|
|
|
|
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/8/2007 12:46:19 PM | Scratch and Sinew, you are clearly not aware of the absurdity of your posts to this thread; both sermonize the virtues of staying on topic when, ironically, they are the only posts to this thread which are off topic.
The number of variant definitions that have come up over the course of this thread's being open suggests to me that the meaning of "b*tch" is not static -- it has changed, is changing, and differs from person to person. I obviously can't agree, therefore, with its being analogous to "Machiavellian", because I disagree with "b*tch" as having a fixed and inarguable meaning.
Interesting viewpoint and very handy if anyone ever suggests you’re using a word out of context; you can always respond with “Aaah! Yes! But that’s only if you subscribe to the antiquated view that words have definitions”. You might run into a spot of bother with more conventional people who like to use dictionaries and the like and I can see the good people at Webster’s and Oxford being a little put out but you can always dismiss them as conformist naysayers.
How about: a self proclaimed feminist magazine titled "****"?
Here is where you can subscribe to it:http://www.****magazine.com/about.shtml
Do you accept that as evidence that the embracement of the word "bitch" as a badge of honor got it's start among feminists?
Unfortunately I’m not aware of any publication called **** and I see you haven’t even flagged the actual article, so I’m gonna have to say no! I don’t accept it.
Now whilst I appreciate that, in your world, an obscure publication may be the pinnacle of authority but in the world of scholars it doesn’t quite cut it as incontrovertible evidence. Most people hold deference for trusted and established organisations such as the European Women’s Lobby, Feminist Majority Foundation, National Organisation for Women, National Action Committee on the Status of Women, to name but a few.
But I can see where you might think a tabloid rag would be considered their contemporary.
To further illustrate, I’m going to have to refer to that pesky dictionary again!! I’ve tried being an anarchist but what can I tell you? I’m a slave to that archaic practice of assigning fixed definitions to words – blame it on my conventional education.
Feminist: somebody who believes in the need to secure rights and opportunities for women equal to those of men, or somebody who works to secure these rights and opportunities.
I can’t quite imagine the Feminist Movement identifying usurping the inference of a vulgarity as a pressing objective.
In fact, I suspect active feminists would consider accrediting the rebranding of “b*tch” to them as derisive. I very much doubt they would appreciate remarkable achievements such as securing women’s right to vote, equal pay, criminalizing domestic violence, sexual harassment legislation, pro choice and breaking the glass ceiling being ranked alongside en vogue trends.
And are feminists not, by definition, people who get upset about the perceived oppression of women?
More than a little insulting wouldn’t you say? Feminists abhor the actual oppression of women. I’m fairly certain they don’t concern Themselves with the ”perceived” oppression of women and I certainly wouldn’t say they get ”upset” about it.
That is how I made my "leap" to assuming they embraced the word as a way to take it away froom men who they perceive as trying to oppress them. Cn you put forth a better explanation?
Well I don’t claim to have your apparent, staggering acumen but I’m gonna give it a go.....
How about women are not so concerned about the labels oppressive men seek to attach to them and are indifferent about their attempts to denigrate them. Progressive Women will no longer pander to the inflated egos of chauvinists. If that means they are labelled b*tches, then so be it. In fact the exasperation steeped in the label only serves to make it more amusing.
Those women think men who call women "bitches" are putting them down, in your words, "because they are not submissive or
docile."
I am saying that, the term is being applied to some of them not because they are "not submissive or docile"; but rather, in some cases, because they are obnoxious and aggressive. And they fail to realize that, because they think anyone applying the term to them is merely being sexist, and they (the women being called bitches)
can't really be at fault.
The viewpoint of an exasperated sexist it would seem. I submit that those women, who are referred to as b*tches, are merely casting off the shackles of male domination much to the vexation of the thwarted dominator.
