Goals for gender equality in a world where sexuality is sensibly free.

[cantata]

I'll be the judge of that... have you got a webcam?

Yes, but I also have a boyfriend

 

[stan1980]

Yes, but I also have a boyfriend

Ah.. No fun.. *zips back up*

 

[Braunwyn]

Obviously I wouldn't know anything about that. It is not like the civil rights movement in the US had any effect on my country. It is not like the Parks and the Kings in America had any effect in my country. It is not they are seen as heroes in this country. It is not like they inspired people here to demand their civil rights. But they were all white so I guess that doesn't matter then, I guess on Bloody Sunday those people demanding their rights inspired by the great fight that black Americans took up and were shot for their peaceful protest, there death doesn't matter because of the colour of their skin?
And America is the centre of the world? Note when you are degrading millions of people because of their skin colour most them are not living in America.

When I first addressed the topic of race I made a point to note my point of reference and that I can only speak from that point of reference. So, I don't really understand why your feathers are ruffled. I'm certainly not degrading anyone. I am attesting to the disparity that occurs in the US due to white on black racism. And it's not as if such racism is isolated to the US. European colonization, the slave trade, etc largely benefited whites, and dominated blacks/non-whites globally. And that's not a challenge to Slavs or Poles or anyone else.

I would call you an idiot, however I would probably think you would misunderstand the insult. There is no such thing as races, there are cultures, again no such thing as races. In keeping in mind that I don't think races exist, it is just for your cultural thing, you are a massive racist (idiot).

Race is a cultural term. You can deny the existence of this term all you like and the meaning it holds but that doesn't really do much. As far as your attempt at a poorly delivered insult, give me a break. No one has offered the term to be used as a biologicial classification.

Short sighted is not an insult from someone that can't see past the bubble they live in.

When I stated my original position as subjective I thought I was pretty clear. I can only speak from where I stand and I realize this. You obviously do not.

I happen to hear about the American civil rights movement almost every week on television. It's talked about to the exclusion of other important civil rights movements around the world.

... so if people in other nations do not know everything about America they are "short sighted" (to use your term) but if Americans don't know about other major historical events it's being knowledgable?

For pete's sake - short sited in the sense that white euorpean on black/non-white domination/colonization/enslavement is a huge part of european history, not the other way around. It's preposterous that you would take my meaning of a non-american not knowing american history as short sited. I'll concede that I may not be communicating well but it still reads as an assumption from where I sit.

To be clear - as far as what I see of racism today, my view can only come from my perspective, that as an american.

I think there are millions of Jews and Gypsies who would disagree with you on that. They were repressed in Europe and North America - yes, almost all of Europe and many parts of North America - well into the 20th century.

It's a little depressing that Americans are not learning about their own respression of Jewish people.

It's a little depressing that you are being so presumptuous but ok. I don't want to misunderstand you so please correct me where I'm wrong but the position here is that non-whites haven't had to contend with anymore descrimination than whites have (due to Jews, gypsies etc). The fact non-whites have not globally dominated whites is of little consequence because of the persecution of some european groups by other european groups. Is that what you're saying?

I think that many want to believe that economic slavery is not slavery because it makes it easier to buy ultra-cheap products that require a lot of pollution to be spewed out and a lot of people to be in total poverty to be manufactured.

Ok, sure. But in this case consumers are directly contributing to econmic slavery. What I'm speaking of is people who are not racist or sexist themselves (as far as I can tell), who do not contribute to it directly, though perhaps indirectly by denying the existence of it, but get ruffled over the topic.

Or maybe I misread your post and it was more of passive/aggressive charge based on stereotypical bigotry? hmmm, now that I read it over again, maybe.

 

[Braunwyn]

I think only a fool would claim racism and sexism doesn't exist. The specific claim in this thread though, that the manner in which women give oral sex to men in pornography is sexist/degrading, is a contentious issue. The debate here mainly, has been whether that is sexist/degrading. Some people think it is, some not. Whether it is or isn't, it is in no way clear cut, and I don't think anyone is really ignoring sexism but saying that this isn't a form of sexism.

Indeed. I haven't addressed the point of this thread (my bad cantata) outside of noting the earlier misunderstanding of porn reflecting society values and not vice versa. Imo, most porn is just plain ol sexist regardless of position for oral sex. Re: fools, there are those that yelp "get over it", "we have laws that protect so hence it's not issue" etc. IIRC, there were a couple of those claims that piqued my interest in the thread.

