Scully? Jody Foster's sci-fi roles?

I think they're there, they are just minor roles most of the time. Like the average lady doctor character in Event Horizon. Or Michelle Yeoh in Sunshine, she was a rather stereotypical botanist you only saw a couple of times.

I can think of a few scifi stories/novels where there are women scientists though, most particularly Red Mars.

The lady scientist in that shitty Doom movie...
The lady scientist in the Will Smith I Robot film...

With the Doom style of things I think it's a popular trope- when you have a very "Masculine", stupid action hero you'll usually always pair him with a sexy smart female of some sort.

Hmm, lets see, in Star Trek the next Generation they had that lady doctor... She was a scientist.
In Farscape, Zhan (blad, blue lady) was the scientist.

Eh, it's pretty common really.

There are plenty of women scientists, but by and large they are not really there to do science, but there to look hot and be a love interest for the hero, in a seconday supporting role.
Certainly female scientists seem a far more glamourous bunch then their male counter parts, if we believe movies.

harkovast
There are plenty of women scientists, but by and large they are not really there to do science, but there to look hot and be a love interest for the hero, in a seconday supporting role.

No. Only the ones in a certain sort of movie, like Doom or I Robot, and even then the other purpose they have is to be the "smart" one who does the thinking and the solving, while the male hero is the thick-headed "man of action".
In fact, that style of pairing supplants the older style in action fiction which was to have a trio: The stupid but brave male action hero, a smart cerebral but non-action older male scientist, and a stupid, timid, female love interest.- like inthe original Flash Gordon for example.

harkovast
Certainly female scientists seem a far more glamourous bunch then their male counter parts

That's probably because the male scientists mainly showed up in the older fiction, where they weren't supposed to be anyone's love interest (generally). The more recent female scientists in fiction combine the love interest role WITH the scientist role.

Some attractive male scientists I can think of in SciFi off the top of my head are Mr Spock from Star Treck, and that male scientist guy in Stargate who was nothing but a wool-headed himbo if I ever saw one.

Female scientists in SF go back to trying to give a reason to have a female around who wasn't a stowaway or a girl friend. The other stereotype role was the woman journalist which was borrowed from crime fiction. At least according to my very broad but unscientific survey of vintage movies.

In the classic This Island Earth the female lead is a scientist, in Earth versus the Flying Saucers she is a scientist and girl friend, The Thing from another World she's a journalist though that fits in with Howard Hawks' formula of tough female characters.

@ Harkovast, sounding like Bill Murray, at least it's better than being told you look like Bill Murray. :( So what if I have a vendetta against gophers...

Oh yeah. I believe there's sexism in Marvel and DC and Image comics. Sure, they're girls who read them and women who work on them but the general audience for them are 10 to 15 year old boys who aren't old enough to buy Hustler but are old enough for super hero comics with scantily clad heroines.
Outside of the occasional "Marvels" or "Kingdom Come" most superhero fare consists of costumes beating other costumes. Mostly, my comic reading (which is rare nowadays) consists of independants and the occasional manga.

I dont know how to react to that article.

Should I laugh because its so stupid? Or should I get angry at these feminists (gloria steinem is a CIA asset. look that up) because they are similar to communists and other insane cults who seek to rebuild the world from the ground up as they force things down other people's throats.

Want my take on that?

First of all, feminism is irrelevant in this day and age because women ALREADY are equal to men in terms of pay and all that. In fact, the law is ALREADY skewed in favor of women. This isn't the 1920s anymore.

And before you accuse me of being a woman hater, I'd make this clear. I dislike feminism and not women. I work at a job where I often have to deal with female clients. Based on talking to hundreds of them at bare minimum, I can tell that they are NOT part of some grand feminist conspiracy designed to enslave men. They are innocent victims being used as pawns in the grand plan of total enslavement. That is why I DO NOT HATE women.

They are victims too. Them and the feminists who are so dumb so as to believe that feminism is all about equality. Its all about destroying the family so that:
- the state can come in as the parent (as CPS takes the children away and hands them over to pedophiles.)

- crime can rise, therefore justifying a police state. With broken families comes potential criminals. Therefore justifying the need to hire more police and militarize them.