As I have already stated, if being a b*tch means not enduring unwanted male attention then so be it. If it means not being a compliant minion of chauvinists then I’m prepared to go so far as legally changing my name to Rampant B*tch!!! “Rampant” to my friends but “Ms B*tch” to you!!
Don't try to have a battle of wits with me unless you are certain you are armed.
Yes! Quite! Well, admittedly I’m not the Mensa candidate you claim to be but do think it ill-advised to claim to be a wit.
Was that simple enough?
I would have thought a Mensa candidate would be able to keep track of the chronology of posts but then I’m not a genius like you so what do I know. For the record, my message 42 was posted prior to your edit to message 41. There was no need for your subsequent explanatory post save to provide me with the opportunity to, once again, discredit your feeble logic.
| |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/8/2007 1:51:50 PM | Its ok if you call me a **** it doesnt offend me to me it is an abbreviated meaning of two things:
B=beautiful
I=Individual in
T=total
C=control of
H=herself
and
B=built
I=incredibly
T=too
C=cause
H=hard ons
lmao
 | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/8/2007 8:42:17 PM | | i don't know i mean me personaly have never had any problem with being called a b*tch. i stand up for what i believe in and i speak my mind. i dont see why so many people have a problem with that but a lot do. in a way i guess you could say that people calling me a b*tch has in a way become my badge of honor so to speak, but if i didn't say what was on my mind people would walk all over me all the time. most people don't like it when people walk all over them, so why is it such a bad thing when a woman defends herself? i've learned to live with this title, mainly because i've had no choice too. there's also i feel a reason for those people giving woman that title too. i think that its probably because they dont feel that they can stand up for themselves and they are trying to bring the women that can do so down with them. but like i said its just my opinion...people can think what ever they want to think! | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/9/2007 1:41:22 AM | For the life of me I will never understand why some women proudly call themselves this. IF you are in control of yourself so to speak, I am sure you can find some OTHER word to use....maybe even one that is in fact, actually positive sounding.
No matter how you look at it, its an insult for crying out loud.....no matter how well you defend yourself, stand up for yourself, etc....you take a step back when you refer to yourselves with this particular word......
To me hearing a woman call herself this is a TURN OFF.
Just my own personal opinion. | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/9/2007 2:22:08 AM | Scully, re-stating your original point and labelling smith's view as 'sexist' are not valid counterarguments.
Women in group A think that they are being called ****es simply because they are not submissive and docile.
Women in group A fail to realize that some of them are being called ****es because of their nasty behavior. When they decide that they are being called ****es because sexist men are resenting their not acting submissive and docile, then they have no motivation to examine their own behavior to see if they are being called ****es because they are acting mean and nasty.
Please explain how the logic in the above is flawed.
Is it not true the labelling of men who call them '****es' as sexist removed all need to examine their own behaviour? Is it not possible then that they *are* actually acting mean and nasty sometimes? | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/9/2007 3:28:43 AM | there is a male equivalent, as some blokes like to say "oh I'm such an evil bsstard *grin*" or "I'm a sick puppy" or "I'm heartless". I've heard my students say things like this, and my best friend who is as gentle as a lamb and has the softest heart, likes to say that he is cruel and mean and evil and then do the "mwhahaha" laugh.
An older woman at work who didn't care if people called her a bitch and was even quite proud of it -- she was a very strong and argumentative woman with high standards and a real genuine care for doing the best for her students and fighting the stupid managers who wouldn't know a student if they fell over one. I really admired her, she was standing up for what she believed in and she impressed people with her strength and intelligence and didn't care if people hated her because she believed in what she was doing. I can see that for her 'bitch' meant all of that -- she was happy to be disliked by ignorant people and wouldn't take any crap from anyone.
I feel at least as passionately about the work we do but I doubt anyone will ever think me a bitch and hope they don't, because whilst I admire the older woman's strength and command, I don't like to be commanding. I get called soft most often, but I influence people in my own way. I would rather not have to fight with people and I don't really see any value in it as it only alienates them further from your beliefs and makes them closed off and defensive.