As as a side note, to try and put this into perspective, my dad was an immigrant to the UK in the 70s, we don't really have much contact these days, but being the son of an immigrant, I have to continually hear stuff like "they're stealing our jobs", "chuck them out", "stop them coming in" etc. not just from people on the street, but this stuff gets printed by some of Britain's most popular tabloids on almost a daily basis. This, as you can imagine, doesn't make me feel good, and this sort of propaganda in my opinion dwarfs any perceived sexism that exists in the UK right now. I'm not claiming sexism doesn't exist, and I am against any form of discrimination, I just don't see sexism as that big a problem in my country. We live in different countries, so I don't know what it is like in the US, but here, if you want to look for people who are treated or made to feel like second class citizens, look at the immigrants, asylum seekers, and children (and adults) who live in poor or deprived areas. Are females in general still made to be felt like second class citizens in this country? Well not being female, it is hard to say, but I think not, but please correct me if you think I'm wrong. I know in other countries, you have said that your 'sisters' are treated badly, but lets not forget, they are my 'sisters' too, and I dare say I am just as appalled as you are.

I don't doubt that you are appalled, Stan. Of course perceptions of sexism will vary from country to country but I don't know if it's in the same league as racism. From what I gather that seems to be the case for racism but sexism is a different breed because it spans across all ethnicities.

From an American female's perspective "are women made to feel like second class citizens?" As I mentioned earlier, there are so many ways we can address this question. The most overwhelming insult imo, coming from a country that is predominantly christian, is the fact that god is viewed as male with the aside that woman is responsible for the fall-this is the easiest to tackle. Yes, there are many debates about god being gender free but in the day-to-day these debates hold little value. God is indeed viewed as male in the US and the application of this view is what matters.

Does this affect my ability to get an education? no. A good job? no. Yes, there are complaints from plenty in the christian right that complain that men are doing poorly, that our economy is no good, because women have emerged on the job market. Honestly, that doesn't really bug me. Fortunately, I wasn't alive in my grandmother's time. She's still alive and relates her stories. She couldn't by a house without her husband's approval/signature even though she wanted to do so with her own money. But her husband could by a house without her.

What does bother me is my own family. At my wedding my mother objected to me having a female officient to marry me and my dh. "It's just not right" she says. It's not right for any woman to hold a high religious position. She cusses women drivers and thinks men tend to be more intelligent. I have a father that holds "traditional" values as well re: the sexes. Women cannot contend with technology, aren't good at math/science, are financially irresponsible (like to shop) etc. So no, those things didn't legally stop me from achieving what I have, even though it was ingrained in me from an early age, but I can seen how it would thwart another woman's growth. Couple that with the confliction I see in many older sexist women. They simulataneously hold sexist views while being resentful against men for the consequences of sexism that both genders bare. It's effed up.

Again, it's subtle, not because the descrimination is actually subtle but because it's socially acceptable. Sexism is a part of our culture. And let me be clear that I don't view men as the perpetrators and women as the victims. It takes two-to-tango.

 

[stan1980]

Indeed. I haven't addressed the point of this thread (my bad cantata) outside of noting the earlier misunderstanding of porn reflecting society values and not vice versa. Imo, most porn is just plain ol sexist regardless of position for oral sex. Re: fools, there are those that yelp "get over it", "we have laws that protect so hence it's not issue" etc. IIRC, there were a couple of those claims that piqued my interest in the thread.

Out of interest, would you say that porn made by women for women, is also sexist? (this stuff is available if you look hard enough, catering for both heterosexual and homosexual women)

From an American female's perspective "are women made to feel like second class citizens?" As I mentioned earlier, there are so many ways we can address this question. The most overwhelming insult imo, coming from a country that is predominantly christian, is the fact that god is viewed as male with the aside that woman is responsible for the fall-this is the easiest to tackle. Yes, there are many debates about god being gender free but in the day-to-day these debates hold little value. God is indeed viewed as male in the US and the application of this view is what matters.

Even though there was a thread about this a little while back, I honestly didn't realise this was much of a big deal. In the interests of fairness and equality though, I personally will do my little bit to balance out this situation, by referring to God as a she from now on. It makes no difference to me plus it might ruffle a few feathers too, and ruffling some Christian feathers is always appealing to me!