- The will of the male to resist tyranny gets broken down. The New World Order knows that the man derives his inspiration from his woman and his family. Take away that source of inspiration... you got a chekmate! You end up with a bunch of broken and weak and depressed men who would be hooked up on SSRI drugs (doubles up as profit for Big Pharma as well).

I can go on and on here about how WRONG the destruction of the family is on so many levels.


You wanna learn about REAL violence and abuse against women? Why dont you look into:
- mind control abuse (see Cathy O Brien, Arizona Wilder, etc.). Watching their video testimonies just made my blood boil and put tears into my eyes... as I cannot imagine that there are people who exist who are THAT evil and abusive toward women.

- police getting away with sexual harrassment. (See G-20 videos... Toronto, Canada is now officially the backward country known as the Demokratik PeopleSS Republik of Toronto). The reason police get away with that is because that is the only place in where you are allowed to be "manly".

- Gardasil vaccines. This is a CHEMICAL ATTACK against women. That is as bad or even worse than a rapist beating you and raping you.

Why don't you feminists make a big stink about those REAL issues?

Instead of ninnying around as to how women are portrayed in comic books / anime / manga, etc.

What is so wrong about big boobs and nice legs and wearing high heeled shoes?!? What is so wrong about a beautiful woman being some kind of action-girl? In fact, the MRA (men's rights activists. Male equivalent of feminism) groups are even complaining as to why beating up men is portrayed as sexy in fiction while beating up women is portrayed the way it is -- really bad.

And you feminists aren't even happy over the fact that women are now portrayed in fiction as dominant and beautiful?!? There is something wrong with you. Get your head screwed on straight and focus on REAL issues that harm women.


/end of rant

Uhm, I don't know, kyupol.

Domestic violence is still pretty prevalent in a lot of countries; Muslim countries, the extreme Christian right and other groups still are repressing the rights of women to decide upon their personal, political and sexual behavior; objectification of women on the media is still an issue.

The same examples that you mention as violence against women justify the existence of the Feminist Movement, even if you don't agree with their stand on certain topics.

Yes, Women Rights had advanced a great deal all these years. That doesn't mean that the things are the way they should be.

There might be a legal equality, but is yet to be achieved a social equality.

I strongly disagree with the borderline misandric stand of a certain group of Feminists, but I highly doubt that they represent the whole stand of the movement.

Oh, and the MRA, while they could have legit claims about issues like the male role in parenting, possible abuses of the divorce settlements and certain portraits of male on media, for the most part they tend to sound like a bunch of whinny douchebags that want to go back to the times where women's sole role was tend family, and most importantly, men.

Now, there are WAY MORE important issues to discuss when it comes to sexism, but the thing is that we are discussing here is sexism on comics.

And the thing is, yeah, by itself, there is nothing wrong with a character with a hot body, but when it comes to HOW that body is represented, HOW the character is portrait, HOW is the character used. Women aren't being portrayed as strong and dominant when it really matters. In the storytelling.

You think that Scarlett Johanson beating the shit out of a bunch of security guards on Iron Man 2 was done to represent her solely as a strong and dominant character?

Hell no! That was just to show her in a tight black catsuit with a nice cleavage, stretching her legs, get in rather sexy positions and show how HOT that woman is from EVERY. SINGLE. ANGLE. You could argue that the objectification goes both ways there. And no, I don't see it like that. I would loved a little bit more of development on Johanson's character? yes, but I think that there was a good job having an interesting character that also looks great. Besides, it wasn't Black Widow's movie, it was Iron Man's.

What brings me to the real deal here. The way man look like in comics is the proof that there is a double standard when it comes superheroes looks.

Of course that characters like Batman and Superman show physiques that by our modern conventions of beauty and aesthetics are perfect. You cannot be a supertrained martial artist crime fighter and don't have a six pack to show off.

But the KEY difference between Batman and Wonder Womans unattainable physical standards is that there is no sexual intent or titillation on Batman. Same cannot be said about female characters as a general.

If a woman has spend her entire life devoted to become a fighting machine, there is a good chance that she will end with an astounding body!

But when her only purpose on the story is show her tits and ass and be a plot device to advance a male hero's storyline, then IT IS sexist!

