Free demeaning to women and porn download

quote.... Demeaning to women and porn .... unquote

Kenny Chesney is not pleased with his country comrades. In a recent interview with Billboard Magazine, the country music legend and Nashville’s greatest muscle-T enthusiast went on the record to speak out about the proliferation of “bro-country” in recent years—a toxic and often criticized subgenre that must have Jimmie Rogers, Hank Williams and Waylon Jennings rolling in their graves.

“Over the last several years, it seems like anytime anybody sings about a woman, she’s in cut-off jeans, drinking and on a tailgate. They objectify the hell out of them,” Chesney said. “Twenty years ago, I might have written a song like that. I probably did. But I’m at a point where I want to say something different about women.”

Popular country music hasn’t been true to its wholesome roots for a while now, but bro-country, which New York Magazine’s Jody Rosen describes as “music by and of the tatted, gym-toned, party-hearty young American white dude,” has taken things to the next level. Their music explores familiar machismo themes such as booze, trucks and booty-shaking, and objectifies women in ways that are almost retro. We had this exact conversation about rap music over a decade ago.

This summer, the teenage Nashville duo Maddie & Tae decided to call out the boys with their hit single “Girl in a Country Song,” a catchy lampoon that rehashes every ridiculous stereotype that bro-country promotes, from cut-off shorts to days spent doing nothing but lookin’ pretty in the shotgun seat of some dude’s truck.

Our willingness to consume their uninspired, macho moonshine clearly says a lot about our tastes as a culture, but to determine how exactly bro-country celebrates women, we decided to conduct a quick, entirely unscientific analysis of popular lyrics. Take a gander at the five things we learned about women from bro-country music:

Ride this Chevy down a little backroad
Slide your pretty little self on over
Get a little closer, turn up the radio
Put your pretty pink toes on the dash
Lean your seat back
Man, I swear there ain’t nothing looks better than that
—“Take a Ride” by Jason Aldean

You got that suntan, skirt and boots
Waiting on you to look my way and scoot
Your little hot self over here
Girl hand me another beer, yeah!
— “That’s My Kind Of Night” by Luke Bryan

Strawberry shimmer on hot lips
Silver buckle hangin’ off her hips
Feeling lucky, got hooked up with some Kentucky clear
So slide that little sugar shaker over here
—“Get Your Shine On” by Florida Georgia Line

Hillary Clinton is sick. This should’ve been obvious, but it came to a head on Sunday when she collapsed at a 9/11 memorial event in New York City. Sunday evening her campaign announced she had pneumonia .

Initially, her supporters pushed the narrative that she had simply overheated, in large part because she was wearing heavy, constraining clothes that only women wear. The idea that men don’t wear stifling clothes in the heat is ridiculous, of course, to anyone who has been on a subway in the dead of summer and seen a train full of men in suits and women in sundresses.

Peter Daou, a former adviser to Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, said he found the 75-degree New York City day too hot for even a stroll that morning. When many New Yorkers responded with the activities they were doing in the downright pleasant weather, Daou accused them of lying.

Marlow Stern, an editor at The Daily Beast, assumed Hillary fainted because she was wearing Kevlar. Humorist Caissie St. Onge suggested Hillary simply blame Spanx — a slimming body attire women all over America wear under their clothes without fainting — and lock down 100 percent of the female voters who would be able to relate.

Igor Volsky, deputy director of Center for American Progress Action Fund, tweeted: “Men seen as resilient: GWB [George W. Bush] chokes on pretzel&faints. Cheney has heart surgeries. Women seen as fragile& so HRC story covered differently.”

Emily Bell, a director of digital journalism at Columbia Journalism School, tweeted that “If feeling sick, faint and too hot is a ‘serious health concern’ precluding high office then no woman over 50 is ever going to be president.” As if no woman over 50 had ever been in a leadership role and been able to handle various temperatures. Golda Meir and Margaret Thatcher, who were respectively aged 71 and 54 when they held their country’s highest office, beg to differ.

Finally, when unable to deny that Hillary had been seriously sick and pretending otherwise, the narrative became how she was emblematic of women powering through and getting the job done even when risking a lung collapse. Like a bad sitcom where the wife is always right and the husband is a lovable doofus, Hillary’s surrogates insisted that soldiering on in the face of contagious infections is just something that women do.