Does this affect my ability to get an education? no. A good job? no. Yes, there are complaints from plenty in the christian right that complain that men are doing poorly, that our economy is no good, because women have emerged on the job market. Honestly, that doesn't really bug me. Fortunately, I wasn't alive in my grandmother's time. She's still alive and relates her stories. She couldn't by a house without her husband's approval/signature even though she wanted to do so with her own money. But her husband could by a house without her.

What does bother me is my own family. At my wedding my mother objected to me having a female officient to marry me and my dh. "It's just not right" she says. It's not right for any woman to hold a high religious position. She cusses women drivers and thinks men tend to be more intelligent. I have a father that holds "traditional" values as well re: the sexes. Women cannot contend with technology, aren't good at math/science, are financially irresponsible (like to shop) etc. So no, those things didn't legally stop me from achieving what I have, even though it was ingrained in me from an early age, but I can seen how it would thwart another woman's growth. Couple that with the confliction I see in many older sexist women. They simulataneously hold sexist views while being resentful against men for the consequences of sexism that both genders bare. It's effed up.

Yes, I've found that a lot of the sexists and racists come from the older generation, but they are a dying breed so to speak, and will indeed be dead soon. I'm pretty confident that as each generation passes, the racists and sexists will become fewer and fewer.

Again, it's subtle, not because the descrimination is actually subtle but because it's socially acceptable. Sexism is a part of our culture.

I really think times are changing though, and it is now becoming quite clear that sexism isn't socially acceptable, nor is racism. If you were to come out with anything sexist or racist in the workplace, you can be pretty sure you'll be up before a disciplinary at most places. Eventually, I think we will be able to say the same thing about homophobia too. Sure, it still all exists in its subtle forms but it is becoming less. I'm not so confident that xenophobia is anywhere near on the way out though, in all its shapes and forms.

And let me be clear that I don't view men as the perpetrators and women as the victims. It takes two-to-tango.

I never doubted it

 

[Braunwyn]

Out of interest, would you say that porn made by women for women, is also sexist? (this stuff is available if you look hard enough, catering for both heterosexual and homosexual women)

It would depend I suppose. I'm not thinking of particular acts found in porn. Maybe some of it is sexist in nature. I'm not familiar with porn enough to know and I haven't spent the time to consider it. I have spent time researching the consequences met by women that enter the sex industry in general and have found disparity to be a component, which is rooted in sexism imo. Just because women happen to be producing porn doesn't mean the actors are in a better situation but again, I'm not sure what porn for women made by women entails.

Even though there was a thread about this a little while back, I honestly didn't realise this was much of a big deal.

It is a big deal, so much so that I wouldn't ask a guy to fathom it. Of course I don't think it would have much meaning to a non-believer but as a former christian I can say that believing the most supreme being ever/the creator of all as male, and that he made men in his image and women in man's, it's like being born into a spiritual caste system.

In the interests of fairness and equality though, I personally will do my little bit to balance out this situation, by referring to God as a she from now on. It makes no difference to me plus it might ruffle a few feathers too, and ruffling some Christian feathers is always appealing to me!

Well, that's mighty considerate of you.

Yes, I've found that a lot of the sexists and racists come from the older generation, but they are a dying breed so to speak, and will indeed be dead soon. I'm pretty confident that as each generation passes, the racists and sexists will become fewer and fewer.

I hope so. You'd think the same would happen with monotheism but that doesn't seem to be the case. Or, this forum might have too much of an influence on me. Is it possible for christianity/Islam/et al to continue on without sexism? Sexism and religion are tied. For sexism to come to pass than either these religions wil have to be reformed or they will have to come to pass as well. We'll see I guess.

I really think times are changing though, and it is now becoming quite clear that sexism isn't socially acceptable, nor is racism.

Not in the US. Open sexism is still accepted. For example, Hillary C. has been called a B**ch on prime time news (by another woman) and people didn't really blink an eye about it. Some found it shocking in a funny way. OTOH, some idiotic woman recently referred Obama as an inadequate "black" male and she was rightly ostracized for it. But, she was an old lady so hopefully you are correct in that her type will die out soon enough.

If you were to come out with anything sexist or racist in the workplace, you can be pretty sure you'll be up before a disciplinary at most places. Eventually, I think we will be able to say the same thing about homophobia too. Sure, it still all exists in its subtle forms but it is becoming less.

