Hmmm, picking through verbal minefields isn't my forte. However, having started all this mess (which has now managed to create a discussion that has offended more people) I would like to add a few points and offer a warning/explanation: I am a politics student and my way of thinking about the world is inherently political.

Firstly, as a point on the original topic, I know her pretty well. Maybe not on the level of close friends, but not strangers and way past a level where I would expect people to get that I'm taking the piss.....having taken the piss out of enough things in her presence.

Secondly, on the whole sexist thing, I really think that some of the responses here reflect the naval-gazing that the feminist debate has come to....in part because of the domination of first world middle class liberal feminists and because of the rise of postmodernism in philosophy. There is now this focus on words rather than the material global reality of female life - there is a focus on how the structure of language and words keeps woman oppressed instead of a focus on the real material factors that afflict the lives of woman every single day.

To relate this back to the topic at hand, is that people appear to be willing to get into a huff about the words used not the meanings intended and what there certainly isn't a huff about is structures that you can literally put your hands on and say "this is sexism!" What's worse, is that sexism, it would appear, is a one way street that exists only when a man says something to a woman. Consider if my joke was made between two women - would anyone be saying that it was sexist? Offensive, yes. But sexist, I don't think so.

Thirdly, on the whole issue of offense, I think its worth echoing what earlier posters said in that offense is something that is fundamentally taken by the other person. Sure, I can try to give offense, but it doesn't exist until someone else perceives it. And it turns out that people choose to take offense at some very random things. For example, some nationalistic Greeks are offended if you call Macedonia Macedonia. If you take things like that into account in a pre-emptory effort not to offend people than you'll never have conversation or make anything resembling a joke. It would be a dull world if conversation was restricted to only what the most pious feel they can discuss.

And on a final (flippant) note, I agree with the women.(up)

Just don't make bad jokes. The you won't have these problems :p

PS - My life has been seriously impacted on by these sexual stereotypes and NO this is not navel gazing. It impacted on how I thought about myself and what value I put on my body from a young age. I am not talking with an academic hat on, i'm talking from my own personal experience. Women who identify as feminists routinely get dismissed in this way and I really resent it actually.

PPS - Just to clarify, in my experience words like 'slag', 'slut' etc are used just as much by women to insult other women. I find it interesting how some women use insults like these to define other women as 'bad' and put themselves up on some 'clean/good girl' pedestal . It's very interesting. Yes these words are used by both men and women, but women are generally the targets of the insults. The fact that you are male is not relevant from my perspective. As I said, I think these words can be very damaging and therefore I dislike the use of them in any context.

Firstly, second wave feminism has always been concerned with language and words - this is not a product of post-modernism/post-structuralism. It was 70s feminists who started the push for the use of non-gendered, non-sexist language. 70s feminists fought for equality on many fronts - in language, in philosophy, in academia, as well as for concrete gains such in education, employment, safety for women etc. A focus on words is not new. The 

Secondly, If it wasn't for 'navel gazing' feminists, how would we expect new ideas to emerge? Should feminists only be fighting for material gains for women? I think not. As Audre Lord said (who, btw, was an African American 1970s feminist), 'the master's tools will never dismantle the master's house' ie we need new frames of reference. Post-structuralism can provide this. Why shouldn't feminists study post-structuralism? Feminist activity is needed in every arena, not just the material ones. There are feminists everywhere, who work everyday, to make women's lives better. Many of these work within a feminist frame of reference, which may or may not stem from a post-modern basis, and loads of women do focus on making a practical difference to women's lives.

Thirdly, lots of leading feminist post-structuralists have used post-structuralism to theorise around difference, stemming in part, from their position as women from an ethnic minority background. Post-structuralism is definitely not confined to white feminists.

An excellent post Sue.

======= Date Modified 26 Jun 2010 08:10:46 =======
======= Date Modified 26 Jun 2010 08:09:06 =======

Hi Slizor,

I would have a few issues with this. There's a middle ground between making whatever comment you (generic) like to somebody else even if it is grossly insensitive and never having a conversation again. I'm not saying you were grossly insensitive in this case, just following on your hypothetical situation. A lot of people tend to get up in arms about 'political correctness' these days but political correctness was born out of the completely admirable sense that people should respect each other and their cultural or physical differences. That doesn't mean never having a conversation again but saying 'sorry, have I offended you? Can I ask why you find that offensive?'
I also wonder how different this thread would be if the language used wasn't casually sexist but casually racist or homophobic...

Edit: Basically, what Eska said :-)

Your last post, Slizor, echos something my mother often says:

"People only offend themselves"

Well, Slizor, if that's the way you feel, then I think you're just going to have too accept that some people will be hurt by sme f the things yousay and learn to live with it. And stop being so offended by it.