Emily Hauser, a columnist at The Week, tweeted, “So what I’m hearing is that Clinton got really sick & soldiered on anyway, & most people didn’t even notice b/c that’s what women do.” Actor Patton Oswalt seconded that, and tweeted: “Wait, so Hillary has PNEUMONIA and she’s still campaigning as hard as she is? You realize how badass that is, right?”

“Dehumanisation is viewed as a central component to intergroup violence because it is frequently the most important precursor to moral exclusion, the process by which stigmatized groups are placed outside the boundary in which moral values, rules, and considerations of fairness apply.” [8]

David Livingstone Smith, director and founder of The Human Nature Project at the University of New England, argues that historically, human beings have been dehumanizing one another for thousands of years. [9]

In Herbert Kelman 's work on dehumanization, humanness has two features: "identity" (i.e., a perception of the person "as an individual, independent and distinguishable from others, capable of making choices") and "community" (i.e., a perception of the person as "part of an interconnected network of individuals who care for each other"). When a target's agency and community embeddedness are denied, they no longer elicit compassion or other moral responses, and may suffer violence as a result. [10]

According to Haslam, the animalistic form of dehumanization occurs when uniquely human characteristics (e.g., refinement, moral sensibility) are denied to an outgroup . People that suffer animalistic dehumanization are seen as amoral, unintelligent, and lacking self-control, and they are likened to animals. This has happened to Conservatives in the United States, Jewish people during The Holocaust , and the Tutsi ethnic group during the Rwandan Genocide . While usually employed on an intergroup basis, animalistic dehumanization can occur on an interpersonal basis as well.

The mechanistic form occurs when features of human nature (e.g., cognitive flexibility, warmth, agency) are denied to targets. Targets of mechanistic dehumanization are seen as cold, rigid, interchangeable, lacking agency, and likened to machines or objects. Mechanistic dehumanization is usually employed on an interpersonal basis (e.g., when a person is seen as a means to another's end). [1]

Delegitimization is the "categorization of groups into extreme negative social categories which are excluded from human groups that are considered as acting within the limits of acceptable norms and/or values." [5]

Moral exclusion occurs when outgroups are subject to a different set of moral values, rules, and fairness than are used in social relations with ingroup members. [6] When individuals dehumanize others, they no longer experience distress when they treat them poorly. Moral exclusion is used to explain extreme behaviors like genocide, harsh immigration policies , and eugenics , but can also happen on a more regular, everyday discriminatory level. In laboratory studies, people who are portrayed as lacking human qualities have been found to be treated in a particularly harsh and violent manner. [13] [14] [15]

Martha Nussbaum (1999) identified seven components of objectification: "instrumentality", "ownership", "denial of autonomy", "inertness", "fungibility", "violability", and "denial of subjectivity". [7]

Manustatud video  · demeaning . transitive verb: to lower in character, status, or reputation. Origin and Etymology of demean . de-+ 1 mean... What made you want to look up demean ?

The media impression is that porn is pretty much harmless, sexy, fun. But the experts gathered together by Princeton's Witherspoon Institute, have a different view. A large portion of today's porn is so much more hard-core now.

"Particularly on the Internet, where much of pornography today is consumed, the type of sexuality depicted often has more to do with violence, extreme fetishes, and mutual degradation than with fun, much less with sexual or emotional connection," Paul wrote.

For instance, men consuming porn rate their partners much less attractive than do those who avoid porn. For many porn addicts, when it comes to a real partner, it renders them nearly impotent or much less satisfied with their partner.

"If they had to choose between an actual sex partner who is in the bed and waiting for them, and going online, they'd go online," University of Pennsylvania psychologist Mary Anne Layden said of porn addicts she's studied.

It's even causing divorces. A 2004 Elle/ poll indicated one out of four divorces had something to do with Internet pornography or online adult chat activity. And the rate has gone up since "it's up something like 20 percent in the last five years," Eberstadt said.

Addicts are now losing jobs because they couldn't stop surfing porn on computers at work. More are suffering from depression and stress caused by porn addiction. More are spending less time with their children because of that addiction.

" Pornography's effects rippled out, touching all aspects of their existence," she explained. "Their work days became interrupted, their hobbies were tossed aside, their family lives were disrupted. Some men even lost their jobs, their wives, and their children."