Agreed. Outward racism is and will be a rarity to find in the workplace. OTOH I think we can find the consequences of isms in the workplace if we look for it. For example, I bet it's difficult for women in general to demonstrate assertiveness at the level seen by sucessful men. Heck, for the fun of it...I recently cut my hair and a guy at my company commented on how women with long hair shouldn't cut their hair etc. This coming from a scientist though he is a bit on the silly/immature side. When he lost the goatee and grew his hair differently it really didn't dawn on me to express to him that he should look the way I think men should look.

Don't get me wrong, I wasn't offended and didn't yell sexism but he was sizing me up based on my appearance due to gender. And this makes me think of some article I read in an undergrad psych class. Beautiful people tend to be more sucessful. Tall men have advantages over short men; thin women over obese women, etc. So yes, it's an issue for men but given that female appearance gets way more air time socially over male appearance, this probably can be added to the many nuances in the sexist realm. But I'm just having a train of thought here.

I'm not so confident that xenophobia is anywhere near on the way out though, in all its shapes and forms.

Geeze Louise indeed

 

[stan1980]

I hope so. You'd think the same would happen with monotheism but that doesn't seem to be the case. Or, this forum might have too much of an influence on me. Is it possible for christianity/Islam/et al to continue on without sexism? Sexism and religion are tied. For sexism to come to pass than either these religions wil have to be reformed or they will have to come to pass as well. We'll see I guess.

I haven't got any stats to hand, but in the UK and Europe in general monotheism is on the way out. In Scandinavia I think about 80% don't believe in God, in the UK it's something like half. I barely know a person who even goes to church/mosque etc, so I wouldn't be surprised if the figure gets considerably lower in the coming years. I'd imagine the same thing will happen in the US.

Not in the US. Open sexism is still accepted. For example, Hillary C. has been called a B**ch on prime time news (by another woman) and people didn't really blink an eye about it.

Is that really sexist though? It's not a term I generally use, but if that is sexist then I might have to re-evaluate some of my insults, particularly when referring to people by male and female genitalia, such as dick, prick, [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] (which is generally saved for males) and the c word (which is used for males and females) plus loads more. Now if I was to call a woman a harlot, slag or something because they sleep around, that would definitely be sexist. I don't though.

Some found it shocking in a funny way. OTOH, some idiotic woman recently referred Obama as an inadequate "black" male and she was rightly ostracized for it. But, she was an old lady so hopefully you are correct in that her type will die out soon enough.

Yes, I think referring to someone's skin colour in the middle of an insult, should be avoided. An American saying that is catching on a little bit here is "white trash". That seems to be socially acceptable as I often hear it on the TV, but I'm not sure why that is acceptable, and is certainly not something you'll hear coming from my lips.

Agreed. Outward racism is and will be a rarity to find in the workplace. OTOH I think we can find the consequences of isms in the workplace if we look for it. For example, I bet it's difficult for women in general to demonstrate assertiveness at the level seen by sucessful men. Heck, for the fun of it...I recently cut my hair and a guy at my company commented on how women with long hair shouldn't cut their hair etc. This coming from a scientist though he is a bit on the silly/immature side. When he lost the goatee and grew his hair differently it really didn't dawn on me to express to him that he should look the way I think men should look.

Don't get me wrong, I wasn't offended and didn't yell sexism but he was sizing me up based on my appearance due to gender. And this makes me think of some article I read in an undergrad psych class. Beautiful people tend to be more sucessful. Tall men have advantages over short men; thin women over obese women, etc. So yes, it's an issue for men but given that female appearance gets way more air time socially over male appearance, this probably can be added to the many nuances in the sexist realm. But I'm just having a train of thought here.

Agreed. A lot of people will say men shouldn't have long hair too, as it makes them look like a girl (I haven't really got the option as my hair is too frizzy and curly, so it stays positively shaved over the summer months). I got my ear pierced when I was a teenager, and other boys who hadn't had theirs done used to say its gay and words to that effect. On the school playground if you get your right ear pierced then you are definitely gay, I got my left done as I didn't fancy the heat, and some kids still call you gay, in a joking way. Incidentally I've barely warn an ear ring/stud since I was 21, because my work wouldn't allow it for men, I sadly had to lose my tongue piercing too, the philistines! But I suppose at least they were consistent with the tongue piercing.

