Use of typically misogynistic words to describe women on MN

[minewouldbeyoug]

I'm talking about threads where an OP has discovered infidelity and the OW is referred to by posters as having 'no morals', being a whore, a slut, a cock - sucker etc.

There was a long - running thread (over several threads as they all filled up) here a little while ago where the OW had been described by the DH she was having an affair with as a really derogatory term which then was adopted as her 'title' rather than OW.

I in no way wanted to derail those threads where the OP needed a great deal of support. Which is why I've left it a little while before talking about my discomfort.

The threads were vicious about the DH as well but he was a bastard, a twat etc because there just aren't words like whore or slut that are applied to men.

The OP didn't use such degrading terms to describe the OW but many, many posters did.

I'm guessing (and hoping!) that most of those posters wouldn't normally use such terms to describe women but somehow, OW are fair game?.

I feel this is an extension of the idea that men can kind of do what they want sexually but women are held to different standards and there is a plethora of abusive terms to describe women's sexual activity but not for men.

I just felt extremely uncomfortable that women were using such terms - terms that have historically been used as unfair and abusive judgements by men to comment on women's sexuality.

YonicScrewdriver
So how is it necessarily sexist to use these words?

Someone does something of a sexual nature that I consider bad, and I wish to find a pejorative to express what I think of them. You could argue that it is sexist that the English language has not provided us with equivalent pejoratives to express that we think a man has behaved badly, sexually, but it has for women who behave badly, sexually, and I might wish to make use of them.

Well not me personally, as I tend not to insult people at all, but you get my drift.

I don't see the use of language that intrinsically insults people for being Jewish or black (or a woman) as the same thing. That is definitely dodgy.

The word only applies to women. It is a word being used as an insult not a descriptor. It is a sexist word.

Did I say they were "the same"? No. Would I find one racist and the other sexist? Yes.

I'm really not sure what point you are trying to make. Do you think the words whore and slut are sexist, or not?

You could argue that it is sexist that the English language has not provided us with equivalent pejoratives to express that we think a man has behaved badly, sexually, but it has for women who behave badly, sexually, and I might wish to make use of them

where you do you think "the English language" comes from?! Why are there not equivalent pejoratives to express that we think a man has behave badly, sexually?

"Do you think the words whore and slut are sexist, or not?"

Not intrinsically, in terms of their very meanings, no.

Does the fact that such words for women who behave a certain way came to exist, whereas none came to exist for men who behave in the same ways, speak of societal sexism and double standards? Yes.

Is the specific individual who would censure these behaviours by women but not when they are by men, being sexist and applying double standards? Yes.

Righty ho, thanks.

So, words aren't sexist...people are?

I think the words are clearly sexist. On the very rare occasions I've heard a man referred to as a slut it's been prefixed by 'man' signifying in my view that man - slut is different to a woman - slut because that needs no prefix, she's always just called a slut.

One of the threads that prompted my OP was where the DH when initially confronted by the DW described the OW in an extremely demeaning and objectifying way as 'wank fodder'. That was adopted as her NN on the threads by women who referred to her as WF rather than OW.

The OP never used that term but many posters did. And I feel uncomfortable mentioning it as I absolutely believe the OP needed support and she had literally thousands of posts over a few threads so I don't want to make about her threads as she was beyond reproach IMO.

But I felt so uncomfortable reading women referring to another woman as WF because she had an affair with a married man. Or referring to any woman in that way.

I hate her behaviour but I felt awful seeing women adopt such a demeaning term to describe another woman.

'Wank fodder' is horrible
They need to be more angry with the man

They are extremely angry with the man; it was he who used the term 'wank fodder'

No, you haven't misunderstood. They, and I, continued to use the term that the horrendous H had used about the OW whilst justifying to his loyal and loving wife, and mother of his children, why he wasn't as bad as she thought.