Now, lets forget about the activism stand point and see it from a marketing point of view.

The "women don't read comics" is a myth. It's been a myth from a long time. By not catering their tastes, they are losing an enormous profit.

And it's not about "neutering" male superheroes, because a lot of women love to see Superman beating the crap out of Darkseid. It's about showing women as something more than eyecandy, convenient plot devices or obvious positive action to seem "politically correct", but show them as true characters.

There is nothing wrong with big boobs and nice legs BY ITSELF. There is a lot of wrong when the character isn't nothing beyond that.

We COULD focus on more important or more prevalent women issues, but that doesn't mean that their portrait in a cultural media that has a great deal of impact on society couldn't (or shouldn't) be discussed.

Oh, and the crisis of the traditional family isn't the fault of any social or political movement, but the lack of empathy, sense of commitment and responsibility and capability to understanding of a lot of men AND women who can't or don't want to see beyond their own needs.

Dark Pascual
Of course that characters like Batman and Superman show physiques that by our modern conventions of beauty and aesthetics are perfect. You cannot be a supertrained martial artist crime fighter and don't have a six pack to show off.

Without the six pack, Batman is nothing!

I strongly disagree with the borderline misandric stand of a certain group of Feminists, but I highly doubt that they represent the whole stand of the movement.

Oh, and the MRA, while they could have legit claims about issues like the male role in parenting, possible abuses of the divorce settlements and certain portraits of male on media, for the most part they tend to sound like a bunch of whinny douchebags that want to go back to the times where women's sole role was tend family, and most importantly, men.

So Feminists are better than MRA? I've read a bunch of their articles and posts on their message boards. They look all the same to me.

In both camps we got moderates who only want equality.

In both camps we got the extremist types who totally hate the other gender and even give spiritual reasons so as to hate the other gender.

The MRAs use the Bible (1 timothy 2:12) and Koran (self explanatory... Muslim women are oppressed in Muslim states) to justify it.

And the feminists use this whole New-Age philosophy about the "divine feminine goddess" and go into this whole concept about feminine energy being loving, caring, nurturing and SUPERIOR and masculine energy being this evil domineering hateful energy that is all about death and destruction and everything wrong including your clogged toilet.

This gender hatred by the way plays into the whole eugenics plan of global de-population (See Dr. Eric Pianka, John P. Holdren, Charles Galton Darwin, etc.). (offtopic: overpopulation is a MYTH to begin with. But even if you believe that myth as fact, what about the suppressed technology that could virtually eliminate global poverty by 90% or so.)

What brings me to the real deal here. The way man look like in comics is the proof that there is a double standard when it comes superheroes looks.

I see your point here is the fact that women tend to be judged on looks.

That's the way things really are. The woman (with some few exceptions) IS the more attractive sex. That is just a fact.

However, you fail to take into a consideration that as a culture, we are taught how to be promiscuous and flaunt one's PHYSICAL appearance. Just look at Much Music (aka sex education channel) and see for yourself. Then you got women's magazines like cosmopolitan and others showing off pretty women on their covers as well as tons of articles about how to look pretty -- what make up to buy, how to fix your hair, etc.

Based on going through tons and tons of such women's magazines, I can tell that the women aren't being taught how to look pretty for the sake of attracting a mate... but more for the sake of attaining some sort of high social status or something that is directly proportionate to their PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS.

The point? Women are taught to value physical attractiveness and flaunt it by the very culture itself. It is something ingrained even as little girls when they play with their barbie dolls and fantasize about being some kind of beautiful princess or something.

So how do you correct that? Do we teach young girls not to value attractiveness from an early age? Do we teach them that your beauty is ONLY to be seen by ONLY YOUR HUSBAND and not to be flaunted. Therefore should we teach women that covering one's face like what they do in Islamic countries is the right thing to do?

And as a comic artist, I do tend to put my female characters in sexually provocative poses . Does that necessarily mean I'm sexist as an author? What if that is really her personality? If you read my comic, Lucia is a promiscuous character therefore that pose is an accurate representation of her personality. And I'm telling you. I used that image in a project wonderful ad and this is what got me the most number of clicks. So from a marketing standpoint, the sexually provocative pose is key.