 

[Braunwyn]

I haven't got any stats to hand, but in the UK and Europe in general monotheism is on the way out. In Scandinavia I think about 80% don't believe in God, in the UK it's something like half. I barely know a person who even goes to church/mosque etc, so I wouldn't be surprised if the figure gets considerably lower in the coming years. I'd imagine the same thing will happen in the US.

Yea, I've read similar stats. I'd think the same would ocurr in the US but as the years go by the change I expected for the future back in the early 90's hasn't really come to pass. The region I reside in (northeast) certainly has a different religous climate compared to the mid-west and southern states but when I look at our current administration and the candidates for the upcoming pres general elections I just don't know. I think education and economic disparity contributes to the rift between US regions and I don't know how much that will change in the coming years.

Is that really sexist though? It's not a term I generally use, but if that is sexist then I might have to re-evaluate some of my insults, particularly when referring to people by male and female genitalia, such as dick, prick, [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] (which is generally saved for males) and the c word (which is used for males and females) plus loads more. Now if I was to call a woman a harlot, slag or something because they sleep around, that would definitely be sexist. I don't though.

I'm sure sexist slurs vary greatly between our two countries (slurs in general). I've never come across slag. I don't think most people over here would agree with me about B**ch but again, I think that's the case because it's socially acceptable in the US. I'll try to communicate my thinking-

If I were to be vicious and call a woman a b**ch it wouldn't be uncommon. Women are referred to as B's in jest and in anger. Sometimes men are referred to as B's in jest but I've only seen that among gay men (no offense to anyone). OTOH, calling a straight man a little b**ch in anger, which I have done, is an emasculating insult (over here) and that's offensive. Calling a woman a dick isn't in the same league because even if it's defeminizing, that's not offensive (unfortunately). Do you understand? I could try to explain a bit more but I don't want to be redundant.

Yes, I think referring to someone's skin colour in the middle of an insult, should be avoided. An American saying that is catching on a little bit here is "white trash". That seems to be socially acceptable as I often hear it on the TV, but I'm not sure why that is acceptable, and is certainly not something you'll hear coming from my lips.

Yea, white trash is way more acceptable. Any white slur is, compared to slurs against minorites like N**ger. I think this is the case due to history. The two don't hold comparable weight. Any person can walk up to me and call me white trash (I'm Italian) but being white trash requires more than skin color; eduction, economic status, culture all come into play. I can't be white trash because of my socio-economic status. A black person OTOH hand can be called a N**ger regardless of education, culture etc. The only qualifier is skin color/heritage.

Agreed. A lot of people will say men shouldn't have long hair too, as it makes them look like a girl (I haven't really got the option as my hair is too frizzy and curly, so it stays positively shaved over the summer months). I got my ear pierced when I was a teenager, and other boys who hadn't had theirs done used to say its gay and words to that effect. On the school playground if you get your right ear pierced then you are definitely gay, I got my left done as I didn't fancy the heat, and some kids still call you gay, in a joking way. Incidentally I've barely warn an ear ring/stud since I was 21, because my work wouldn't allow it for men, I sadly had to lose my tongue piercing too, the philistines! But I suppose at least they were consistent with the tongue piercing.

For shame!

I wouldn't have any body peircings at work either. And I've heard a snide comment about my plugs. We do have some guys over in IT with long hair and another one who looks like Jerry Garcia lol but it's not the norm and it's sexist. Fortunately we don't really have dress codes to contend with.

 

[Maxwell511]

When I first addressed the topic of race I made a point to note my point of reference and that I can only speak from that point of reference. So, I don't really understand why your feathers are ruffled. I'm certainly not degrading anyone. I am attesting to the disparity that occurs in the US due to white on black racism. And it's not as if such racism is isolated to the US. European colonization, the slave trade, etc largely benefited whites, and dominated blacks/non-whites globally. And that's not a challenge to Slavs or Poles or anyone else.


Race is a cultural term. You can deny the existence of this term all you like and the meaning it holds but that doesn't really do much. As far as your attempt at a poorly delivered insult, give me a break. No one has offered the term to be used as a biologicial classification.


When I stated my original position as subjective I thought I was pretty clear. I can only speak from where I stand and I realize this. You obviously do not.