I understood the motivation of the OP in feminist chat but I'm frankly really unhappy that you have zoned in on a specific woman and the women who are trying to support her. Continuing to refer to the OW in the derogatory terms introduced by the H was because the shat-on W kept comparing herself unfavourably - directly as a result of the H's bs narrative - against the angel OW who was pretty much perfect in every way. "He thinks she's so wonderful, I can never match up to it, he thinks she's amazing and I've always been shit…." NO, please, keep in mind that he referred to her as 'wank fodder', don't let him now rewrite history...

The huge, overwhelming response to those now 5 threads has been that the DH is fucking awful and the OW no worse or no better. But it's the DH who's a massive arsehole.

For anyone to call upon that specific thread in feminist chat, when a woman has been blindsided and is now on her knees, makes me think the concept of 'sisterhood' is utter bullshit.

I've asked my friend, who's H has also recently blindsided her with pretty much similar language if we can use the way people, including her h have described the OW. She's ok with it. No "sisterhood" problems there.

Have at it.

I couldn't even be remotely friendly with a man who referred to a woman he had had sexual relations with as "wank fodder", and the OP is right, we do not have corresponding terms for men like that.

Some of this reminds of some "reality shows" on Mexican TV. They put a cheating man between his wife and OW and wife and OW spend their time trying to hit each other without doing anything to the man. The man is actually being treated as if he were underage, too feeble-minded to know what he was doing, whereas the OW is treated as a responsible adult.

Not on point with the previous discussion but I hate the way "pearl clutching" is used on MN

It obviously is supposed to depict a certain type of woman not man - middle aged, middle class, conservative and it is very dismissive and contemptious of what that woman is saying simply because of who she is as she says it - and the phrase is only used about women. It is basically saying "you feel outrage and are expressing it but I will minimise your outrage and treat it like some sort of female stereotypical rant because I don't agree with you" Argue with her like a woman but don't dismiss for being a perceived stereotype.

I haven't expressed this very well but women - even those in twin sets - even those who are conservative or easily shocked - have voices to be heard and also fought long and hard for their voices to be heard not dismissed and we aren't half there yet. I hate the phrase used by women against women.

I must admit that a part of women's anger at the OW is the lack of sisterhood that their actions involve.

But why would the sisterhood mean saying it's acceptable to use demeaning and abusive terms about another woman just because she had sex with a married man?.

And it looks like the OP on those threads never used that term to describe the OW and she was the one who'd been blindsided and her life turned upside down.

It's a disgusting way to refer to another woman. By reinforcing it and repeating it you're saying yes, he was right - that reference to her being something to wank over. Just an object to wank over basically - is what she is. That's how she should be referred to.

I'm surprised 'sisterhood' involves scrutinising a betrayed woman's thread from Relationships in Feminist Chat without asking her.

Laurie, OP said she wouldn't have posted on the thread in question, or indeed any thread where a woman has been betrayed, because it's not right to interfere with the support. She's commenting on a more general trend.

The H in question sounds like a scumbag to refer to the OW in that way in an attempt to minimise or justify his actions!

Maybe best if we don't focus on that particular instance going forward. I've seen it a bit on other topics, suddenly in a Chat thread there will be a description of a woman as a stupid slapper or whatever that makes me gulp.

Yonic - the OP, as you say, directed the comments towards a more general trend...but as soon as it got specific, that's when I think it became a problem. So the last I'll say on it is, frankly, I don't think it matters whether you are male or female: if you send photos of yourself to another married person with the purpose of providing them with material to wank over, then, um…

Canyou… I also dislike "pearl clutching". It's used by men too, outside of MN, to dismiss men and women.

"So, words aren't sexist...people are?"

It's perfectly possible for a word to have a definition, a meaning, that is sexist. It is also possible for this not to be the case, but the individual using the word is using it in a sexist way.

Not sure either apply to the kinds of denigrations of other women that we are talking about here.

Righty ho.

Moving on... I am seeing slapper challenged wherever it is used, which is great.