It's so widespread among teens, 65 percent of 16- and 17-year-old boys and 46 percent of 16- and 17-year-old girls admit they have friends who regularly download pornography. Research shows teen girls exposed to a high amount of porn have sex earlier, are more promiscuous, take more sexual risks, and engage in more anal and group sex. So do the boys.

I’ve been a bit vocal lately on how feminism negatively affects men and fathers and encourages them to behave in ways that ultimately undermine themselves, women and relationships . In the interest of fairness and equality, today I would like to point out how feminism insults and demeans women. Feminists claim to represent and promote the interests of women, but if you scratch the surface, you’ll find that feminism embraces a streak of misogyny to make the ancient patriarchs green with envy. Here are six ways that feminism insults, belittles and demeans the women it is supposedly supporting and encouraging.

Feminist laws about consent turn grown women into slobbering, babbling toddlers who must be interrogated at every stage of the game to see what their thoughts might be, rather like trying to figure out which underpants your two-year-old wants to wear when he has forgotten the words “Incredible Hulk.” My, how empowering. No thanks .

In the era of clickbait journalism, it’s incredibly rare to see headlines like “Unusual Situation Happened Last Night” or some other misleading or elusive headline that downplays the actual events. Quite the opposite. But feminists adore trigger warnings because it reinforces the idea that women are ruled by their emotions, are incapable of recovering from trauma and are just generally hysterical nitwits unprepared to confront adulthood and reality. How encouraging! How supportive! No thanks.

The Duluth Model —which emphasizes that no matter what injuries a woman has inflicted on a man, the man should be considered the perpetrator—also reinforces the idea that women are equivalent to children who must not be held responsible for their actions because they lack the maturity and rationality to understand what they are doing. You don’t arrest a child for kicking her mother, but you do arrest a mother for kicking her child. When it comes to domestic violence, feminists consider the women children. Gee, that’s not infantilizing at all. The trouble with being human is that sometimes humans suck and they act like deranged, violent assholes and, sorry, feminists, but men do not have the market cornered on that at all (*cough* Hope Solo *cough*).

Affirmative action programs were born out of a time in which black students in particular were denied access to higher education for no reason other than the fact they were black. They had the abilities, grades, achievements and skills to be in a particular discipline and were denied the opportunity because of the level of melanin in their skin. Those were worthwhile programs that needed to happen, but then feminists got hold of them. They began to change programs from ones designed to address real, actual prejudice and promote a meritocracy into ones designed to force access for the un- or under-qualified simply because.

Interestingly enough , affirmative action programs that push qualified black students higher up the academic chain are more likely to result in those students dropping out, since being perfectly qualified to compete in a B-level school but getting shoved up to an A-level because someone thinks superficial diversity is a good idea means that a competitive student is suddenly facing adversaries he or she is not qualified to compete with.

This is the exact impact that pushing women into STEM careers is having. Women are encouraged to ignore what their natural needs and wants are, enter careers that they are only nominally qualified to be in and guess what happens? The vast majority of women with STEM qualifications are not working in the field at all . Money and time wasted, all because feminism thinks women should be forced into ideologically defined roles (Engineer! Astrophysicist! Chemist!) that meet their fantasies of “equality.” Feminism insults women by telling them that their natural interests are wrong and they are too stupid to know what’s good for them. No thanks.

If trigger warnings are the dumbest thing to come out of feminism, microaggressions are a close second. The very definition of pettiness, microaggressions are teeny-tiny irritations that women are encouraged to nurture into long-standing grudges until they spill out into hysteria and mania. Did you once go for coffee with a guy and it led to sex? Any time a guy asks you for coffee, it automatically means he wants to fuck you! Were you one time slightly uncomfortable in an elevator with a guy you sort of knew but not really? Men on elevators will attack you! Did a guy on an elevator ask you for coffee? Sexual harassment! Alert the presses! Asking women for coffee is a way to remind them that elevators are perfect places to rape!

How does the boast 'I breastfeed my puppy' strike you? Or 'I had sex with my car'? As some kind of sick joke, I would suspect. Unless, perhaps, you are an avid reader of Closer magazine, in which case you would know they are the real-life confessions of everyday folk, who might include that nice girl next door with the new dog or the chap down the road who spends a lot of time polishing his motor.

