Non Sequitur TOON- Ouch!

[n2doc]

[ThomWV]

1. Priceless: K&R

[Bigmack]

2. Wiley is ALWAYS good! nt

[bjobotts]

33. HEADS UP: the unrec troll is out now at 7:25CST unrecing everything on DU

[bjobotts]

34. Wonder how much they get paid for rat f**#ing liberal sites.

[dixiegrrrrl]

3. Helen Reddy approves.

K&R

[Tansy_Gold]

5. So does Tansy Gold ;-)

K&R

[blondeatlast]

13. ... & blondeatlast! nt

[liberalhistorian]

50. Ya know, BAL, this has nothing to do with anything

and I'm sorry to threadjack, and you know I love ya, but I just have to tell you that every time I see your username I see "blondes eat last" for just a second! :silly:

[ensho]

4. kick

nt

[WillyT]

6. Perfect !!! - K & R !!!

:applause::applause:

:rofl:

:kick:

[ellenfl]

7. k&r eom

[conservdem]

8. Isn't this sexist and prejudicial?

I am not offended, but I do wonder if sexist toon aimed at women would be viewed so favorably.

Are we allowed to point out such hypocrisy?

[conservdem]

9. crickets chirping

[11 Bravo]

11. Mostly it's just funny (a concept foreign to many on this board).

[Cerridwen]

15. You are, of course, correct.

As this 'toon shows, the fact that the overwhelming majority of those in positions of power; whether heads of state or banking/industry; are men, is probably one of the most clear examples of the sexism in our world throughout history.

Good on ya for noticing.

Isn't it entertaining to watch those who can find a few notable instances of women in power who've acted the same? Especially if you consider they're notable because they're so rare throughout history and because they've behaved in the same manner as "the men."



edit: yet another typo

[blondeatlast]

28. Perfect response.

:thumbsup:

[stuart68]

19. To be funny

it has to have a grain of truth. I think it is pretty funny.

[conservdem]

21. Is it still sexist?

Is it prejudicial?

[stuart68]

22. i think it is sexist

but at the same time, true (for the most part).

[Lautremont]

25. What's your definition of "sexist?"

[conservdem]

35. Let's use your definition of the term. Is it sexist?

What about prejudicial?

[blondeatlast]

27. Is truth sexist? You tell me. nt

[conservdem]

37. I do not know if the truth of a statement precludes it from being sexist.

I tend to doubt the two are always mutually exclusive. What do you think?

[nikto]

32. As a male...

I just can't feel offended by that, no matter how hard I try.

I am amazed at any male who actually FEELS offended by the cartoon.

Just hard for me to imagine or empathize with.

[conservdem]

38. I am not offended either, but it's still probably sexist and prejudicial

I can even see the humor in it. The post and this discussion makes me wonder if something can be sexist, humorous, and acceptable here at DU. It appears it can, at least if it is sexist toward men.

[verges]

41. I am not offended by this....

but, however, there have been instances of male bashing that have offended me.

[conservdem]

48. Male bashing here?

Did the mods halt it?

[verges]

51. Actually, I meant in the world at large. nt

[Solomon]

59. Jay sus! Please give it up. It's not sexist its not

prejudicial and its not male bashing.

Jee zuz H. Christ! What is wrong with you?

[Greyhound]

10. K&R. For inescapable truth.

[debannbull]

24. great pic

shook her hand once - like touching the sun.

[Greyhound]

61. I've met him half a dozen times, never her. n/t

:kick:

[DLnyc]

12. Good point.

But you would have to ignore Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher and a few others to make it really fly.

[Cerridwen]

17. Definitely.

We should always make a point of pointing out the notable few in order to justify and validate the overwhelming majority. "Women do it, too!" dammit!

[demwing]

47. It's not the raw numbers that count

Its the relative percentages

[reggie the dog]

14. Quenn Mary

started a war, bloody mary was her name after it all.....

[Cerridwen]

16. Fixed that for ya.

As the fourth crowned monarch of the Tudor dynasty, she is remembered for restoring England to Roman Catholicism after succeeding her short-lived half brother, Edward VI, to the English throne. In the process, she had almost 300 religious dissenters burned at the stake in the Marian Persecutions, earning her the sobriquet of "Bloody Mary". (a wiki quote)

MARY I, Queen of England, unpleasantly remembered as "the Bloody Mary" on account of the religious persecutions which prevailed during her reign,... (from Luminarium: Encyclopedia Project)

Here's a link for you. MONARCHS of BRITAIN. You can go read up on all them women who ruled just like the men did. Funny how that plays out, isn't it?