And if I portray a female character nude in the coverpage does that necessarily mean I'm sexist? What does that particular cover tell you about the relationship between those two characters? If you read my comic, Claudita is the entity behind those wings. She's the reason for saving Eman's life as well as making him take a few levels in badass. She is nude because she is in a spirit form and clothes do not have a spirit.

Oh, and the crisis of the traditional family isn't the fault of any social or political movement, but the lack of empathy, sense of commitment and responsibility and capability to understanding of a lot of men AND women who can't or don't want to see beyond their own needs.

I agree to an extent.

But that is what they want you to believe. If that is the case, have you ever wondered why the fashion in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, 2000s, have a different look? Meanwhile if you go back to ancient civilizations, why did the fashion last for hundreds of years? And look at the Islamic culture. Why are the men and women still wearing the dress that their civilization was wearing since the old times?

It is because the culture in the West is controlled and manipulated by the corporate controlled media. Go research what corporations own the media and see for yourself.

The culture in the West was made dysfunctional BY DESIGN.

Its original Christian roots and value of liberty that is responsible for the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and introducing Liberty to the world has been replaced by this decadent, corrupt, superficial, and boot-licking anti-life culture (that I can go on and on paragraph after paragraph explaining it). BY DESIGN.

I know that is hard for you to believe. But please read the books of Edward Bernays, Aldous Huxley, George Orwell, Charles Galton Darwin, Adolf Hitler, Bertrand Russell, Zbignew Brzezinski, etc.

And then tell me that everything happens by mere happenstance randomness...

Kyupol I am honestly not sure if you are just trolling this topic to get attention.
A divine feminine goddess? What are you talking about?
Nobody here mentioend such a concept.
You are building a strawman to fight which bares no relation to any of the views expressed here.
By that logic, I will say you worship a werewolf you think lives under your bed. See? We can all make up nonsense about other people, it doesn't make it a valid arguement.

The idea that our society has achieved some kind of perfect equality and sexism no longer exists is so laughably silly that I am again forced to question if you are kidding.
Domestic violence and rape are still extremely prevelant in modern society. And I dont just mean in some oppressive muslim state, I mean in Europe and America, right now.
You actually acknolwedge that women are objectified in the media and only judged on their appearance, so I am confused how you managed to fail to take the next logical step of saying "...and this is a bad thing."
But then, I guess I am just a pawn of the corporate plan to break down the male will to resist and destroy family values (cause viewing women as objects is ESSENTIAL to a successful family unit!) and start a communist super state run by Obama and Hitler... so I could be wrong!

But your final section really blew my mind-

Kyupol
The culture in the West was made dysfunctional BY DESIGN.

Its original Christian roots and value of liberty that is responsible for the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and introducing Liberty to the world has been replaced by this decadent, corrupt, superficial, and boot-licking anti-life culture (that I can go on and on paragraph after paragraph explaining it). BY DESIGN.

I know that is hard for you to believe. But please read the books of Edward Bernays, Aldous Huxley, George Orwell, Charles Galton Darwin, Adolf Hitler, Bertrand Russell, Zbignew Brzezinski, etc.

And then tell me that everything happens by mere happenstance randomness...

It's stuff like this that makes me think you are just trolling. You are hijacking this thread away from discussion about the depiction of women into the media into your usual conspiracy theory about whats wrong with the world, which you seem to do wiht every thread you get involved in. No one said "everything is happenstance randomness" so why are you trying to refute this? This is just another strawman opponent for you that has NOTHING to do with this conversation and everything to do with you grinding some weird axe you always start grinding when ever you post on the forums. All this "open your eyes! The truth is out there!" crap is a load of psuedo-intellectual rambling.
If you want to talk about conspiracy theories and whats wrong with modern society or what books you want us to to read or how people say you are a terrorist, why not start a topic about these things instead of trying to shoe horn them into every conversation?

kyupol
But that is what they want you to believe. If that is the case, have you ever wondered why the fashion in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, 2000s, have a different look? Meanwhile if you go back to ancient civilizations, why did the fashion last for hundreds of years? And look at the Islamic culture. Why are the men and women still wearing the dress that their civilization was wearing since the old times?

