October 31, 2014
Friday Inflammatory Debate Topic
The commander of U.S. troops in South Korea is dropping the hammer on that country’s notorious “juicy bars,” which use women as sex workers who cater to U.S. troops.
Many of the women are illegally smuggled into South Korea from other countries, including the Philippines. They are treated as the property of “juicy bar” proprietors, who steal their passports and claim the women owe them money for bringing them into the country.
The women are forced to sell themselves as companions to U.S. troops, who can buy overpriced juice drinks from them. A 2002 Military Times investigation profiled a “juicy girl,” who said she did not make enough money by selling drinks to pay off her debt to her bar owner, so she had to resort to charging U.S. service members for sex.
How is this the same/different from the Secret Service brouhaha? (sorry, Don!)
May 02, 2014
Friday Incendiary Debate Question
So, a while back Sheryl Sandberg's campaign to "ban" the term bossy generated lots of outrage and excitement on the right. Many lofty principles regarding the desirability of free and open speech and the hideous dangers of discouraging even obnoxious or disrespectful rhetoric were aired.
Which leads the Blog Princess to snidely ponder this question: "If it's dangerous and wrong/bad to discourage speech we don't like, then isn't this sort of thing dangerous and wrong/bad too?"
“Negative general portrayals of fathers/husbands/men in TV commercials and sit-coms contributes to a decrease in men wanting to assume those roles in society, and creates the impression among others that men need not assume such roles anyways, that such simply aren’t important,” Matt Campbell, an administrator for Mensactivism.org told reporter Sarah Peterson.
A couple of years ago CNN produced a story on how a bunch of dads had decided to fight the “doofus dad” trope. “We’re not the Peter Griffin or the Homer Simpson that we’re often portrayed as,” Kevin Metzger, who runs the Dadvocate blog told reporter Josh Levs. The protest was prompted by a series of Huggies commercials portraying fathers as idiots.
If women complaining about negative stereotypes typically used against women endangers free speech, then doesn't it logically follow that men complaining about negative stereotypes typically aimed at men is wrong on the same grounds?
How do we "kill" a stereotype, anyway? Shoot it through the heart? Wag our fingers at it sternly? Make disapproving faces at it? Or simply respond to it with opposing ... ummm.... speech. Which is said to be dangerous when certain people speak out, but a healthy and vibrant exercise of democracy when others do the exact same thing :p
The mind boggles.