment advertised as being "historically white".

Umm, there really isn't any need to since a vast majority of colleges in the US are "historically white"

EXACTLY!!!

Everything in this country is historically white and historically male. If someone advertised they were historically white they be doing it for the very specific purpose of showing their white pride/racism. An African American dominant college is a rarity and should be advertised for the students looking for that experience in college.

Who's the sexist now huh?? wrote:

WTFBBQ wrote:

It's one theater, celebrating the fact that it's the first female superhero in her own film since... I can't remember there ever being another in the new millennium.

Umm.. Have you ever heard of Catwoman?

Catwoman was supposed to be a villain. I think they altered that for the movie but I never could get through it.

I haven't seen a Batgirl or Supergirl movie.

Also, sorry if someone else called this moron on it already but using the term "reverse-sexism" is idiotic. Sexism is prejudice or discrimination based on a person's gender, can be male, female or other. Women discriminating or being prejudiced against men is sexism in the same way men discriminating or being prejudiced against women is sexism.

BS wrote:

Not an Oppressed Man wrote:

We have colleges that advertise as "Historically Black". Imagine if any establishment advertised as being "historically white".

Umm, there really isn't any need to since a vast majority of colleges in the US are "historically white"

Not to mention that he's conveniently ignoring the reason that there are historically black colleges in the first place,ie, blacks were not allowed to enroll in white colleges so they had to start their own.

Not an Oppressed Man wrote:

We have colleges that advertise as "Historically Black". Imagine if any establishment advertised as being "historically white".

Given the history of our country, one can safely assume that any college that is not "Historically Black" is historically white. It would just waste people's time, breath and ink to state it explicitly.

Xanax wrote:

WTFBBQ wrote:

Women and gays are whiny? Have you taken a look at our president's twitter account lately? I cannot think of a bigger crybaby than that sad excuse for an grown up man.

Maybe you're onto something here. There is a consistent trend of self-hating homosexuals trying to hard to proclaim their manliness as our president does.

In general I think it's pretty silly to whine about a double standard as the more privileged class. How do you expect the playing field to be evened out if there aren't occasional moves made to the preference of those under-privileged? Without action, nothing changes.

Way to fall right in the trap of the theater, OP. They just wanted faux outrage to draw attention to the event and you've given it to them.

Why in the h3ll does that seem like a good idea to you? Evening out the playing field? In what manner?

Look, there are certain people who built our society by the inch and by the mile over the past hundred centuries or so. They are not defined by a race or a sex, but by a mindset of production and innovation. Now, we have people who, instead of trying to improve their own situation, expect for the government to "even out the playing field" for them? If you want something, you MAKE it, and hopefully you marginally improve society as a happy side effect.

Piss on "evening out the playing field". Daniel Hale Williams and Grace Harper would be appalled.

Actually, the very first category when creating a new thread is "Non Running".

Or, do you also think whitehouse.com is a government website?

Dennis T Reynolds wrote:

BS wrote:

Umm, there really isn't any need to since a vast majority of colleges in the US are "historically white"

EXACTLY!!!

Everything in this country is historically white and historically male. If someone advertised they were historically white they be doing it for the very specific purpose of showing their white pride/racism. An African American dominant college is a rarity and should be advertised for the students looking for that experience in college.

And only blacks (please don't say "African Americans" unless you are referring to actual naturalized immigrants) are entitled to that, right?

Again, I am not saying I think there SHOULD be a movement towards advertising anything as White, Male, or anything else. I AM saying that folks who resort to minority advertisements perpetuate our problems and keep us from a color/gender-blind society.

Dennis T Reynolds wrote:

Also, sorry if someone else called this moron on it already but using the term "reverse-sexism" is idiotic. Sexism is prejudice or discrimination based on a person's gender, can be male, female or other. Women discriminating or being prejudiced against men is sexism in the same way men discriminating or being prejudiced against women is sexism.

Fair enough on the "sexism" part.

However, I may be a lot of things, but a moron ain't one of them.

Not an Oppressed Man wrote:

Dennis T Reynolds wrote:

EXACTLY!!!

Everything in this country is historically white and historically male. If someone advertised they were historically white they be doing it for the very specific purpose of showing their white pride/racism. An African American dominant college is a rarity and should be advertised for the students looking for that experience in college.

And only blacks (please don't say "African Americans" unless you are referring to actual naturalized immigrants) are entitled to that, right?

Again, I am not saying I think there SHOULD be a movement towards advertising anything as White, Male, or anything else. I AM saying that folks who resort to minority advertisements perpetuate our problems and keep us from a color/gender-blind society.

Are you trolling or just stupid? The only reason there are "historically black colleges" is because historically that's the only place they were allowed to go to college. And they're not "blacks only" anyone can enroll.

Xanax wrote:

Not an Oppressed Man wrote:

We have colleges that advertise as "Historically Black". Imagine if any establishment advertised as being "historically white".

Given the history of our country, one can safely assume that any college that is not "Historically Black" is historically white. It would just waste people's time, breath and ink to state it explicitly.

Because blacks are the only minority in this country? That is pretty racist of you.

Where are the Historically Asian colleges? Oh, I forgot, there aren't any, because Asians are too busy getting degrees and good jobs from reputable (Howard excluded from that jab) universities.