I mean, if you are going to claim that gendered insults at all are wrong, you kind of just have to go with it all the way, lest you be a hypocrite. Sexism does not magically become ok if it is directed toward the tribe that is not your own.
People will say that "dick" is ok because of power dynamics, but really people just do not want to lose the "freedom" to call people dicks. It is a great little compact insult, isn't it? But then again, we could all just use "asshole" and skip the whole gender mess. Does make our profanity a bit dull though.
Personally, I do not really care what words people choose to use, but there it is.
Dick (Dickish, dickishness, etc) may be gendered, but it does have a particular meaning. Although women have real power over men in certain scenarios and can therefore be "reverse sexist" (unlike reverse-racism, which can't happen in our current time). In this case, a journalist for a free mag-rag can use it against an actor in pop-movies, and it's no harm no foul.
@8 - Because sometimes using "bad" words is an effective way to make a point? And sometimes because I just fucking feel like it and you're not my real mom anyway?
Junkets, with a hundred talking heads all trying to be "cute" and "unique" and provocative with someone whose brain has just undergone a nonstop series of interviews are enough to make any actor go through a grumpy nervous breakdown. I have some sympathy, even if some are able to to smile cheerfully (and SEEMINGLY effortlessly) through all the monotony.
@6: I understand that fully, but it is equally easy to understand that using gendered insults while claiming that sexism and gendered insults are wrong makes one a hypocrite.
I assumed (and still do) that it was scripted. Isn't this how it works? Evidence: what was supposed to happen? She was going to ask him to do a card trick and then that's the end? How would anybody feel motivated to link to that?
What do you mean, "the" male reproductive organ? I thought all males had them. I know I do, and if you think you're apologizing to mine you've got another think coming.
@15, now you're talking. Eisenberg is clearly the cunt here. The interviewer is a SILLY cunt, which is an entirely different thing. Neither are reproductive organs.
Why did Paul feel the need to incite an argument about gender politics in a stupid poll about some movie? I'm starting to cringe whenever I see "Feminist" or "MRA" in an article, because the way some people argue in comments belies their view that everything is a zero-sum game; that addressing valid complaints by men marginalizes women, and vice-versa. And then there's all the name-calling... blech
If you read her account of what happened, wherein she whines about what a mean, mean man Jesse Eisenberg is, you realize that she's just a big old baby who came unprepared and couldn't handle his (very mild, almost brotherly) teasing. http://univisionnews.tumblr.com/post/506…
Uh, he was there to promote something, she tried to be cute, flirtatious, get herself promoted, oh, and do a magic trick when HE was the one in the movie about magic.
No, she's not a dick. She's something else but I think most of her friends and the 3 fan boys in the corner all know that. She just doesn't.
Am I really the only one who caught the fact that Mr. Eisenberg decided to be such a <> to the knit-witted-but-oh-so-pretty-love-me-because-I’m-famous-online-so-called-entertainment-"journalist" conducting the interview because she started the interview off by referring to his co-star (and only one of the most celebrated and influential living American actors) in an all to disrespectfully-familiar, not to mention inaccurate ("Freemand"?!? really?) way. Per @11, I think that would be plenty to justify Mr. Eisenberg's <>-ishness! In fact, I give him props for being able to make the overly entitled little twit look SO bad without anyone being able to deride him for being any more than just mildly-awkwardly demeaning. Well played Mr. Eisenberg... well played!
You can probably come up with something that doesn't involve apologies to any particular group or papier-mache organ.
People will say that "dick" is ok because of power dynamics, but really people just do not want to lose the "freedom" to call people dicks. It is a great little compact insult, isn't it? But then again, we could all just use "asshole" and skip the whole gender mess. Does make our profanity a bit dull though.
Personally, I do not really care what words people choose to use, but there it is.
@15, now you're talking. Eisenberg is clearly the cunt here. The interviewer is a SILLY cunt, which is an entirely different thing. Neither are reproductive organs.
Personally, I'm not super invested in policing anybody's speech. But the example given does smack of hypocrisy, and your reasoning is flimsy.
I don't know who these young people are.
No, she's not a dick. She's something else but I think most of her friends and the 3 fan boys in the corner all know that. She just doesn't.
Go Jesse.
He was in a big movie, but he's still a person able to be pushed to their breaking point by a person who confuses them for their movie role.