Though I will not dispute your whole thesis, this one particular point is bogus. Any study of the history of costume shows a change in fashion every generation and at times even by the decade in the Middle Ages It was much slower than today because communication was slower but there was a fashionable ebb and flo over time. Fashion changed noticably just during the lifetime of Elizabeth I. There were periodic fashion "magazines" And this is all before the Illuminati and Free Masons but maybe it was all controlled by the Priory of Scion and the Catholic Church? Hardly the Church was steadfast against changing fashion which usually involved necklines and codpieces.

Ancients all look the same only because we don't have enough examples of depictions of their dress to tell the changing fashions but they were there. One of the most extensively documented change in costume was with the Egyptians and anyone familar with it can tell time period by looking at the clothes, there were even "classical revivals". Even with all those panels we still don't have an extensive enough record to chronicle anything more than fashion changes by centuries.

You also have to remember that for the ancients they did not have the variety of fabric and weave Europe even had in the later Middle Ages. There is only so much you can do without patterned weaving and the limited dyes of the Mediterreanean world. The Northern Europeans wer quite fashionable, but again with so few images and educated guess work dating can't really chronicle changes in fashion.

Bravo1102- Yeah right! Ancient peoples had fashions too? Pfft! Likely story! What a wild and nonsensical notion!
Isn't it more likely that international big businesss is manipulating feminists in a global conspiracy to rob us of freedom?
I think you need to consider your points more carefully before jumping in with unfounded ideas based only on these so-called facts and evidence. Who needs those when you have good, old fashioned, reliable wild accusations and speculation?

kyupol
So Feminists are better than MRA? I've read a bunch of their articles and posts on their message boards. They look all the same to me.

I think that as a whole, Feminist claims have a more legit ground than the MRA ones, at least for the most part.

As I stated, I agree with the MRA desire of a better deal on the issue of divorce settlements, the right of visitation, men portrait on media (specially when it comes to sexual crimes commited by women against men), and how men should have a more prevalescent role on the raising of children.

But they usually come across as, well, I hate to use the clichè but, chauvinistic pigs threatend by the idea of women being independent enough to not need men in their lifes unleast THEY want to. And they come with the same confrontational tone than the Feminazis, which doesn't help their stand at all.

And both the "Divine Feminity" and "God says men rules" are both different flavors of a big plate of bullshit. Equality at the law doesn't have to do with your spiritual beliefs.

That's the way things really are. The woman (with some few exceptions) IS the more attractive sex. That is just a fact.

Yeah. From a heterosexual male perspective, of course women are a much more attractive sex.

But as I said, isn't a matter ot attractiveness but also of HOW is this portrayed and dealed with.

kyupol
Based on going through tons and tons of such women's magazines, I can tell that the women aren't being taught how to look pretty for the sake of attracting a mate... but more for the sake of attaining some sort of high social status or something that is directly proportionate to their PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS.

If women aim for a better look for themesleves and for their own liking, then go for it. It's a lot more healthier than girls altering her looks and personality to atract some guy who isn't mature enough to see beyond boobs.

I think that people despite the gender should be teached to keep themsleves healthy, be responsible of their choices and that body image isn's a matter of how other see them, but how they see themselves.

As your pointing, we as a culture are still very sexist, because us men are way more visual creatures than women, so it all boils down to be a visual culture and taking on consideration just what WE as men WANT. But as a civilized (in theory) beings, we should be able to go beyond our primal impulses. The "it's how we are wired" is just a lame excuse to be a lazy prick and refuse to change.

How we correct that? remembering that people are something beyond the good looks.
Is not about NOT value atractiveness at all, but give it the proper value in the scheme of things and more related to be healthy and feel good with oneself. No more, no less.

Besides, as a society, people isn't concerned with people being promiscuous as long as they are boys.

The "If a man sleeps around a lot is DA MAN, if a girl sleeps around a lot is a whore" double standard is still on play this days. And I still found it repulsive.

kyupol
And as a comic artist, I do tend to put my female characters in sexually provocative poses. Does that necessarily mean I'm sexist as an author? What if that is really her personality? If you read my comic, Lucia is a promiscuous character therefore that pose is an accurate representation of her personality. And I'm telling you. I used that image in a project wonderful ad and this is what got me the most number of clicks. So from a marketing standpoint, the sexually provocative pose is key.