For 30 years I lived, breathed - and defended - women's magazines. For 13 of those years, I worked on Cosmopolitan, and for the last five of those years, from the mid-Eighties, I was that magazine's editor.

So it could be that the words pot, kettle and black spring to mind when I say that I am shocked, bewildered and disgusted by what has happened to women's magazines since the days when the weeklies were the cosy end of the market, all about knitting patterns and 50 ways with leftovers.

You could accuse me of hypocrisy. You might tell me I am out of touch with the interests, needs and desires of younger women. You could tell me that I'm one of the architects of the problem. But you can't take away the fact that as I browsed the magazines at WH Smith at Waterloo station this week, I felt an overwhelming wave of nausea.

First to assault my eyes was Closer, with the coverline: 'Incest Mum Shock: Sex with my son sets me on fire.' This is the magazine that also proudly claims on its cover: The UK's No 1 Celeb and Real Life Mag.

Sometimes I would kick myself that Elle's supermodel cover girl was a little more super than Cosmo's that month. I might lament that the graphics on Marie Claire were more stylish than ours or that the colours used on Vogue's cover put Cosmo in the shade.

But there was one area - the key area, as far I was concerned from a sales point of view - where Cosmopolitan could never be beaten. Cosmo's coverlines were the boldest, the brashest, the best in the business.

Sometimes they were very funny, indeed, and sometimes they were a little shocking, but they worked. On the strength of those coverlines, and the stories that went with them, Cosmo remained the Number One women's glossy for three decades.

All content on this website, including dictionary, thesaurus, literature, geography, and other reference data is for informational purposes only. This information should not be considered complete, up to date, and is not intended to be used in place of a visit, consultation, or advice of a legal, medical, or any other professional.

With all the things I desperately wish were imported into Australia from America (Cheerios, drive-through espresso stands, and honest-to-goodness Mexican food), Hooters is somewhere near the bottom of that ever-loving list, right above the broken health care system.

I’m pretty sure that everyone knows what kind of a restaurant Hooters is—they are self-classified as an “adult entertainment” venue —but did you know that they employ girls as young as thirteen years old who are required to sign that they “acknowledge and affirm” the following:

How in the world they can try to market a restaurant based on sex appeal as a “family friendly” environment (even offering ‘kids eat free’ nights and children’s promotional apparel) is completely beyond me.

We spoke up – single people, married people, religious people, non-religious people, people with sons, people with daughters, young women, old women, young men, old men. A whole slew of us spoke up.

Here’s the thing, I’m not personally offended by these comments at all. I’m not ugly, or lazy, or jealous. I’m not Amish, or bored, or prude. I’m definitely not a redneck and I’m fairly certain that those who know me would never peg me as small-minded. (I’m not sure what’s wrong with being a “do-gooder” so I’ll go ahead and give ‘em that one.)

So even though these comments don’t offend me, they do sadden me. For every “anti” Hooters comment left on that thread there were probably 50 “pro” comments. (Never mind they sounded like they all copy+pasted what the person above them wrote and then threw in the “people wear less at the shopping mall” stellar line of reasoning to drive home their point about the “small minded rednecks living under a rock” who voiced our opposition.) It worries me profoundly that we live in an era where legitimate concerns about the welfare of women are tossed out of the arena and labeled as irrelevant and outdated.

Because here’s what I think is grossly outdated : patriarchal societal norms where women are sexually exploited for the pleasure and entertainment of men… even normalized to the point of women themselves volunteering for it.

In another comment a young woman told of how she was shocked when she visited a Hooters in Sydney and then went a second time and realized “how wonderful it all was and that only their arms were exposed”. This kind of a comment demonstrates how desensitized we have all become.


Trump said Friday he doesn’t recognize the words Fox News’s Megyn Kelly used during a debate on Thursday. Kelly asked about him having called women “fat pigs,” ”dogs,” ”slobs,” and “disgusting animals.”

In the debate, Trump joked that he was only referring to talk show host Rosie O’Donnell but didn’t deny having used the insults. “I don’t frankly have time for total political correctness,” Trump said during the debate.

“You know, some of the statements she made about the women, I don’t recognize those words whatsoever,” Trump said on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” ”We’re going to take a very serious look at it.”

He said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” ”Not that I’m an angel, by the way. But I don’t recognize those words, so you know, she was spewing out these words, and I’m sitting there. … We’re going to have it checked out.”





Photo Gallery