Bitchiness as a positive quality is just another name for strength and the ability to dominate people and fight your corner and not care what people think of you. I still think it's a horrible word for that but it captures the "don't care" attitude held to those in opposition. | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/9/2007 3:58:10 AM | There is a very fine line between not putting up with crap, and acting obnoxious and rude.
The problem with the title of '****', is that it implies the latter is okay so long as you're doing the former. It blurs the boundaries such that someone can act rude/obnoxious, yet believe they're just 'not putting up with crap' since it all fits under the '****' title.
There is a difference between the person you admire for their courage and strength of character, and someone you dislike for their stubbornness and lack of compassion.
When you make no attempt to understand someone else's position or feelings and simply pursue your own convictions, you're acting like a **** (or a 'prick' perhaps if you're a bloke). People will resent you.
When you understand and respect other people's positions and feelings, and act accordingly but without being manipulated or compromising your own beliefs, you are not putting up with crap. People will respect you. | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/9/2007 7:37:40 AM | I suppose it all comes down to every persons definition of obnoxious and rude vs when someone is being called a ****. You may find certain character traits unappealing where as someone else may not find them all that offensive. So that is where I see a flaw in Smiths argument regarding re-evaluating behaviour.
The point is that there are many words that can be inserted here and the same argument will apply.
"When you make no attempt to understand someone else's position or feelings and simply pursue your own convictions, you're acting like a **** (or a 'prick' perhaps if you're a bloke). People will resent you."
I find this argument interesting as again it all comes down to the individual, if you are one of those people who cant agree to disagree you may agree with this statement. However if you are an individual who is quite comfortable with having a different opinion and dont need to have it validated by everyone you will not experience this.
JMO | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/9/2007 7:55:54 AM |
I find this argument interesting as again it all comes down to the individual, if you are one of those people who cant agree to disagree you may agree with this statement. However if you are an individual who is quite comfortable with having a different opinion and dont need to have it validated by everyone you will not experience this.
I like this statement. As you state [I] if you are one of those people who can't agree to disagree[/I] I think however, the problem here is that certain individuals, tend to use a hit and run tactic with the forums. They post ridiculous thread replies, for sake of argument, and argument alone. They may very well believe what they post, or they may be playing devils advocate. I see the same people replying with the same MO,, to incite, debate, or twist a knife into an already festering wound.
The title B*it*ch, obviously has many meanings, for different people, and I wont dispute what people perceive the definition to be, although I tend to be of the opinion, to use words correctly, and in the proper places.
I think the problem with certain posters is, to me they clearly hate women, or despise them, and if you look at their posting habits, you will see a trend, they think they are above them. I also know of women who seem to do the same tactics with men, as well. While this debate may at first glance appear to be about the word B*it*ch, if researched, it is about how woman, are treated, or preceived, by certain men, as a whole. | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/9/2007 8:32:28 AM |
"When you make no attempt to understand someone else's position or feelings and simply pursue your own convictions, you're acting like a **** (or a 'prick' perhaps if you're a bloke). People will resent you."
I find this argument interesting as again it all comes down to the individual, if you are one of those people who cant agree to disagree you may agree with this statement. However if you are an individual who is quite comfortable with having a different opinion and dont need to have it validated by everyone you will not experience this.
I don't believe this is to do with requiring your stance to be validated. I believe it is to do with showing a natural respect for other people.
Taking a stupid example to make a point...
Suppose you turn up for a meeting at work and find the car park full - including your VIP spot, where a man emerges from his car. You stop yours and tell him he's in your place and you'll be late if he doesn't move. He starts protesting. You can
a) Shout over his protests, completely ignoring him. You know full well he is NOT allowed to park there for any reason, and you're well within your rights to do so.
b) Listen to him. He's panicky, tells you his wife is pregnant at home and her waters have just broken, but the batteries died in his phone mid-call. He just wants to use the payphone ten yards away and he'll only be two minutes.