And if I portray a female character nude in the coverpage does that necessarily mean I'm sexist? What does that particular cover tell you about the relationship between those two characters? If you read my comic, Claudita is the entity behind those wings. She's the reason for saving Eman's life as well as making him take a few levels in badass. She is nude because she is in a spirit form and clothes do not have a spirit.

If your only reason to have a female character and put her on sexual poses is to bring yourself more hits, then yes, you're sexist, because you're objectifying a woman and stripping her from what makes her a person and making her just a decoration.

Context is important on the visual portrait of a character as it is the intent as artist and author. I'm not against nudity on any media, but it should have a purpose beyond the obvious tittilation.

Again, and I can't stress this enough. Big boobs, great ass, amazing legs, lovely face. All this is great and isn't bad by itself. But when the character isn't nothing beyond the physical traits, when is treated like a disposable plot element, when is brutalized and denigrated for the sole purpose of advance the male hero's plot, then it's sexist.

Kyupol I am honestly not sure if you are just trolling this topic to get attention.
A divine feminine goddess? What are you talking about?
Nobody here mentioend such a concept.

I am talking about the SPIRITUAL reason behind feminism. Go to amazon.com and go search "divine feminine" for yourself and see the results for yourself. You will see tons of books about the entire philosophy that the feminine energy is superior to the masculine energy.

One such book even had this whole "aliens are here to help us" as a cover for pushing this dangerous agenda. Its one of Barbara Marciniak's books about the Pleiadians. Somewhere in the book, there is a section that talks about the healing power of menstrual blood as well as how the earth is in such a terrible state because of the masculine energy that is all about suppression and fear and hate and war and everything negative. Feminine energy is loving and divine and beautiful.

You do not know what Feminism is really about if you do not look into their SPIRITUALITY.

You do not know what Feminism is really about if you haven't been a victim of gender discrimination by one of such people. I was refused a room to rent because I am a single male and I was accused of being a potential rapist because of some weird stuff that was allegedly detected in my aura. It made me so mad. But instead of being confrontational, I successfully hid my rage so as to be able to grill this man-gina on his philosophy (I'm still thinking of pursuing legal action for discrimination against him). And lo and behold.

He believes that for a man to be "good", a man must be more feminine. A man must soak up more of this "divine feminine" energy so as to get spiritual balance. And an effeminate man is supposedly a "higher evolved being" because he radiates more of that divine feminine energy. I apparently am an un-balanced, un-evolved being because I am a real man.

Stop living under a rock. Go research the spiritual nature of feminism. Dont just believe the incessant propaganda being force-fed to you in the media, educational institutions, etc.

The idea that our society has achieved some kind of perfect equality and sexism no longer exists is so laughably silly that I am again forced to question if you are kidding.
Domestic violence and rape are still extremely prevelant in modern society. And I dont just mean in some oppressive muslim state, I mean in Europe and America, right now.

Domestic violence in both male and females do exist. But why is Western society only looking at male violence against women under a microscope and not the other way around?

Why is:
Man beating woman = OMG!!! EVIL!!! END OF THE WORLD!!! AAAAAGGGHH!!!
Woman beating man = YOU GO GIRL!!! HE IS PROBABLY BEING BEATEN BECAUSE HE DESERVES IT!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFAd4YdQks

I never said that we have reached an utopia where domestic violence is non-existent. You are the one building a strawman.

You actually acknolwedge that women are objectified in the media and only judged on their appearance, so I am confused how you managed to fail to take the next logical step of saying "...and this is a bad thing."

Yes that's a bad thing. And it happens to both genders. Not just woman.

The Feminists suffer a severe case of cognitive dissonance.

Why is:
Women being portrayed as dominant and beautiful in the media = Bad!!! Because you shouldnt show the beauty of women because that is objectifying them!

Women being portrayed as damsels in distress with long dress that cover them up = Bad. Because women are suppose to be strong and hold up on their own! It is liberating to burn your bra and show your breasts in a protest because that is a sign of defying the old social norms where woman is so oppressed!!!

What do they really want?!?

