Why don't environmentalists bitch about estrogen pollution?

Started by D, Dec 04, 2007, 01:08 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

Mr. X

Because estrogen is the "good" hormone.  :tongue2:
Feminists - "Verbally beating men like dumb animals or ignoring them is all we know and its not working."

Johnny

Enviromenltism  is about ONE AND ONE THING ONLY  that is the destruction of Western economies. It is most sad that the sheeple espouse such a value set
Openly Straight.

Johnny

There is a mole among us. for whatever reason an imbecile has breached our perimeter. I suggest an arrow through our heads and a Steve Martin circa 1978 approach.
Openly Straight.

MAUS

According to the tenents of eco-feminism....(that's pronounced EEEEKO-feminism, not echo-feminism...echo-feminismwould be :
MEN ARE PIGS..pigs...pigs...pigs...pigs)

According to the tenents of eco-feminism testosterone is so evil that just one drop in a river will kill all of the fish and defoliate everything downstream for fifty feet up both banks and for ten miles downriver just as devastating as agent orange.

Estrogen, on the other hand, when added to the water reservoir of a community will eliminate the need for sewage treatment because a woman's shit does not stink.

Hope that clarifies your inquiry :laughing6:

Hujo

From what i have read these estrogen mimicking chemicals are every where, in paint thinners, sealants, in plastics, in foods. It's effect on men/boys are developmental, smaller genitals, weight gain, difficulty concentrating, reading disorders, low sperm counts.

I think the research is rather new. With any luck they will discover it effects women negatively and something will actually be done about it.


CaptDMO


Aegis

Looking through some old books, I came across a book "Best of the Best American Humor."

It is an anthology of comics that have appeared in the comic newspaper Funny Times.  It was printed in 2002, and had a collection of comic strips and articles dating back to 1985.  The book was composed of two to three-page chapters, humorous articles by contributors that had run in the Funny Times.  On these pages were also comic strip shorts that were approximately on topic with the chapter.  One of its chapters was titled "My Life as a Man: Adventures in Testosterone" by Holly Nadler on page 119.

On this page, there was a single frame comic.  A man, drawn to look boyish but with a man's face and buzz-cut, is holding a globe of the earth and making an angry face.  He is facing three women, drawn to look girlish, innocent and bewildered.  The caption read "I'm taking my ball and going home!"

I couldn't make out the artist signature in the corner, so I just called the contributing editor at Funny Times.  They are very polite over there, and are working to find out which artist submitted the comic.  Unfortunately, their records from those days were disposed of by their publisher, but the Contributing Editor may still be able to track it down.  In any case, it's one of the names in the list of 126 contributors.  I just don't know which yet.  When I can get an attribution, I'll post it here and on other sites.  All I know from the editor is that the comic was originally drawn between 1985 and 1995.  It's a sort of Rosetta Stone for the notion that emerged that environmental problems are somehow solely men's fault.  Unlike most such environmental political cartoons today, which can hide behind the excuse that the depicted man with the giant SUV or whatever is only a man because it is the default gender to be drawn, this cartoon shows a man in conflict with women.  It explicitly casts the problem as a gender conflict, and grants a greater insight into the psychology of this issue than was perhaps intended.

I was surprised at how far we had gone politically into self-deprecating and even self-loathing humor in the 90s.  I can vaguely remember seeing the comic the first time around and not being amused by it.

D

There is a written rule about advertising, 'do not offend your target market'.   

Women are almost always the target market, except for things like video games, beer, football.  That's about it.

So basically they have no one to offend or rather pick on to create a 'group' mindset then men.  It is probably the basic and simplist form of advertising manipulation.

A good example is those areo commercials.  Two women eating a chocolate bar "sharing" a moment and some guy walks up and says or trys to communicate with the women and they 'belittle' him.   

Now why is he a dork?  He is a undesirable dork because chocolate makes you gain weight and become unattractive.  Having a healthy stud confident and desirable will actually kill the message of "eat this chocolate".

It's ditto with beer commercials.  Labatts? had a commercial with two girls kissing in order to try lip stick.  There were three guys standing there with their jaws on the floor.  Why?  Was the commercial there to demean women?  Was it to promote male sexuality?  To feed men's ego?  NOT ONE BIT.  It was a directive.  It was to specifically dysfunctionalize male ego.  It was to make men bumbling incompetent boobs around women which leads them to believe they need liquid courage to talk to women.  It further creates a barreir between men and women in order to seel more product.  Because, my guess is, partnered relationships actually drink less beer.

Advertisers never want us to grow up.

Go Up