Maybe this will change your opinion on whether you can afford to wait a couple minutes for the clearly distraught guy. Maybe it won't. What matters is that you at least took his view on board. In neither case does he have to like or agree with your decision, but eve if your decision is the same in both cases, he's much more likely to think you're a bitch/prick if you fail to listen to his view at all.
Does it matter what he thinks?
No, not really.
But do unto others as you'd have them do to you. At least have enough respect to listen & understand them. | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/9/2007 8:36:39 AM | Well, I know for a fact that I am not a bxtch. I am one of the original softies...not a door mat..they are hard and scratchy and you wipe your muddy boots on them. I'm more like that soft rug by the side of the bed that keeps your feet warm and comfy until you are awake enough to stand up and meet the world. My girl friends tell me to never admit to that soft side to any man.
However, I have been called a bxtch, by males and females who have met the side of me that stands up for myself or those I feel need someone standing beside them on any issue.
I know who I am. Being called a bxtch by someone who barely knows me or not does not bother me. It did bother me when my son called me one until he explained himself like I said in an earlier post.
I know some true bxtches and they admit it. What blows me away is the ones I know the best each have a man attached doing everything he can to obtain the unobtainable....please her!
I just do not understand...but that WAS another thread and it was deleted.  | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/9/2007 8:41:46 AM | | I can't say for certain, but I have noticed that this disturbing trend applies more to the economically, or educationally disadvantaged than others. As if it were a mechanism to take the gutsy or ballsy part of the description of a b!tch and say, "See, I got just as much drive as anyone!". Which is fair enough. It is, again just in my observation, that the women that use the term as a badge of honour either ignore the manipulative component, or celebrate it. The latter being as disturbing as a man that celebrates beating women...Not good. | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/9/2007 8:52:55 AM | Im not fond of the term, whether directed at me (thru friends or rivals... grrrr! sounds like a pirate! ~lol~) nor to use it towards someone else (unless Im driving and cut off, of course) ...
Hearing another woman saying "Im a b!tch and a) Im proud of it or b) I dont care" just makes me think she's a very hard, harsh woman without much value nor respect for anothers opinion, on an obvious ego trip and has no sense of the 'real' world. Of course, thats MHO and I could be completely wrong... but thats how it comes across to me. | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/9/2007 9:07:10 AM |
Scully, re-stating your original point and labelling smith's view as 'sexist' are not valid counterarguments.
Well I can only have one counterargument Sly. I can't create several. Unlike some my viewpoint doesn't change based upon the mood of the thread. My counterargument will remain constant. Any subsequent posts will merely serve as clarification.
As such, this post will, in compliance with your request, be my viewpoint restated albeit with a nod to explication.
Please explain how the logic in the above is flawed.
Is it not true the labelling of men who call them '****es' as sexist removed all need to examine their own behaviour? Is it not possible then that they *are* actually acting mean and nasty sometimes? .
Someone’s behaviour is entirely subjective. For example: a government official refuses to award Welfare to a Claimant. To that Claimant she is being “mean and nasty”. A b*tch if you will; a prize b*tch - a royal b*tch!
That government official is, however, discharging her duty with consummate skill and professionalism. She is applying the guidelines and regulations and this Claimant does not qualify for Welfare.
Here would it be your argument that this particular government official is, indeed, a b*tch and by deluding herself into thinking she is a consummate professional discharging her duty with skill and proficiency she is failing to examine her own behaviour?
It is my counterargument, and my only counterargument, that the term b*tch is applied to women who are doing nothing more offensive than going about their daily business. It is those men, who expect women to be compliant and submissive, who automatically label that same woman as a b*tch when she fails to pander to their every whim.
The woman who won’t go out with you: B*tch!
The woman who makes it to the available parking space before you despite the fact that you're in a rush: B*tch!