Feminists seem to oppose:
- Portraying beautiful women in the media... even if its about her being some sort of dominatrix beating up hordes of men with no sweat. Isn't feminism about strong women? Now you got a strong dominatrix, shouldn't you be happy?

- Organized religion because of the "oppressive" gender roles they put. Meanwhile, alot of these organized religions worship woman in their iconography one way or the other.

- Porn because it is objectifying women. My view on porn is that it is another tool that is designed to take away the ability to bond and promote promiscuity... which leads in the long run to shallowness and the destruction of human relationships... which ultimately follow the Eugenics plan of population control. Then again, if I think that porn is so bad, why do I use provocative imagery in my signature and my banner ads? That is my method of hijacking the system. In fact, I got a "1" rating because some idiot thought that my comic is porn... only to his disappointment.

It's stuff like this that makes me think you are just trolling. You are hijacking this thread away from discussion about the depiction of women into the media into your usual conspiracy theory about whats wrong with the world, which you seem to do wiht every thread you get involved in.

I am NOT trolling. I really believe what I am saying.

My bad. I did veer off-topic. However, based on at least hundreds of hours of studying this, I couldnt help but point out how its all inter-related.

To summarize my point about feminism:
Feminism is an ideology designed to destroy the family through manipulating the woman into hating the man. It is not about equality. It is about destruction of gender relations.

Same thing goes with the male equivalent known as MRA (Men's Rights Activists) and PUA (Pick Up Artists).
The entire cycle of Feminism vs MRA / PUA is a cycle of hate that feeds itself. I have arrived at that conclusion after hundreds of hours of reading feminist, MRA, and PUA websites.

The "If a man sleeps around a lot is DA MAN, if a girl sleeps around a lot is a whore" double standard is still on play this days. And I still found it repulsive.

You have a valid point. I am not discounting that. However the argument here is THE LAW THE LAW THE LAW. Name me ONE sexist western law that is biased in favor of men. All over, we have political correctness that gives men the short end of the stick.

Look up "Violence Against Women Act" and "Employment Equity Act" among others.

What happened to the "equality" that the feminists want? Are they more equal than others?

This thread is nuts, Hark and Ozone seemed to have brought some chuckles though.

Anyway anytime anything/anyone says something like... "you just don't get it!" you know there argument is going to be terrible and they will resort the that ad nauseum.

Sexism in marvel and Dc, why target these? I mean they are big shining targets but probably less guilty of it than smaller publishers and webcomicss.

Sexism swings both ways, the difference is most don't see it as sexist when it is women being sexist.

@Kyupol, the bible maybe largely responsible for sexism, the story of Adam and Eve, damn.

Kyupol....okay so you really ARE just trolling!
Right! Got ya!
Feminism is a spiritual thing? Do you even know what feminism IS?
You spoke to one stoned out hippy talking nonsense about spirit energy and you think thats what feminism is?
Honestly, I dont even think that encounter with the "man-gina" even happened.
It is just more trolling nonsense or conspiracy nonsense, or some combination of the two.

Yes there is violence by women towards men and yes that is just as bad as any other violence, but to pretend that such violence is anything like as wide spread as violence against women by men is so laughably silly that I ma again forced to believe you are either will fully ignorant or trying to troll this thread.

In either case, this discussion is turning into a farce, and your arguments are just becoming more and more bonkers.

Obviously feminists have sent too much female spirit energy into my brain so I cant understand the evil conspiracy that is taking over the world.

The idea that all feminists are man hating is so childish and simplistic it boggles the mind. Are you reading this off prompting cards being held by rush limbaugh?

You claim society now favours women over men, but you completely over look that legal equality and actual equality are entirely separate.
Rape is still common place, as is domestic violence towards women and the depiction of women as nothing more than sex objects in the media.
What you are saying is the equivilant of "well we just passed a law against racism, therefore there is no longer any racial inequality and anyone who says different is clearly a brainwashed puppet!"
In fact....that is EXACTLY what you are saying, I just subbed in the word racism instead of sexism.

I dont know whether to leave you and your conspiracy theory troll fest alone, or keeping posting to see how crazy you get.

Tell me more about the eugenics plan that porn is a part of...really, go ahead, I want to hear all about it.

Hark porn is actually a product of Christianity. It is part of a much larger plan that includes aids and just about every STD.