To understand why my feathers are ruffled why don't you study the history of slavery in the Americas then? Since that is your point of reference apparently.

I suggest starting here. If you read it and get to this; "Sometimes they were people who were captured in wars with the Irish - a phenomenon again that we also don't talk about very much. But the very first slaves that the English made in the Caribbean were Irish. And there were more Irish slaves in the middle of the 17th century than any others." hopefully you might understand how insensitive your dismissal of me due to my skin colour was and why I am "ruffled" about it. To me you are not only dismissing centuries of suffering under colonialism of my people, but attempting to associate them with their oppressors based on nothing but skin colour.

 

[Braunwyn]

To understand why my feathers are ruffled why don't you study the history of slavery in the Americas then? Since that is your point of reference apparently.

Nice article, nothing new though. I suspect that your feathers are ruffled because you have a hammer and hence everything looks like a nail.

I suggest starting here. If you read it and get to this; "Sometimes they were people who were captured in wars with the Irish - a phenomenon again that we also don't talk about very much. But the very first slaves that the English made in the Caribbean were Irish. And there were more Irish slaves in the middle of the 17th century than any others."

Interesting that you would pull the Irish for your quote. Making such comparisons hold little water since the Irish in the US have not had to contend with systemic racism.

hopefully you might understand how insensitive your dismissal of me due to my skin colour was and why I am "ruffled" about it. To me you are not only dismissing centuries of suffering under colonialism of my people, but attempting to associate them with their oppressors based on nothing but skin colour.

First off, I have never dimissed you. You are emotionally invested in the horrors faced by the Irish (present or past) but it has little to do with my words. I'm not talking about you or the Irish. Nothing the Irish have endured will change the facts of european history with Arfrica and in the US. Irish Americans do not face the battles Arfrican Americans do. If they did sure, I would speak of it. You want to make it about you but I'm not in your home. I don't witness racism against the Irish where I live so it's not a concern I would attempt to raise in the US. I can't figure out why that's so difficult to understand.

 

[Maxwell511]

Nice article, nothing new though. I suspect that your feathers are ruffled because you have a hammer and hence everything looks like a nail.


Interesting that you would pull the Irish for your quote. Making such comparisons hold little water since the Irish in the US have not had to contend with systemic racism.

Yes they did, but then they made a deal with the devil. They became traitors.

First off, I have never dimissed you. You are emotionally invested in the horrors faced by the Irish (present or past) but it has little to do with my words. I'm not talking about you or the Irish. Nothing the Irish have endured will change the facts of european history with Arfrica and in the US. Irish Americans do not face the battles Arfrican Americans do. If they did sure, I would speak of it. You want to make it about you but I'm not in your home. I don't witness racism against the Irish where I live so it's not a concern I would attempt to raise in the US. I can't figure out why that's so difficult to understand.

You called me "white". Irish people believe themselves to have more of a connection with Africa than they do Europe. (Again not Irish Americans because they sold out).

It's a cultural thing.

 

[SallyNow]

...

Or maybe I misread your post and it was more of passive/aggressive charge based on stereotypical bigotry? hmmm, now that I read it over again, maybe.

I think you have misread my post, I'm sorry. I was coming from a point of honest questioning, attempting to figure out your position. But if you assume I was trying to passive-aggressive I'm not sure what I can ask or say to further this debate. I'll think about it, though

 

[Braunwyn]

Yes they did, but then they made a deal with the devil. They became traitors.

Ok, can't argue with that.

You called me "white". Irish people believe themselves to have more of a connection with Africa than they do Europe. (Again not Irish Americans because they sold out).

It's a cultural thing.

Indeed it's a cultural thing. And without a doubt I can't deny my own lack of worldliness which is why I fronted with a disclaimer. Hopefully that won't always be the case. I only took one (sort of) european history class in college, which was French history but I have come across some stuff/information about the strife in Ireland...and Irish pride. I truly do hope to become more informed in the years to come.

 

[Braunwyn]

I think you have misread my post, I'm sorry. I was coming from a point of honest questioning, attempting to figure out your position. But if you assume I was trying to passive-aggressive I'm not sure what I can ask or say to further this debate. I'll think about it, though

Well, my first instinct wasn't that you were being passive/aggressive and then I wondered about "American" generalizations which I come across quite a bit on the net (and IRL) so I can be weary. If I'm incorrect than great and sorry to have confronted you with it.