I think the main issue here is that there is no comparable term of abuse for a man, and if there is then its often percieved as a 'good' thing - whereas for a woman its damaging, extremely so - no woman trying to make it in the world and trying to maintain a circle of friends would ever want the label 'slag'. We have all been called it at some point I think in pure abuse even if only at school when it wasn't in any way accurate and the fallout is horrible. There are just some words aimed at a woman that tend to really upset them if there's that level of insinuation behind them, even if its said in jest unless you are really close!!! Sometimes, even someone with a really dry sense of humour needs to stop for a second and engage their brain before opening their mouth and consider if their words will upset someone unnecessarily - the trouble here is that I don't suppose that many younger men (ie those who hadn't seen the effect those kind of words can have) would consider that that would have that effect as there isn't the life experience of being insulted in that manner, live and learn.

======= Date Modified 26 Jun 2010 11:58:23 =======
======= Date Modified 26 Jun 2010 11:56:19 =======
Hi again, Slizor, this is not aimed at you in any way, so please don't be offended. This whole thing has really got me thinking about a girl I was at school with and this whole thing about sexual policing - she was really nice, and still is; she had a high sex drive, and still has, but it's only now, 25 years after leaving school, that I've discovered how nice she is, because at school she was on the margins, because people knew she was into sex, and I was keeping my head down for various reasons I don't really want to discuss here. I mean big fat deal, really - she used get 'slaggy s***' balled at her every available and possible minute of her day, and it was a warning to all of us girls and boys, a loud warning about sexuality and expression by women. But still she carried on, being herself and enjoying life, even though she mus have hurt, and I really admire her for that. She's still the same, which is wonderful... I saw her a few months ago, and her weekend plans were a few tinnies and the boyfriend round for a weekend in. Marvellous. I often wonder about my own sexuality, if I'd been different throughout the years without the desperate need to fit in and be a nice girl when I was younger, and now even, maybe, I don't know. I mean, I've had a bloke dump me on the spot after declaring love and devotion after knowing me for two years because I'd taken him seriously enough to be honest about how many sexual partnets I've had _ which is not that many, see my words above. Most women I know lie about that at the start of a relationsip, and thereafter, or they evade the issue completely. One of my close friends had a very promiscuous phase during which she slept with a lot of men in her locale, where she still lives with her husband who still thinks, after 15 years, that she's only had 2 other sexual partners! Ha, ha, ha. Sad because he's so lovely otherwise, but he'd have freaked if he'd know the truth. I've decide my next one won't ask me.

I did say that picking my way through verbal minefields is not my forte.....

Eska: I'm not offended by people being offended - I don't take my beliefs or my self that seriously. It does annoy me though. It's nice to see you back anyhow. :-)

Stressed: I too though that there was an age gap between the responses, but not a gender gap. Maybe that's just my lack of astuteness and wisdom as a young male not touched by the world....

Keep_Calm: I would respond to your point, but I imagine it will just drive people further out of sorts. Imagine an argument along the lines of Mill, Freedom of Speech and tolerance.

Thanks for the post Sue.(up)
Okay, first off, my remarks were about the feminist debate in the mainstream, not really the academic debate/s or about the generations of feminists (although I hadn't realised that the issue of language came prior to the postmodernist turn.) It is within the mainstream that there is now the huge imbalance which I talked about.

Secondly, I can think of plenty of new ideas that are not coming from feminists, maybe I'm missing your point on this bit because it does seem like a strange question. As for "should feminists only be fighting for material gains for woman?" I would answer yes, at least at the moment. I think that the material reality of a situation determines things far more than language does and that only through tackling material oppression can you fundamentally change the position of women in society. You change the material reality which changes the ideological reality which changes language - the other way round is just excruciatingly slow and a bit pointless!

Thirdly, I wasn't actually talking about feminism ignoring racism or people from other ethnicities (hence, I didn't include white in my list of adjectives.) Instead I was talking about (liberal/mainstream) feminists and their failure to engage with issues of worldwide development and, well, the whole shitheap of problems that those in the third world suffer and are subjected to. I mean, if you want to get mad about something, get mad about how 18% of the world live on less than $1 a day, how there is an international regime based on free trade and the main promoters of that free trade protect the markets where developing countries are most competitive, or how up to one billion people don't have access to clean water when in the first world w

Well, Sliozor, perhaps I should have said: try not to be annoyed by us women being ourselves - and yes, if you look carefully at the posts, there is a great gender divide. I didn't want to leave because of your comments btw, more ejc's and the 'I'm, allright jack' atttitde that was coming from several posters who, as people who have experienced prejudice, must know better. I think you are just going to have to accept that using the worh 'slag' will hurt some people, deeply, that's just life, and make your decsion from there, and that that has nought to do with theory, and much more with personal experieneces and tragic prejudice, that all women, and many men, have expeienced.