Let me explain, STDs were created as the first biological weapon to wipe out the homosexuals and other sexual deviants. There is also a reason it started in africa, everyone knows that blacks are more like animals than people. Despite improvements in the biological weapons the population of the homosexual and other sexual deviants continued to rise.
To speed the spread of the weapons the church created porn, and later the internet.
THIS IS ALL SOLID FACT!!!!


Honest, I didn't just make up an ridiculous load of nonsense just like that.
And no I don't believe any of the things ion that post before anyone calls me a racist or homophobe.

Kyupol is a DD national treasure.
I'm glad we have aleast one here :)

...well, I'm also glad we don't have more actually.

Genejoke
Hark porn is actually a product of Christianity. It is part of a much larger plan that includes aids and just about every STD.

Let me explain, STDs were created as the first biological weapon to wipe out the homosexuals and other sexual deviants. There is also a reason it started in africa, everyone knows that blacks are more like animals than people. Despite improvements in the biological weapons the population of the homosexual and other sexual deviants continued to rise.
To speed the spread of the weapons the church created porn, and later the internet.
THIS IS ALL SOLID FACT!!!!

You're mixing AIDs and Herpes in with other earlier STDs.

Syphylis was actually invented as a secret weapon by the Carrib indians to keep other indians from eating them in their cannibal wars before the Europeans arrived. Sadly as a biological weapon it wasn't effective on the Europeans themselves taking entirely too long to kill unlike influenza with Native Americans.

Gonorrhea was developed a demented scientist named Yakub right after he invented white people a million years ago.

Also SOLID FACT because I believe it. My faith in my belief trumps all evidence to the contrary so matter how well proven by actual evidence. Thanks Harkovast for helping me to see the light.

The whole feminist spiritual thing started with Womanspirit Rising an anothology published in the early 1970s. One of the better essays was "What ever Happened to God the Mother?" by Elaine Pagels who went on the write the seminal work The Gnostic Gospels Another seminal work is The Chalice and the Blade which I first read in 1986.

Remember black helicopters aren't really black. :evil:

The amount of truth on this thread is so massive it is giving me a nose bleed.

harkovast
The amount of truth on this thread is so massive it is giving me a nose bleed.

That time of the month again? :(

Yes, I have truth related nose periods.
They are caused by big business working with the catholic church to mind control people with flouride in drinking water (obviously!)

On the plus side, this thread did get me to crack open my Psychology textbook to make sure that "confirmation bias" meant what I thought it did.

OK, here's what we've got: the Rand Corporation, in conjunction with the saucer people, under the supervision of the reverse vampires, are forcing our parents to go to bed early in a fiendish plot to eliminate the meal of dinner. We're through the looking glass, here, people...

harkovast
The amount of truth on this thread is so massive it is giving me a nose bleed.

It's gotta be that mind control machine the government has. ;)

Zerogee until I am sure that machine is turned off, my tin foil hat is staying on!

Are you sure the tin foil companies aren't in on the scheme, too?

Tin foil companies are in on it as the formula of the metal in the foil was changed back in the 1980s so now the brain control rays penetrate. That's also when they started with the contrails to get around the tin foil hats.

Harkovast you'd better use handkerchiefs for your nose bleed as most facial tissues are imbued with chemical contaminants to further the mind control. That's why I have a stash of cotton handkerchiefs passed down to me by my grandfather that I only wash in well water.

The truth is on whatever website that fits your preconcieved notions best. Never read anything that could cause you to question your deeply held beliefs because it's all disinformation from MiniTru.

I believe that the system favors women from what I've seen. My best friend Jared lost his job recently because a girl at work told the boss he sexually harrassed her. He didn't... She was angry at him and decided she didn't want him around anymore. Why was she angry? Because he refused to sleep with her after a random meeting at a bar. Jared had worked that job for many years and he was really good at it. He lost it simply because a woman didn't like him. There will always be violent crimes and people who hate women these things are not an arguement against a system that is set up against men. Racism and sexism will always exist because there will always be evil. In the USA they have been suppressed as much as possible.

A note Harkovasts interest in this issue seems to be very personal. What's your vendetta? Why do you hate your own gender?