The woman boss who doesn’t accept your flimsy excuse for not having met a deadline and demands that you submit your proposal by the end of the day: B*tch!
The woman judge who fines you $600 and suspends your licence for 12 months for driving whilst under the influence: B*tch!
Some people will think these women “make no attempt to understand someone else's position or feelings and simply pursue [their] own convictions”.
It is my stance that women do not actively call themselves “B*tchs”. What they say is:I am assertive, confident, self-assured and poised. I will behave in a way that is true to myself: my morals, my honour, my values. I will not change who I am to please you.
If being this way makes you think I am a B*tch then so be it. But you will not kowtow me into compliance and submission by calling me that. I will continue to be the person I want to be.
Women didn’t embrace the word B*tch. They became indifferent to it. By not being affected by this label it lost its influence, to the palpable consternation of men who expect this moniker to coerce them into compliance.
Now there will be instances where a woman will be rude and obnoxious but ask yourself this - is she really being mean and nasty because she thinks to be so is to act in accordance with an emerging Code of Conduct known as the B*tch Decree.
Do you honestly think some women are being rude and obnoxious because B*tch has been stripped of its offensiveness or do you think these women are being rude and obnoxious just because they are, in actual fact, rude and obnoxious?
I submit it is the latter.
If a woman is malicious, snide, insensitive, thoughtless etc do you think they are so because the bastardisation of b*tch has given them a licence to be so, or do you think they would be so in any event?
People who exhibit these traits, be they men or women, have no consideration for the feelings of others. Do you honestly think they would care whether these people, the same people whose feelings they have no consideration for, think less of them?
To summarise, lest confusion abound once more, my viewpoint and counterargument is simply this:
(1) Women have not embraced the word b*tch; they have become indifferent to it. Immune to it, if you will. It has neither a negative nor a positive connotation: it is merely there. By dispossessing it of any influence it is no longer scornful and, as a result, inconsequential.
(2) There are some men who will view some women as b*tchy when they are merely confident, assertive, assured and independent.
(3) There are some women who will be vicious and spiteful whether b*tch has a positive subtext or not; and
(4) There are some men who just hate women and seize even the flimsiest of opportunities to malign them. Then, inexplicably, they publicly lament their failure with women, little realising that their misogynistic outlook, which is prevalent in everything they say, is anathema to any prospective partner.
| |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/9/2007 9:23:52 AM | "As if it were a mechanism to take the gutsy or ballsy part of the description of a b!tch and say, "See, I got just as much drive as anyone!". "
Dented your statement is exactly what the argument is. When did being a women who has goals, drive and ambition become a bad thing and a ****? Many people see a male having traits such as ballsy or gutsy as a positive and a go getter, Alpha male or leader, but if a woman has has these traits she is labeled a ****! So that is why I personally do not take offense to being called a **** because it has become such an ambiguous word and has lost its power.
And Sly what you are talking about is having consideration for others not being a ****. I have met many so called nice people that live in their own little world and have not the slightest idea of how they impact others around them by being oblivious. Is that person a **** or inconsiderate? | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/9/2007 11:12:16 AM | | aligirl. I understand that. What I'm saying is that it appears more in the disadvantaged peoples. Gutsy or ballsy women are fine. Absolutely nothing wrong with that. The Girlfriend is What I'm saying is that women at work in society, entrepeneurs, go-getters, etc. have those qualities, but no use for the term b!tch. It is the disadvantaged that tend to use it to rub your face in thier claim that they also have those qualities. It is almost as if there is a need to scream "Pay attention! I will not be ignored just because I don't have a suit or a good job like other women, I too have guts!" Well, that's one side. The other is the manipulation side and I just don't get that at all...lol | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 3/20/2007 12:16:43 AM | | I think it's juvenile and not the least "empowering". I don't go around calling myself a professional a***hole, and don't much care for ANY person who revels in the lowest common denominator with their "image". | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 4/11/2007 10:30:36 AM |
I have met many so called nice people that live in their own little world and have not the slightest idea of how they impact others around them by being oblivious. Is that person a **** or inconsiderate?
Ali, you make an interesting point. Many of society's terms (for lack of a better word), have such a broad meaning, what constitutes a person being a "B*tch" nowadays anyway? Personally, I've always found labels, whether actual, or implied, to be pretty ignorant, especially when the people usually tossing those labels around, are in no position to be judge or jury for anyone else's behavior. | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 4/11/2007 2:11:31 PM | I personally never use the term **** toward a women I use it only toward men and use it as a derogatory term. Kind of like you are her **** you are acting like a total ****.
Now when a guy is being rude and obnoxious he is an ***hole when a women is being the same way she is a ****ing****
I have no problem with strong women in control of herself but if she goes out of her way to put people down like alot of the women who use the term as a badge of honour you are nothing but a****
same way with a guy who does the same thing he is an ***hole | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 4/11/2007 2:40:55 PM | | I think it became a badge oh honor a couple years back. My best friend is a woman and her friends think they are hot shit for being one or called one same goes for my sister and scary enough my mother lol. I think some woman atleast most of the ones I know think it is cool to be called that because they think it means you goes beyond them not taking s**t but they will beat your ass to the ground and can hand it out 10x worse then you give it. Personally I know this is pretty much bull honkey from them except my sister lol, I think it is the persona of the word that it gives to atleast the women I know and thats why they like it. Of course what do I know. | |
|
| |
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 4/11/2007 4:51:46 PM | >>Now whilst I appreciate that, in your world, an obscure publication may be the pinnacle of authority but in the world of scholars it doesn’t quite cut it as incontrovertible evidence.
Fine, dispute my evidence, but I don't see you offering any evidence to the contrary.
>>Mensa candidate
Not a candidate--a member. | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 5/18/2008 2:02:24 PM | I have no idea, but I've noticed a co-relation with the availability of pole dancing lessons at the YMCA lol
It's called lipstick feminism. ie the third wave of feminism
the myth of sexual power lol | |
|
| When did the title of B***h become a badge of honor?
Posted: 5/18/2008 2:27:36 PM | I think it's funny when girls take pride in it, or announce it. They are clueing you in to how proud they are of having poor personal skills, or issues with men (or women). Guys may call you a **** unfairly sometimes, but the real meanings are either 1) you're being an ***hole, or 2) you are weak and not worthy of respect. I can see why they feminists would think to reclaim it but it's not a realistic idea. It will always stem from it's literal meaning - a female dog. Feminists calling each other female dogs - brilliant.
I have a couple female friends who call each other **** all the time, and announce they are ****es etc..But they tone that all right down when a guy they are into is around. They at least know it's not attractive to broadcast your social baggage, and it actually sounds trashy when used in this way. | |
|
| When did the title of B i tch become a badge of honor?
Posted: 5/18/2008 2:41:46 PM | When people(both male AND female) started using the term to describe any woman who isn't a doormat.
I've been called b i tchy for not giving a friend more than a couple thousand for her wedding. #1- not my wedding. #2 it was her fourth wedding. #3 Just because I HAVE money doesn't mean I need to give it away just because someone asked. I gave away all my required alms by paying taxes. Anything extra is my choice.
I've also been called a b1tch for going out of my way to get someone fired or arrested when I was only the witness, not the vic. (That would be the proper usage.)
So, same word to describe two completely different traits.
The term was over used, therefore lost the meaning and now has itsown meaning to each individual group.
Anyone who has had two fertile female dogs under the same roof understands WHY b1tch is an insult! OMFG, it does not work out well. Even a fixed female takes over if you don't alpha b1tch her.
We've experienced the same problem with the term "stalker." So many people used the word to describe the smallest trait they disliked in someone that most people dismiss the term when used. | |
|
|
| Page 3 of 5
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 |
|
Home
login 
