>ostracizing sex work is almost entirely normalized
100%. One of the universal curses people throw at each other is implying that someone's mother is a prostitute, or that they are a product of extramarital sex, implying the promiscuity of the mother. This all is hand-in-hand with the implied comtempt towards women of course.
This is an educated, albeit only a speculation of mine that I never confirmed: in the past (medieval times) people used to describe inferior things by comparing them to dogs like "dog's weather", "you will die like a dog" and many other sayings. It's wrong to think that your mother is being insulted by being called the "son of a bitch" (it's also pointless to censor the word as you did). What it means, or at least what it originally meant, is that you came out of a womb of a dog.
In other words, if you're with your mom in a room, and someone calls you a son of a bitch, the claim is not that the woman you take for your mom is a bitch, rather, that you're wrong and your mom is actually not in the room (unless there's also a female dog in that room).
> 100%. One of the universal curses people throw at each other is implying that someone's mother is a prostitute, or that they are a product of extramarital sex, implying the promiscuity of the mother. This all is hand-in-hand with the implied comtempt towards women of course.
> Because no one's throwing around "your father is a prostitute" as an insult.
There's all kinds of things that people insult men/fathers for that they wouldn't use for women/mothers (e.g. strength, financial success, etc). It's just gender roles, not generalized contempt for women (and going that far is probably just politically motivated exaggeration).
I think the contempt is there, because we're talking about someone's parent, and for some reason, all cultures (that I know of) picked the mother as the one being out of line. As in, when there's someone that's out of line, that has to be the woman. If this would be random, or balanced, we'd curse at others like your father is a deadbeat, or that your father's sperm is weak, and therefore you are weak, or things like that. Yet that just doesn't come up much.
Edit: I do get your point though. It's not as straightforward as I implied. In fact I think that it's a complex, interwoven system, which comes up unfair for everyone. But I do observe a general hatred toward women, and if something like this curse comes up, I can't help but think that the two are in connection.
> I think the contempt is there, because we're talking about someone's parent, and for some reason, all cultures (that I know of) picked the mother as the one being out of line. As in, when there's someone that's out of line, that has to be the woman.
There's definitely contempt there, but just for the person being insulted.
I think you're analyzing those kinds of insults using the wrong framework. It doesn't have much to do with women as a class, but rather with the relationship with the insulted person to his mother. Insulting someone's mother will probably get under someone's skin more than insulting their father, because (especially historically) they probably have a warmer/closer relationship with their mother due to gender roles around child-rearing.
>I think the contempt is there, because we're talking about someone's parent
But I feel that this is more because the mother is the more 'revered' parent? People often hate their father, but it's far rarer for people to hate their mother. Cursing someone's mother is, to me, just a way to hurt someone by insulting the person they love the most.
This of course would imply the exact opposite of what you're suggesting.
cursing someone's mother not their father shows exacly the opposite attitude to women (mothers) to me: since the offender presumes people are more loving to their mothers than fathers, therefore expects that maledicting the mother hurt more.
True. In fact we’ve made televised “I’m not the father” dancing into a national pastime.
The patriarchy mentality our norms are built upon includes blaming women for everything ‘wrong’. Women are blamed for premarital sex. Men are celebrated for their scores. Women are paid less yet have less leisure time. They are the first to blame if anything goes wrong with children, including just bringing them into public spaces. Men aren’t expected to be responsible parents, and usually aren’t primary caregivers. Women are the butt of jokes, and are constantly told they aren’t funny. Some men are actively campaigning to make women property again. Women are forced to give birth for anyone that inseminates them without exception in many jurisdictions now.
Not all women are sex workers, but the fact is that female sex workers (sex entrepreneurs?!) are generally disrespected by patriarchs and their women. That internalized distain comes out in a variety of ways, but quite materially as well (ie bank policy and regulations). Male sex workers are envied by other males. “I’d love that job”.
Do yourself a favor and read "Self-Made Man". It's obvious you're only seeing this from one side of the coin and lack the perspective of the other side in some kind of crusade.
Both sexes have their problems and the status quo causes stigmas for both. To claim women are uniquely seen as "lesser beings" in a developed world is horribly naïve.
Blarg. I read the summary of it, it’s going on my list thx. I grew up with a patriarch mentality and took it into my marriage and business. It’s just plain wrong, it’s effects are severe, and it’s been a long personal journey to relearn and reinterpret stuff.
I’m not on a crusade per se, but I guess I’m at a place where I’m now sharing aggregated angst I’ve heard from women and read about. Men absolutely have unmet needs, and much of that actually comes from patriarchal values.
The phrase “I don’t see color” seems admirable but ultimately was determined by researchers to be one of the strongest indicators of racial bias. It’s a problem because it ignores or denies the struggles that minorities have and do face. It projects a meritocracy where there isn’t one. I’d love to live in a “post-racial” society, but we just don’t. In the same way, “I don’t see gender” or “it’s hard for everyone” is a polite way of lying to yourself and denying the harsh reality that women objectively experience.
I have stats and citations for everything I’ve posted here, but I’m lazy and on my phone. I hope you’ll find that most of my claims easily substantiated, not some naïve diatribe. Hit me up if something I said needs backup.
Re: the phrase I don't see colour. Do you have a reference or link for that research? That dovetails elegantly into something I'm dealing with right now.
The Legitimation of Black Subordination: The Impact of Color-Blind Ideology on African American Education
Dawn G. Williams and Roderic R. Land
The Journal of Negro Education
Vol. 75, No. 4 (Fall, 2006), pp. 579-588 (10 pages)
Published By: Journal of Negro Education
https://www.jstor.org/stable/40034659
>To claim women are uniquely seen as "lesser beings" in a developed world is horribly naïve.
Not really. The developed world barely raised a few generations since women can vote. This is not saying men don't have problems - but the field is still very often tilted against women.
100%. One of the universal curses people throw at each other is implying that someone's mother is a prostitute, or that they are a product of extramarital sex, implying the promiscuity of the mother. This all is hand-in-hand with the implied comtempt towards women of course.