[lunatica]

18. Well she shut him up for all of two seconds

LOL! He probably tells kids and dogs to get off his lawn too

[SaveOurDemocracy]

29. Indubitably! In fact, here he is doing just that....

.................... :hi:

[Political Heretic]

20. Women, given the opportunity, would act the same.

It's the fact that our patriarchy keeps women from the opportunity to be as big of jerks as men.

Since it is power that corrupts and not something biologically better or worse about about men or women... if you had a capitalist system dominated by women, you would have women doing all the shitty things in service of profit and power that male capitalists do today. :shrug:

In fact, you can already see examples of this, as women do begin to infiltrate the system and start playing the capitalist game - they're no different than anyone else obsessed with greed, profit and power.

[Cartoonist]

23. Women would act the same.

Not Sarah! :-)

[Political Heretic]

26. Hahaha!

[SaveOurDemocracy]

30. ...and 99.9% of serial killers are men because women

don't have the opportunity?

[LostInAnomie]

31. Women are much more likely to kill their children than men.

Violent people are violent people. Assigning a gender to it for the purpose of trying to prove a point is ridiculous.

[pundaint]

36. Do you mean that of the last thousand serial killers only one was female? Or is it just hyperbole?

[Political Heretic]

43. Would depend on how you define "serial." A woman killing all four or her children...

doesn't usually count as "serial" in the minds of people making these sorts of male v. female stereotypes.

[Prophet 451]

57. Technically, it's rarely "serial"

A serial killer has to kill three or more people with a distinct emotional cooling off period between them. Since those who kill their children usually do so all at once, they wouldn't qualify as serial killers but spree killers.

[Vincent441]

44. men are also a thousand times more likely to run into a burning

building and save someone

[blondeatlast]

52. And you have a an objective cite for that at the ready, I'm certain. nt

[Political Heretic]

62. No more than you did.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

54. How does 99.9% = 1,000 : 1?

Might want to subtract 1 of those zeros.

[Political Heretic]

42. It's sure not because they have dicks.

Plenty of women kill their children, more than men do for that matter. Plenty of women kill other people, and plenty of men do as well.

[Prophet 451]

56. Um, about 85% actually n/t

[JAbuchan08]

58. You'll also notice that among all of those war-mongering men

very few are bachelors.

[grahamhgreen]

39. Bring back femininity - the other way to fight!

[Beacool]

40. Good one!!!

:7

[colsohlibgal]

45. Yes!

I had to clip that one out of my Sunday paper to show my daughter - Doonesbury was another great one this morning on a slightly different bent.

What's striking is that while Wiley and Trudeau are known for pointed commentary like this, comics like "six chix" are even starting to sometimes contain some stinging topical zingers.

[demwing]

46. Are men stereotyped as being warmongers and greedy industrialists - OR

Are warmongers and greedy industrialists stereotyped as being men?

[winyanstaz]

49. bwhahahaaa

[GoddessOfGuinness]

53. Love it!

:thumbsup:

[Eric Condon]

55. Can we have one hot minute of sanity in this thread

Here's my take on this. Since I'm a guy, feel free to assume I'm biased one way or the other, but I'm trying not to be.

The whole manner of thinking that states "men start all the wars" and "if women were in power we wouldn't have as many wars," etc, vs. the counterargument that "women have started wars too" is fundamentally flawed from the start. It's based on an outmoded binary that has no use in our modern world. Sure, there are still tons of inequalities between the genders, and all of us (both men and women) suffer the effects of patriarchy. But ascribing gender to warmongering one way or the other is an example of an old, irrelevant way of thinking.

Let me say this as simply as I can: maybe in the past (like, say, around the time Lysistrata was written), war could correctly have been viewed as "men's folly," or something like that. But today, countries don't go to war because their leaders are having a dick-swinging contest. Today, countries go to war because every time countries go to war, someone stands to make a shitload of money.

It's foolish to think gender has anything to do with this, and it's naive to think that wars happen in this day and age for any other reason. So all the guys in this thread grasping at straws to claim women have started wars just like men have, and all the women claiming that this doesn't absolve men of their crimes against humanity, are missing the point entirely.

[On the Road]

60. Using an Argument with an Undistributed Middle --

Just like a dame!

:smoke: