Feminism

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

What are your thoughts about feminism as a movement and philosophy? I don't even want to give my thoughts right now because I don't want to influence any others.

[BookBeauty]

Yay for feminism!

But, when it becomes a matter of equality for convenience, and it's more for advantage than out of the essential rightness of the universe, then it's just inappropriate.

For example: The army. Women wanna be signed in for the front lines, which is fine. But, then they ask for the lifting requirements to be lowered, because they are not as physically strong as men.

An army applicant for the front lines must carry such-and-such a weight, because they have to carry backpacks and whatnot across fields... So, lowering the weight means that the backpack, of the weight designated, cannot be carried. So somebody else has to carry it for you. So you're holding back the team. Bad news bears.

A common example I think most should agree with is gentlemanly gesture: Opening a door for a lady out of respect, taking the time to pull out the chair.. When the lady gets snappy, well, that's just rude. I'm sure there are ladies out there who do the same for men, and it's not like they get snappy. Traditional gentlemanlyness is something to be cultivated, not scorned, in my opinion at least.

And then there are women who will argue that men and women are already the same. It's simply not true. I think we should all admit that we're all different, we all have weaknesses and strengths.

But, when it comes to the workplace, and general attitudes, obviously it's only right that women get neither special treatment, nor being looked down upon. Women should have every right that a man does. But, as said, they should be willing to work just as hard, if not harder for it to become physically strong in appropriate fields, if they need to.

[Charles Darnay]

I think it is too broad an issue to give a single opinion on. There are examples of feminism that are great (such as raising awareness about the gross inequalities in the workplace that still exist today) and then there are there examples of people trying to use feminism to promote their personal ideas despite how many people (of both sexes) disagree.

[Paulclem]

I think there are cetain differences between the sexes that are a result of biology and socialisation as a starting point. Men and women are not the same.

Having said that, it is no reason to label people and discriminate against them. I thought the whole equal wages thing in the UK had been done and dusted years ago, but apparently there are still cases of discrimination on the grounds of sex where the woman is not on a waged parity with men.

Though they are in a minority, there are women who can physically do as much or more than men in certain fields. There are women commandos now who have passed the course, and I think they have to do it on equal terms with the men.

Where I live, we have dustbin ladies - is it scavengers or garbage operatives in the US? - which has been unheard of before. (We now have wheeled bins which anyone could manouvre, so why not?). There are female plumbers and engineers. Great. I'm all for it.

Some of the more recent feminists - so I heard in interviews - have revised the original view of feminism as anti family where the family was seen as a structure for the oppression of women. I think what they're saying is that if women want to raise families and be Mothers, then that should be celebrated, just as the achievements of women in careers should be celebrated too. It should be a personal choice which path an individual takes without prejudice or pressure.

One area where there is a lot of potential for problems for women is where there has been immigration, and the family has retained it's culture and expectations of the role of women within that. In the UK there have been so called honour killings of sisters and daughters where the expectations of the family have clashed with an adopted western attitude. I hasten to add that though it is a recognised problem, such extremity is not widespread practice here, but no doubt presents problems for some.

[Veho]

For me, feminism is a matter of the choices, opportunities and the rights of women being equal to that of men. In this century I think women are not too far off achieving a pretty equal playing field in this respect but there are some opportunities that are harder to acquire than men and perhaps some that are still closed altogether even in the 21st century. I think feminism is being able to choose to work and learn and do whatever a man is 'allowed' to do without people thinking we're an inferior species who simply to not possess the knowledge/intellect/sense that a man does. I find it hard to grasp that women were ever denied this right and were thought of as incapable of thinking as men do.

But I do find that some feminists are unrealistic. Women should accept that at the highest of physical strength and power, woman is certainly not equal to a man at his highest. Also, (I might get shot for this) but I think the same goes for intellect in certain respects, hence why mostly men have been the great innovators, inventors and thinkers. However, VERY few men and women are at the highest possible peak, so I'm not saying that all men are stronger and cleverer than women because we all know that that is simply not true in any shape or form - but mankind at his highest is always going to beat womankind at her highest.

I also think that if a woman chooses to have children they should be there for that child as a mother really should and if that means not working, I think that is important. This is really because I think that society benefits from children growing up with a mother in the house to properly care and nurture. When considering feminism in terms of a marriage/relationship, I think it's important that any marriage is based on equality and respect. So, I would never marry a man who expected tea on the table after work and ironed shirts in the drawers etc. just because I am the woman in the relationship.

I do agree with Charles D that feminism is a complex subject with many considerations and it is very much subjective.

[Darcy88]

I like and I dislike feminism. I dislike the idea it introduced which posits that men and women are indentical in every way but anatomy. And I hate that feminism often demeans traditional females roles, like homemaker and mother. It has unleashed upon women the same money-obsession that has forever plagued men. Some women are happier in the kitchen and the nursery than they are in the board-room or cubicle. These women shouldn't be made to feel any weaker or lesser on account of their own chosen priorities. Raising good kids is a great ambition and noble occupation. These women have my respect.

I like feminism because it really has given women more freedom and more opportunities than they had in the more male dominated society that preceded the movement. If a woman wants to be a doctor or lawyer or politician then it should be only merit, not gender, that predicts her success. If I worked in an office and had a female boss I would think nothing of it. But if this was 1950, before the triumph of feminism, I would probably regard such a situation as absurd and emasculating.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I like and I dislike feminism. I dislike the idea it introduced which posits that men and women are indentical in every way but anatomy. And I hate that feminism often demeans traditional females roles, like homemaker and mother. It has unleashed upon women the same money-obsession that has forever plagued men. Some women are happier in the kitchen and the nursery than they are in the board-room or cubicle. These women shouldn't be made to feel any weaker or lesser on account of their own chosen priorities. Raising good kids is a great ambition and noble occupation. These women have my respect.
The idea that men and women are identical is called structuralist feminism, which posits that everything that makes a woman a woman is cultural, and the idea of "the feminine" should be suppressed. The other theory is essentialist feminism, which says that women are indeed born with inherently feminine traits, and that they should be embraced. Right now, the latter seems to be the more popular mindset. Plus, the "all men are bad" idea of the early feminist movements that have caused so many to dislike feminism just aren't as prevalent as they once were.



Some of the more recent feminists - so I heard in interviews - have revised the original view of feminism as anti family where the family was seen as a structure for the oppression of women. I think what they're saying is that if women want to raise families and be Mothers, then that should be celebrated, just as the achievements of women in careers should be celebrated too. It should be a personal choice which path an individual takes without prejudice or pressure.
This is true. That sort of militant type of feminism that has dictated what women could and couldn't do: things like saying women couldn't dress pretty and wear jewelry, couldn't let men help the (or even be in relationships with men), couldn't be stay home mothers; all this has, more-or-less gone away.

I was at a recent lecture that talked about how one of the biggest battles for feminists is trying to convince people, men and women, that there are no longer any set-in-stone beliefs that one must adhere to to be a feminist. A woman can like to dress up and wear jewelry, be doted on by her boyfriend; a woman can even be pro-life and feminist.

I'm taking a theory class on feminism right now which is what inspired me to bring this up.*

[JuniperWoolf]

I dislike the idea it introduced which posits that men and women are indentical in every way but anatomy.

Alright, people keep saying this. I need clarification. What non-physical quality might I, as a woman, posess that will never be posessed by a man and vice versa?

[KCurtis]

These women shouldn't be made to feel any weaker or lesser on account of their own chosen priorities. Raising good kids is a great ambition and noble occupation. These women have my respect.


Thankyou! You must have a good Mom!




A common example I think most should agree with is gentlemanly gesture: Opening a door for a lady out of respect, taking the time to pull out the chair.. When the lady gets snappy, well, that's just rude. I'm sure there are ladies out there who do the same for men, and it's not like they get snappy. Traditional gentlemanlyness is something to be cultivated, not scorned, in my opinion at least.



Agreed. And being a gentleman has nothing to do with feminism, I think. It is just polite and gentlemanly!

[Alexander III]

Alright, people keep saying this. I need clarification. What non-physical quality might I, as a woman, posess that will never be posessed by a man and vice versa?

1) men have impulses which may lead certain men to rape women. Women do not.

2) Your average man is stronger and faster than your average woman

3) Your average woman is more organized than your average man.

4) Your average woman will cry more times in her life than your average man

Also in highschool and university I have discovered the pehnomenon that Men socialize by insulting each other in a playful manner, while women socialize by complimenting each other in a viscous manner.

[YesNo]

3) Your average woman is more organized than your average man.

Although I haven't actually defined a metric on what "organized" means nor taken a random sample, that's a feature I would not have guessed distinguished men from women.

Since I haven't been at a university in two decades, discussions of "feminism" with people I actually know just doesn't occur. As I think about it, I don't even know what feminism is. Neither do we talk about things like "Marxism" or "existentialism" for that matter. Sometimes I think discussions of feminism are more like mating rituals that occur among people who haven't yet found a partner, but I don't want to belittle any political efforts at equality by that comment.

[Darcy88]

1) men have impulses which may lead certain men to rape women. Women do not.

2) Your average man is stronger and faster than your average woman

3) Your average woman is more organized than your average man.

4) Your average woman will cry more times in her life than your average man

Also in highschool and university I have discovered the pehnomenon that Men socialize by insulting each other in a playful manner, while women socialize by complimenting each other in a viscous manner.

Those are all good ones. I've noticed women look in mirrors and reflective surfaces a lot, many even carry one around in their purse. I don't know if it can be proven, but I'm pretty sure that men are as whole more prone to physical aggression than women are. If I was at a bar and feeling very horny I'd take home even an average looking girl. A girl of looks comparable to mine would probably rather go home alone than lower her standards like that. A stay at home mother may have some misgivings, may wish rather that she be out working, but for most men the prospect of being a stay at home father is degrading and emasculating, and its not just a cultural thing, I believe its to an extent in our genes that men be hunters and women be mothers and tenders to domestic things. There are differences in brain structure between the sexes. The corpus callosum in women is thicker and has more connection, making women better "multi-taskers." Makes sense since hunting is a rather focused activity while keeping your child safe from cliffs or predators while picking berries and gossiping about Lorf's spiffy new lion-skin loin-cloth and what a little slut that new cro-magnum hussy Grindla is would take a much more diversified pattern of brain activity. The part of the brain in which emotion is centred is larger and more active in women (the limbic system I think.) This latter difference is the reason women can seem more emotional and erratic and suffer higher rates of depression. We also can't discount the difference in behaviour caused by the differing amounts of testosterone and estrogen featured in either sex. I remember reading a feminist take on the biblical story of Abraham and Isaac. The writer argued that no woman would sacrifice her son, not for anything, even God. She argued that men are more abstract, women more emotional. I agree. I believe we are complimentary parts that unite to complete a perfect beautiful whole.

[Alexander III]

5) Men rarely tend to bleed for several consecutive days every month and for those days become volatile sentimental storms.

6) Men are more prone to substance abuse than women.

7) Women have higher self-expectations when it comes to personal beauty. A man in his teenage years will discover all the faults in his visage. At first he will try to alter, but by the end of puberty he will look into the mirror and findhimself comfortable with his facial flaws. A woman will not find herself comfortable with her facial flaws until much later in life. An average looking man 20 soemthing man is more likley to have a higher self-esteem than a 20 something average looking woman, because he has realized my face is flawed but that is ok, for the women the fact that her face is flawed is more of a big deal - beauty matters more to women than to men. This may also be because men care more about beauty in their choice of partner than women. For both sexes beauty is important, but the average man will first fall in love with what he see's, the average woman will first fall in love with what she hears. Ofcourse there are exceptions such as me myself and I, my expectations for personal beauty are in line with those of the average woman not your average man.

7) Men are more prone to homophobia, than women, this is clearly seen by conversation within all male or all female groups. The adjective "gay" frequently being used as a jocular insult amongst male friends. I do not think this is a cultural phenomenon, men on the whole are more likley to find homosexuality uncomfortable than women, because amongst males the concept of the "conquest" and "sport" of womanizing plays a very important part in male pride and relations.

8) Men are more violent than women, war so far in history is a male dominated art. Sure nowadays we have women in the army, but they are a small % comapred to men, and the percentage is even smaller when looking at the troops who fight on the front lines. For a man it is easier to kill than for a woman, it is in our nature. Also men are predisposed to view war from the point of "Glory" - for men war was always seen as a way to demonstrate barvery and greatness, it is war which makes many men imortal. Women on the other hand rareley see the "glory" of war that men do.

[OrphanPip]

That's all nice and dandy Alex, although it still has problems with empiricism. But you completely missed the point of Robin's question, none of those things are evidence of what is exclusive to men or women, apart from the physiological process of menstruation (which was excluded from her question).

Also, you and Darcy are simply belabouring against a strawman anyway. There are few feminist, if any who posit that men and women are identical except for culture. Even the most ardent of constructivist would not say that. The point of structuralist feminism isn't to argue that what is feminine and what is masculine are not biological, it is to argue that cultural attitudes about femininity and masculinity are in part culturally constructed, despite an assumption of naturalness that pervades our current culture. This is obviously true, a simple survey of historical ideas about masculinity and femininity across multiple cultures will tell you this.

The point isn't to make everyone believe that women and men are identical, but to undermine several assumptions of normative gender that generate barriers to social equality.

Gender equality does not mean a lack of gender difference, it means that neither gender is assumed to be arbitrarily inferior.

[Darcy88]

Gender equality does not mean a lack of gender difference, it means that neither gender is assumed to be arbitrarily inferior.

If proving and proliferating that principle is the goal of feminism then I am a feminist. But I really have encountered the "men and women are identical in all but anatomy" perspective countless times. I've had multiple professors argue it before the class. The differences are primarily biological and not cultural. I was called a misogynist once by a women's studies major for saying this.

[JuniperWoolf]

2) Your average man is stronger and faster than your average woman



5) Men rarely tend to bleed for several consecutive days every month and for those days become volatile sentimental storms.

I did say...


Alright, people keep saying this. I need clarification. What non-physical quality might I, as a woman, posess that will never be posessed by a man and vice versa?


The point of structuralist feminism isn't to argue that what is feminine and what is masculine are not biological, it is to argue that cultural attitudes about femininity and masculinity are in part culturally constructed, despite an assumption of naturalness that pervades our current culture.

True true, the deterministic fallacy pervades every sphere nowadays, not just gender-wise. It's usually people who have a "little" science, gender roles are one of the examples that one of my favorite profs used when he told us that his favorite quote is "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" (gender, and the whole genetic determinism in regards to race kerfuffle).

There are very few real live women who embody all of the things that have been listed here as "female," and vice versa for males. The "female" female as you've described her practically doesn't exist, and neither does the "male" male (although I'm sure there are a few exceptions for both). Considering gender in such rigid, written-in-stone terms is what led to the great pill-popping and suicidal housewife plague of the '50's (not to mention the generation of children who grew up with serious daddy issues because their own were afraid to even hug them).

And then there are a few of us who embody very few of the "in general men/women are..." rules. It's not very fun for us. You have no idea how frustrating it is to constantly be told that "you're an exception," or that "you're just putting it on to compete/attract men." Yes. Either my entire personality is a lifelong lie devised to lure straight males by pretending to embody masculine traits (how does that even make sense?), or I'm a mutant. Inflexible ideas of gender identity really cause me a lot of grief, which is probably why so many people are intimidated into adherance of their socially-prescribed gender roles where they deviate from what is now the norm if they happen to (AND THE NORM CHANGES OVER GENERATIONS, so it's by no means inborn). Everyone's afraid of the scorn they'll attract, and they will: from people who are equally afraid of stepping outside of their culture's gender definitions. For example, Alexander's earlier point that men are more prone to homophobia than women - you know that it's because they're afriad of how they themselves might deviate away from their "gender role" (or even that they might only appear to deviate). I have piles of studies that can back me up if you have any doubt.

I've specified the important words in bold red and underlined them, just to make 100% sure that no one misses the point.

[Charles Darnay]

True true, the deterministic fallacy pervades every sphere nowadays, not just gender-wise. There are very few real live women who embody all of the things that have been listed here as "female," and vice versa for males. The "female" female as you've described her practically doesn't exist, and neither does the "male" male (I'm sure there are a few exceptions). Considering gender in such rigid, written-in-stone terms is what led to the great pill-popping and suicidal housewife plague of the '50's (not to mention the generation of children who grew up with serious daddy issues because their own were afraid to even hug them).

And then there are those of us who embody very few of the "in general men/women are..." rules. It's not very fun. You have no idea how frustrating it is to constantly be told that "you're an exception," or that "you're just putting it on to compete/attract men." Yes. Either my entire personality is a lifelong lie devised to lure straight males by pretending to embody masculine traits (how does that even make sense?), or I'm a mutant. Inflexible ideas of gender identity really cause me a lot of grief, which is probably why so many people are intimidated into adherance of their socially-prescribed gender roles. Everyone's afraid of the scorn they'll attract, and they will: from people who are equally afraid of stepping outside of their culture's gender definitions (for example, Alexander's earlier point that men are more prone to homophobia than women - that's because they're afraid).

I agree with most of this, and I think that what I consider positive feminist philosophies strive to disrupt the rigidity of the gender distinctions. There are those who would argue that women who "try to emulate men" - or rather who tend towards the more "masculine qualities" - are responsible for holding women back. I have no patience for these self-titled feminists.

On a separate point, in regards to men being more prone to homophobia than women - my experience (by no means scientific data) has shown otherwise. I have met far more women who are just put off by the fact that gay people exist than men.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Also, you and Darcy are simply belabouring against a strawman anyway. There are few feminist, if any who posit that men and women are identical except for culture. Even the most ardent of constructivist would not say that.
I keep saying this, but no one seems to listen. Maybe you'll get through to them, Pip.

[JuniperWoolf]

On a separate point, in regards to men being more prone to homophobia than women - my experience (by no means scientific data) has shown otherwise. I have met far more women who are just put off by the fact that gay people exist than men.

Yeah, solid point. I have lots of information on why people are homophobic, but I really haven't come across anything regarding the relationship between gender and homphobia. That's an "unknown" for me right now, so I shouldn't agree that men are more prone to homophobia than women.

[Alexander III]

I keep saying this, but no one seems to listen. Maybe you'll get through to them, Pip.


lso, you and Darcy are simply belabouring against a strawman anyway. There are few feminist, if any who posit that men and women are identical except for culture. Even the most ardent of constructivist would not say that.

I think you both misunderstood me. I was not arguing against a pseudo-feminist lingering inbetween the atoms of this thread. I was merley replying to Juniperwoolf, some personal observations of mine regarding differences between the sexes.

As for men being more homophobic than women, I abse this on the fact of language, of the vernacular used amongst young male groups and female groups. There is a theme in male banter of using efeminancy to demmen, efinacy which is often linked to homosexuality.

[Darcy88]

And then there are a few of us who embody very few of the "in general men/women are..." rules. It's not very fun for us. You have no idea how frustrating it is to constantly be told that "you're an exception," or that "you're just putting it on to compete/attract men." Yes. Either my entire personality is a lifelong lie devised to lure straight males by pretending to embody masculine traits (how does that even make sense?), or I'm a mutant. Inflexible ideas of gender identity really cause me a lot of grief, which is probably why so many people are intimidated into adherance of their socially-prescribed gender roles where they deviate from what is now the norm if they happen to (AND THE NORM CHANGES OVER GENERATIONS, so it's by no means inborn). Everyone's afraid of the scorn they'll attract, and they will: from people who are equally afraid of stepping outside of their culture's gender definitions. For example, Alexander's earlier point that men are more prone to homophobia than women - you know that it's because they're afriad of how they themselves might deviate away from their "gender role" (or even that they might only appear to deviate). I have piles of studies that can back me up if you have any doubt.


I have these contrasting conceptions of how I think and expect members of either gender to typically be and behave, but I don't care when my expectations are thwarted by one such as you who defies most of the stereotypes. My closest friend is the same way, a defier of gender generalities. As was the last girl I had strong feelings for. But I still recognize that, despite the many exceptions, these differences still commonly stand. Our brains feature many dissimilarities. Its a good thing. If the puzzle pieces were the all same then nothing would fit, psychologically speaking, not just physically. And as atypical as you consider yourself to be, I'm sure in many aspects you still show distinctively feminine traits. Do you go to bars, get hammered and want to fight or **** everyone in the bar? Could you imagine yourself having a child and then ditching it like many guys do? If you were going to a fancy restaurant would you pay any heed at all to your appearance or would you do as I do and merely tousle your hair, smooth your eyebrows, apply the smell test to your attire and then head out? lol.

[Paulclem]

As for men being more homophobic than women, I abse this on the fact of language, of the vernacular used amongst young male groups and female groups. There is a theme in male banter of using efeminancy to demmen, efinacy which is often linked to homosexuality.

I don't think this is homophobic - I think it's an an expression of a male challenge to a male. You said it in the male banter part - that's what it is on the whole. Calling a friend/ fellow etc gay/pouffe/ soft/ a girl etc is just like the tough guys commenting on a fight and referring to them as fighting with handbags.

It's not homophobic in itself in general, but a challenge to the sexual status of the other.

There may be more homophobic attitudes in males, but it's not evidenced with this. I think you're more likely to find it more prevalent in some social groups than others.

[Darcy88]

I also have tended to notice that homophobia is more common among men. Its likely due to the reason laid out by Juniper, that homosexuality is perceived by men as a threat to their own gender identity, their own masculinity. If a girl is friends with a gay man that's pretty normal. Around here though for a man to be friends with a gay man is a clear sign that he is not homophobic and for that reason he'd somewhat stand out from the rest.

[Taliesin]

Um, Paul - if you use homosexuality or effeminacy as insults, playful insults, banter, humiliation or even self-deprecatory humour then that, in my understanding, carries the implication that being gay or effeminate is by nature something negative, something that has lower status and is inferior. And that is homophobic.


But I digress.

As for feminism, as far as I understand, feminism is such a large and vague movement/ideology that it is hard to comment.

I myself wonder whether anyone will bring up womanism or anti-kyriarchy or other terms that have been invented due to some problems of the feminist movement.

[Paulclem]

Um, Paul - if you use homosexuality or effeminacy as insults, playful insults, banter, humiliation or even self-deprecatory humour then that, in my understanding, carries the implication that being gay or effeminate is by nature something negative, something that has lower status and is inferior. And that is homophobic.




Alex was arguing that it is a pointer to homophobia per se, but that's not the intention in the sense that it is directed to other mates/ men in order to challenge their masculinity. I take your point, but I think the emphasis is on the male challenge rather than a statement of homophobia.

It's not the kind of banter I would use, you understand, but it's in my experience of male groups and their competitiveness.

Edit: I've changed my mind. Above is what I originally replied, but now thinking about Taliesin's post, I reckon there is an element of homophobia embedded in the language.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Meh. Me and certain friends often all each other names like pussy, gay, fag, etc. It's demeaning to gays and women, I admit, but it isn't as if we are making a conscious decision to demean them. Plus, homophobia is defined as a fear of homosexuals. I'm not sure how that exemplifies a fear.

[Darcy88]

Meh. Me and certain friends often all each other names like pussy, gay, fag, etc. It's demeaning to gays and women, I admit, but it isn't as if we are making a conscious decision to demean them. Plus, homophobia is defined as a fear of homosexuals. I'm not sure how that exemplifies a fear.

Dislike or contempt for gays is also included in the definition of homophobia.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Well, not according to the definition on my computer's dictionary I double-checked before I posted (not saying you're wrong, just saying where I got my info):

"an extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people."

Here are some others:

"unreasoning fear of or antipathy toward homosexuals and homosexuality."

irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals.

And from the OED:

Fear or hatred of homosexuals and homosexuality.

I don't think calling each other stupid names (lightheartedly and in no seriousness, no less) constitutes an extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people, or applies to any of those definitions, really.

[OrphanPip]

No, but it's certainly irritating to not be able to make it through a single day without having to hear complete strangers demean you on the street, on the bus, eating lunch, or any comments section anywhere on the internet where the most insecure of the male species always seem to concentrate.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

We don't make a habit of using those words out in public around people we don't know--we're not total a-holes--just when we're hanging out, usually when playing video games, in which trash-talking is a necessity.

[Darcy88]

No, but it's certainly irritating to not be able to make it through a single day without having to hear complete strangers demean you on the street, on the bus, eating lunch, or any comments section anywhere on the internet where the most insecure of the male species always seem to concentrate.

I agree. I used to say "gay" and "fag" all the time until I realized how annoying it must be to men who are actually gay. It would be like all white people saying the n word all the time. I think South Park had a lot to do with the wide spreading of the use of the word "gay" as an insult, a way of calling something stupid. I don't like political correctness but in the wake of the many homosexual suicides that have occurred it makes sense for people to reevaluate their use of this word.

[Alexander III]

We don't make a habit of using those words out in public around people we don't know--we're not total a-holes--just when we're hanging out, usually when playing video games, in which trash-talking is a necessity.

Yes at university we do it too, but it carries homophobic sentiment nonetheless, even if you do not inteand it the language used makes it more acceptable. But one thing I have noticed is that at university, amongst the Italians there is a bit of homophobia. Amongst the french there is no homophobia and complete aceptance, and amongst the english boys, from the good schools there is almost a culture of encourgement for gay behavior. Espeicaly the boys from harrow, there is agroup in my year of about half a dozen of them and they are all bi-sexual, even though some of them are straight. Or rather amongst them I swear being soley straight is seen as a limitation. It is a fascinating thing.

[tonywalt]

No, but it's certainly irritating to not be able to make it through a single day without having to hear complete strangers demean you on the street, on the bus, eating lunch, or any comments section anywhere on the internet where the most insecure of the male species always seem to concentrate.

I am sure it is irritating and annoying. I notice that alot of gays will constantly refer to each other, in an endearing way I guess, as "fag" or "faggot", constantly - escpecially the queens. I have never noticed anyone correcting them, but it self depreciating.

[OrphanPip]

I am sure it is irritating and annoying. I notice that alot of gays will constantly refer to each other, in an endearing way I guess, as "fag" or "faggot", constantly - escpecially the queens. I have never noticed anyone correcting them, but it self depreciating.

Yes, I suppose it's the whole reclamation thing, but it depends on the subculture. There are older gays who will have a fit over the word "queer" despite it not having any offensive overtones in young gay communities since the 90s. Even then there isn't a sense of faggot being an acceptable word in the gay community, when it's heard it is still often used as an insult. Often by self-described straight-acting types who have a chip on their shoulder for being associated with camp men.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

So, is "gay" or "gays" the preferred term(s), then? I never know, really.

[OrphanPip]

So, is "gay" or "gays" the preferred term(s), then? I never know, really.

Yes, sometimes people think "homosexual" is the PC term, but homosexuality was coined by the medical community as a psychiatric diagnosis.

[Alexander III]

I find it funny, that we all assumed Orphan Pip would play the role of Gay ambasador and speak on behalf of the gay consulate, from where he gets a his direct orders from the king of gaydom to inform the straight masses on the tehcnical preferences of names.

It's like when the class is having a lecture on slavery, and the teacher always picks on the sole black kid to speak on behalf of all the blacks in regards to their view of slavery...

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Well, who here is better equipped to tell us what the preferred term is? It's not just because he's gay that I trust his opinions, but because he obviously knows a lot about gay culture, academics, and media.

[Paulclem]

On Alex's point -what's the perfect state in which to be regarded?

From my perspective It's really none of my business what sexual orientation people have. If they are open about it fine. If not - fine. I mention my wife occaisionally in the course of ordinary conversation. I don't expect any reaction/ surprise / aversion etc. But equally, with people who know me less well, I don't expect it to come up particularly. I'm sure it's the same with my wife.

At work there is a gay woman. This knowledge wasn't revealed to me in some declaration, but just through the normal course of conversation. I've never asked her if she's gay, nor has she never needed to state it. When her partner was ill in hospital last year, I felt that I could enquire how she was as the knowledge had just become apparent over time.

It's similar to feminism in that I wouldn't expect to be paid more, or given more opportunity than a woman. My bosses are all women, and have female and male peers. It just doesn't come into it in terms of roles and responsibilities.

The biggest difference is that whereas there's certain social jokey roles played out between males and females based on stereotypes that we go along with, that doesn't seem to exist yet in the same way with between the heterosexuals and the gays in work. Perhaps it's easier in more relaxed, social environments.

[cacian]

so where is masculinism to counteract feminism?

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Part of my class (actually, a fourth of it) covers masculinity studies--something rarely ever covered at any university. It's more about the ideas of masculinity--what masculinity is, how it's been defined in history, how's it defined now, etc. The main split is between hegemonic masculinity (what we think of as the usual manly tropes--strength, wealth, sexual prowess, etc.) and subordinate masculinity (what we think is not masculine, yet is practiced by males, such as metro-sexuals). It does not make an analogous claim to feminism that men have been oppressed, or are currently oppressed; that would be silly.

[Babyguile]

I don't think men are oppresssed by femininity. That is a null point.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I don't think men are oppresssed by femininity. That is a null point.

Do you mean by feminism? I made the exact opposite point; to claim men are oppressed by feminism is absurd.

[G L Wilson]

I never forget the advice of Nietzsche in regards to women. His advice was never forget your whip.

[Darcy88]

Do you mean by feminism? I made the exact opposite point; to claim men are oppressed by feminism is absurd.

Yeah but you state that "men are stupid" and you get smile and cheers. Say "women are stupid" and you'll get booed. And then when I was planning to go to university and was trying to find a place literally 75 percent of the ads said "women only." That doesn't count as oppression but there's something not right going on there. Also, I have this lame but genuine impulse to be somewhat chivalrous. I like opening doors, paying for dinner, buying girls I'm seeing nice things. A couple girls I dated long ago couldn't stand for it. Such acts were seen as infringements on their independence. These were women who had been let down by every man they'd ever closely known, so I understand it, and I suppose it had less to do with feminine ideas and more to do with their own personal experiences, but still... Never mind. It came to mind just now. lol. Don't mind me. Its late. Been a long day.

[G L Wilson]

Do you mean by feminism? I made the exact opposite point; to claim men are oppressed by feminism is absurd.

Men are liberated by feminism as much as women. Woman is no longer a sick creature that must be beaten.

[Dark Star]

My opinions on feminism vary based on the form. I'm a supporter of equality feminism, for example, but a staunch opponent of gender feminism which posits that there is a 'gender war' and that both individual men and the state must step in and remove or take away certain rights (or behaviors) in order to 'bridge the gap.' (This may not be exactly how the ideas are phrased in a textbook, but it's how they are applied in practice.) Many also demonize women who disagree with them on these issues as 'gender traitors.'

To give some examples to illustrate my point, here are two practical examples of gender feminist thought that I've seen stated by gender feminist bloggers:

1. That any man walking on the same side of a street as a lone woman should cross the street so as not to scare her. (What the man is supposed to do if lone women are walking on either side of the street is not indicated.)

2. One of the more extreme (and unfortunately very popular) gender feminist bloggers I've read argued that women often fear rape when a man stares at them and therefore leering at a woman should be legally classed as sexual assault, or at least sexual harassment.

Mind you, I do not think of staring at a woman as a right that men have, but I'm quite certain the results of allowing a government to arrest people for looking at another person would be disastrous.

As for the first example: While I do believe there is value in the notion of gentlemanly behavior or chivalry I reject the idea that a person should have to go that far out of their way to prevent potential fear from arising within another assuming the former individual is not exhibiting threatening behavior. One should also consider the practical results of this behavior if it was adopted by the majority of men. A more mainstream feminist commenting on the idea put it well when she dryly quipped, "I'll feel very safe knowing the kind, polite, helpful men are on the opposite side of the street and only the rapists are left on my side."

[Darcy88]

To give some examples to illustrate my point, here are two practical examples of gender feminist thought that I've seen stated by gender feminist bloggers:

1. That any man walking on the same side of a street as a lone woman should cross the street so as not to scare her. (What the man is supposed to do if lone women are walking on either side of the street is not indicated.)


I always cross the street in such a situation if its after dark or in a area without many people. Its just polite. Its not silly. A sixteen year old girl was raped and killed while out walking around my area a few months back. Men typically substantially out-weigh women and enough men do commit acts of rape that I think any such fear is perfectly rational. I've never been told to cross the street, never heard the idea discussed anywhere, I just have a natural instinct when I'm out walking or running after dark to do so.



2. One of the more extreme (and unfortunately very popular) gender feminist bloggers I've read argued that women often fear rape when a man stares at them and therefore leering at a woman should be legally classed as sexual assault, or at least sexual harassment.

That really is silly. That sounds like poorly cloaked general hatred of all males. You shouldn't stare at women unless they are staring and smiling at you, otherwise you look creepy. But I don't see why staring should make a woman think of rape though, unless the particular woman was in the past victimized by a rapist. Most men, the overwhelming majority, are not rapists.

[Babyguile]

My opinions on feminism vary based on the form. I'm a supporter of equality feminism, for example, but a staunch opponent of gender feminism which posits that there is a 'gender war' and that both individual men and the state must step in and remove or take away certain rights (or behaviors) in order to 'bridge the gap.' (This may not be exactly how the ideas are phrased in a textbook, but it's how they are applied in practice.) Many also demonize women who disagree with them on these issues as 'gender traitors.'

To give some examples to illustrate my point, here are two practical examples of gender feminist thought that I've seen stated by gender feminist bloggers:

1. That any man walking on the same side of a street as a lone woman should cross the street so as not to scare her. (What the man is supposed to do if lone women are walking on either side of the street is not indicated.)

2. One of the more extreme (and unfortunately very popular) gender feminist bloggers I've read argued that women often fear rape when a man stares at them and therefore leering at a woman should be legally classed as sexual assault, or at least sexual harassment.

Where do you find the people who hold these crazy views? I've been an active feminist for years and I have never come across another woman who holds these views, and yet whenever someone says to me they are cynical of feminism, they manage to unearth crazy anti-man theories like you have cited and then use them as reasons to not support feminism. It's really frustrating.

I suggest you and other people like you stop getting your knowledge of feminist thought from online blogs and start reading feminist books. Feminism needs men on board.

[Babyguile]

Also you really shouldn't be crossing the street under the assumption that a woman will be scared and intimidated by you if you walk towards her. That's actually registering your name to one of the loopy arguments Dark Star mentioned.

If a woman has reason to feel intimidated she will cross the street herself. Better to just smile in greeting as you approach. I think it's really sad if you really do that Darcy.

[Veho]

I suggest you and other people like you stop getting your knowledge of feminist thought from online blogs and start reading feminist books. Feminism needs men on board.

Is that irony? Whatever it is, it made me laugh.

[Veho]

If a woman has reason to feel intimidated she will cross the street herself. Better to just smile in greeting as you approach. I think it's really sad if you really do that Darcy.

Why is it sad? I think it's chivalrous, considerate and respectful. If more people were as thoughtful in other situations and in general, the world might be a nicer place. Just because women want the same rights as men (wages/choices etc) it doesn't mean common courtesy or chivalry needs to go down the drain.

[Babyguile]

Is that irony? Whatever it is, it made me laugh.

I'm not responsible for how you interpret my posts. I don't think it's ironic to admit that women need men when they are trying to further feminist causes. That's one half of the population, and, still, it is the half that holds the most power.

[Veho]

I'm not responsible for how you interpret my posts. I don't think it's ironic to admit that women need men when they are trying to further feminist causes. That's one half of the population, and, still, it is the half that holds the most power.

I wasn't questioning your point's validity. I just thought it was amusing, all things in consideration.

[Babyguile]

Why is it sad? I think it's chivalrous, considerate and respectful. If more people were as thoughtful in other situations and in general, the world might be a nicer place. Just because women want the same rights as men (wages/choices etc) it doesn't mean common courtesy or chivalry needs to go down the drain.

There's no need to do it. Darcy does it because it makes him feel good about himself. I don't think it does any good beyond that and I think it's very sad.

[Babyguile]

People should show respect toward eachother. Not things which are based on assumptions of gender. You crossing the street to avoid walking towards a woman is not going to stop that woman getting raped. It's going to make you feel good about yourself and likely make the woman feel more anxious. Walk towards her and smile!

[Veho]

There's no need to do it. Darcy does it because it makes him feel good about himself. I don't think it does any good beyond that and I think it's very sad.

I didn't say there was a need to do it. Do you only do things you need to do? No one needs to open a door for someone or relinquish their seat on a bus for someone more in need but people do it because it's the considerate thing to do and it's a very small but nice thing also - and yeah, maybe it makes you feel good about it as well. What's the harm in that? Did Darcy say he only does it to feel good about himself? I think he said it was polite, which it is. On the contrary, I think it's a lovely thing to do and refreshing to hear, certainly not sad.

[Babyguile]

I didn't say there was a need to do it. Do you only do things you need to do? No one needs to open a door for someone or relinquish their seat on a bus for someone more in need but people do it because it's the considerate thing to do and it's a very small but nice thing also - and yeah, maybe it makes you feel good about it as well. What's the harm in that? Did Darcy say he only does it to feel good about himself? I think he said it was polite, which it is. On the contrary, I think it's a lovely thing to do and refreshing to hear, certainly not sad.

Open the door to someone, but don't open a door to a woman because you think she's too weak. Open a door to someone who is pushing a pram, holding shopping bags or someone you just feel it would be polite to open the door to.

[Veho]

Open the door to someone, but don't open a door to a woman because you think she's too weak. Open a door to someone who is pushing a pram, holding shopping bags or someone you just feel it would be polite to open the door to.

I don't understand what it is you're trying to say with this?

[Babyguile]

Well I'm certainly not going to repeat myself. But I said this earlier:

People should show respect toward eachother. Not things which are based on assumptions of gender.

[Veho]

Well I'm certainly not going to repeat myself. But I said this earlier:

People should show respect toward eachother. Not things which are based on assumptions of gender.

I think you're mixing basic politeness up with feminism. Unfortunately women are more likely to be the victims of rape because they are, in general, no match for the strength of a man, especially one who is determined. To me, as a feminist (not one of those crazy ones who seem to resent everything men do), a man moving across the road so as not to frighten a women has absolutely nothing to do with feminist issues - it does however have something to do with considerateness. I can't answer for Darcy, obviously, but I presume that his decision to move across the road has absolutely nothing to do with feminism. However, if he doesn't cross the road simply because he thinks he is potentially voiding all the progress that feminists have achieved over the past couple of centuries if he does, well, I'm sorry, but THAT is sad.

[Darcy88]

Also you really shouldn't be crossing the street under the assumption that a woman will be scared and intimidated by you if you walk towards her. That's actually registering your name to one of the loopy arguments Dark Star mentioned.

If a woman has reason to feel intimidated she will cross the street herself. Better to just smile in greeting as you approach. I think it's really sad if you really do that Darcy.

I think its really sad that you think its so sad. I live an area that has a somewhat elevated crime rate. I run late at night, like 8,9, 10 pm. I also go to the supermarket at that time. I mean if its a long street and I see a single female approaching from a distance I will cross the street well before we are in close range of one another. Its just polite. If its so sad then why do I see women themselves cross the street in anticipation of crossing paths with a young man or group of young men? They do - frequently.

The average man weighs 40-50 pounds more than the average woman. The media, the news and television shows, constantly bombard us with stories of violent criminal deviants. I think such a fear on a solitary woman's part while walking out after dark makes perfect sense.

[Darcy88]

I posed this question in another thread: if you had a 17 year old boy and twin 17 year old daughter and both wanted to go out alone walking after dark would you be more worried about your daughter or your son? Its not sexism. Its common sense.

[Veho]

I posed this question in another thread: if you had a 17 year old boy and twin 17 year old daughter and both wanted to go out alone walking after dark would you be more worried about your daughter or your son? Its not sexism. Its common sense.

People seem to abandon common sense in favour of political correctness.

[Alexander III]

People should show respect toward eachother. Not things which are based on assumptions of gender.


Call me stupid, but outside of jail or the army, getting raped is not a principle concern of mine. But those are just my silly and patriarchal gender assumptions.


but seriously what are these false gender assumptions that you believe men have?

That woman are physicaly weaker than men?

That rape has a lot to do with gender?

That a woman has more parental affection to her child than a man?

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I don't think it's "sad," but I do think it's a bit silly to cross the street if a woman is on your side. It's something that would never occur to me to do (though maybe that I'm disabled and don't see myself as ever being perceived as a threat at all plays a part on this). It almost seems like your saying women are easily frightened . . . the mere sight of an oncoming make is enough to scare them. To me, it's be more polite to smile and just say, "Food evening."

I don't think it's sad, though. Even if I think it could be construed as a weird sort of insult, that's still just me construing it that way. I still think it's a polite gesture to do so. How it could be seen as sad, I don't know.

[Darcy88]

I don't think it's "sad," but I do think it's a bit silly to cross the street if a woman is on your side. It's something that would never occur to me to do (though maybe that I'm disabled and don't see myself as ever being perceived as a threat at all plays a part on this). It almost seems like your saying women are easily frightened . . . the mere sight of an oncoming make is enough to scare them. To me, it's be more polite to smile and just say, "Food evening."

I don't think it's sad, though. Even if I think it could be construed as a weird sort of insult, that's still just me construing it that way. I still think it's a polite gesture to do so. How it could be seen as sad, I don't know.

Yours is a rational view. Mine is too. I am slim and clean cut and I dress well. But at ten at night with nobody around except an approaching lone female I think its right to cross the street. If there are passing cars I might not. A woman usually looks standoffish and very cautious in such situations anyway. Their mild concern is obvious, written plain upon their face.

[Charles Darnay]

What ever happened to doffing your hat and politely saying "hello" as a woman (or anyone I suppose) passes you!
But, Darcy I do see your point, although, like Mutatis, it has never occurred to me to do this - I am too short and clumsy to see myself as any threat.

[Veho]

I don't think it's "sad," but I do think it's a bit silly to cross the street if a woman is on your side. It's something that would never occur to me to do (though maybe that I'm disabled and don't see myself as ever being perceived as a threat at all plays a part on this). It almost seems like your saying women are easily frightened . . . the mere sight of an oncoming make is enough to scare them. To me, it's be more polite to smile and just say, "Food evening."

I don't think it's sad, though. Even if I think it could be construed as a weird sort of insult, that's still just me construing it that way. I still think it's a polite gesture to do so. How it could be seen as sad, I don't know.

That thought would never occur to me. If I was walking down a street at night with no one else around, I would undoubtedly be frightened. Not because I'm female, thus more easily scared, but because females are at more risk of rape, simple as. That might be irrational because it presumes that all men walking down the street are rapists but unfortunately some men are. As it happens, you would never find me walking down a quiet street at night on my own, for this very reason.

[Paulclem]

I agree with Darcy. I'm aware that some females become nervous alone at night, and I try to avoid putting them under pressure by walking near them. Speaking to them may also be no help, as it may be perceived as an attempt to establish an unwanted contact.

It is certainly sad, but I feel i've got to respect the rights of women to walk as comfortably as possible without fear of threat or abuse. It's not very nice for them to think they might be being stalked - even if it's imagined. Anything you can do to alleviate this is better.

I have to add that I don't lurk around the streets at night but walk my dog and go to the shop.

[Veho]

I agree with Darcy. I'm aware that some females become nervous alone at night, and I try to avoid putting them under pressure by walking near them. Speaking to them may also be no help, as it may be perceived as an attempt to establish an unwanted contact.

It is certainly sad, but I feel i've got to respect the rights of women to walk as comfortably as possible without fear of threat or abuse. It's not very nice for them to think they might be being stalked - even if it's imagined. Anything you can do to alleviate this is better.

I have to add that I don't lurk around the streets at night but walk my dog and go to the shop.

And as a woman, I appreciate this gesture :D

You might not know this but if your pace is considered too slow, dog walking and shop visiting can be construed as lurking.

[Paulclem]

Ah - then a lurker I be - sometimes...:biggrin5:

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I think all this demonstrates is that people can't do much of anything anymore without risking offending someone.

[Veho]

I think all this demonstrates is that people can't do much of anything anymore without risking offending someone.

I'm trying to find at what point in the recent discussion anyone on this thread mentioned anything about being offended, apart from this, by yourself: "Even if I think it could be construed as a weird sort of insult...".

[Dark Star]

Seeing the debate my earlier comment sparked, I wish to make one thing clear: I don't have any problem with a man choosing to cross the street so as not to cause a female discomfort. I myself take certain precautions to help females be more at ease, such as trying to make sure that I stay in front if a female and I are using the same stair well or the same street and going in the same direction so she won't have to worry about the feeling of someone constantly walking behind her and watching her. If I am behind someone I try to give a wide berth when passing to make them more comfortable. I also give a polite 'hello.' What I take issue with is the attitude that some gender feminists hold that men should be required (socially speaking, not legally) to do things like this.

[Dark Star]

Where do you find the people who hold these crazy views? I've been an active feminist for years and I have never come across another woman who holds these views, and yet whenever someone says to me they are cynical of feminism, they manage to unearth crazy anti-man theories like you have cited and then use them as reasons to not support feminism. It's really frustrating.

I suggest you and other people like you stop getting your knowledge of feminist thought from online blogs and start reading feminist books. Feminism needs men on board.

Unfortunately, some of the more popular and 'mainstream' feminist blogs (Thus Spake Zuska, Skepchicks) argue viewpoints such as these.

I'll also add in my defense that I did distinguish between gender feminism and more mainstream feminist philosophy, and I am on board with most mainstream feminist ideology. (I disagree with some of it on a point by point basis.) All of that said, I would be happy to look into any books on feminism that you can recommend.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I'm trying to find at what point in the recent discussion anyone on this thread mentioned anything about being offended, apart from this, by yourself: "Even if I think it could be construed as a weird sort of insult...".

Some have mentioned not walking on the same side of the street as a woman in order not to frighten her. How could this not be seen as an attempt at avoiding offending someone?

All of that said, I would be happy to look into any books on feminism that you can recommend.

The Essential Feminist Reader (http://www.amazon.com/Essential-Feminist-Reader-Library-Classics/dp/0812974603/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1332804999&sr=8-1) would be a good place to start.

[Veho]

Some have mentioned not walking on the same side of the street as a woman in order not to frighten her. How could this not be seen as an attempt at avoiding offending someone?

Funny, because I don't see how walking on the same street as a women or not in relation to frightening her as anything to do with attempting to offend or not offend someone. How anyone could be offended by it, either way, is beyond me. It never has been a question of offending or not, just mere politeness.

And just to clarify, no one has said that men should do this. I'd never even thought of it myself until I saw it mentioned on here but when I did see it I thought what a nice and thoughtful gesture it was.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Now you're just arguing semantics.

[Veho]

Now you're just arguing semantics.

Lol. I admit I'm in an argumentative mood tonight but I assure you that, in my previous post's case, I was most decidedly not, arguing semantics.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Politeness, offensiveness. Pretty interchangeable concepts. Semantics.

[Veho]

Politeness, offensiveness. Pretty interchangeable concepts. Semantics.

Nope, sorry, I'm not convinced.

You said:


Some have mentioned not walking on the same side of the street as a woman in order not to frighten her. How could this not be seen as an attempt at avoiding offending someone?"

I say that this gesture is in no way an attempt to avoid offending someone. That never even crossed my mind. It is however an attempt not to frighten someone, out of politeness/considerateness. A polite gesture that is in no way offensive if not partook of, as like myself, most people wouldn't even think to do it.

Polite/considerate: Moving across the road so as not to scare a woman.

Indifferent: Acting like most men would - normally - without changing sides.

Offensive: Bumping into said woman, telling her to "watch where you're going, b*%#h!".

Semantics? Yes.
Arguing semantics? No.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Honestly, I've lost interest. You win.

[Veho]

Honestly, I've lost interest. You win.

Thank goodness for that because I was getting bored myself. Just so you know, being right, as I was, I'd already won. :D

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Thank goodness for that because I was getting bored myself. Just so you know, being right, as I was, I'd already won. :D

Whatever helps you sleep at night. ;)

[Veho]

Whatever helps you sleep at night. ;)

Lol, not much helps me to sleep at night. I'm scared of the dark. Anyway, I was having a laugh with my other comment - no need to get sarcastic :p

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I'm always sarcastic.

[BienvenuJDC]

I'm always sarcastic.

I NEVER EVER use sarcasm...

[Babyguile]

That thought would never occur to me. If I was walking down a street at night with no one else around, I would undoubtedly be frightened. Not because I'm female, thus more easily scared, but because females are at more risk of rape, simple as. That might be irrational because it presumes that all men walking down the street are rapists but unfortunately some men are. As it happens, you would never find me walking down a quiet street at night on my own, for this very reason.

Veho, do you live in an area with high incidents of violent crime?

You know, in some parts of Asia today, just as it was in Ancient Greece and Rome, women are not allowed to go out alone at night. They are forbidden. There was a feminist movement in the 1970s called 'Take Back the Night'. Women marched through the streets against sexual violence and demanded freedom of mobility and freedom of speech. That event is still active today across the world.

I think it's a real shame Veho, that you are in the situation you are in. Where you feel you cannot go out in your own community out of FEAR or sexual violence. You are far more likely to be abused by someone you know, possibly in your own home.

I think men moving away from women before they overrtake them on the pavement, not walking up close to them when behind them, or crossing the street when walking towards them are just useless gestures. I would argue that it is more proper, and less presumptious and sexist, to show these acts of 'chivalry' to ALL people you meet on the street alone at night. Not just women becaue you assume them to be helpless and frightened.

The fact is men are FAR more likely to be attacked by strangers on the street. There is empiricle evidence which supports this. Men are more likely to be robbed, beaten and killed by thugs. Young men being stabbed and robbed is reported all the time. The victims of violence reported on news and newspapers are nearly always men.

But it is this fear of crime which, strangely, makes a woman feel she has to take responsibility, and thus people like Veho avoid going out at night altogether. It is a flaw of womanhood I suppose - feeling the need to shoulder the responsibility for something which is not our fault.

[Babyguile]

(merged this post into my other one)

[Dark Star]

TheDave:

You make a pretty strong argument there for equal application of 'chivalrous' behavior. I'm impressed. That said, I'll repeat my previous question to you: What books on feminism do you recommend? Mutatis-Mutandi recommended what seems to be a pretty good primer on historical feminism, so I'd be interested in a survey of contemporary feminist thought to supplement it.

[blazeofglory]

Feminism or woman activism is something some clever women use to popularize themselves. I agree that there is a lot of discrimination against women almost all over the world. In fact the entire world has dimmed the image of women and in fact it is mainly due to the machismo of man or to put it rather brusquely males have evolved in a way that always pushed females a little behind in physical prowess, if not in wisdom. That is why though the degree is lower in developed countries, women are considered soft-sexes in therms of their physical builds.

[Darcy88]

Veho, do you live in an area with high incidents of violent crime?

You know, in some parts of Asia today, just as it was in Ancient Greece and Rome, women are not allowed to go out alone at night. They are forbidden. There was a feminist movement in the 1970s called 'Take Back the Night'. Women marched through the streets against sexual violence and demanded freedom of mobility and freedom of speech. That event is still active today across the world.

I think it's a real shame Veho, that you are in the situation you are in. Where you feel you cannot go out in your own community out of FEAR or sexual violence. You are far more likely to be abused by someone you know, possibly in your own home.

I think men moving away from women before they overrtake them on the pavement, not walking up close to them when behind them, or crossing the street when walking towards them are just useless gestures. I would argue that it is more proper, and less presumptious and sexist, to show these acts of 'chivalry' to ALL people you meet on the street alone at night. Not just women becaue you assume them to be helpless and frightened.

The fact is men are FAR more likely to be attacked by strangers on the street. There is empiricle evidence which supports this. Men are more likely to be robbed, beaten and killed by thugs. Young men being stabbed and robbed is reported all the time. The victims of violence reported on news and newspapers are nearly always men.

But it is this fear of crime which, strangely, makes a woman feel she has to take responsibility, and thus people like Veho avoid going out at night altogether. It is a flaw of womanhood I suppose - feeling the need to shoulder the responsibility for something which is not our fault.

I meet some people who are oblivious to certain social etiquettes and norms. I used to not shake people's hands when I met them, but I'm a little weird altogether. I think your inability to comprehend why I and other men cross the street when encountering a lone woman in the dark of night in a place where there are no other people about is something like this. Its an unawareness on your part of a perfectly natural and sane social behavior.

Like I said, most women will cross the street themselves before the man meets them on the sidewalk. I really don't see why this doesn't make sense to you.

[Babyguile]

I meet some people who are oblivious to certain social etiquettes and norms. I used to not shake people's hands when I met them, but I'm a little weird altogether. I think your inability to comprehend why I and other men cross the street when encountering a lone woman in the dark of night in a place where there are no other people about is something like this. Its an unawareness on your part of a perfectly natural and sane social behavior.

Like I said, most women will cross the street themselves before the man meets them on the sidewalk. I really don't see why this doesn't make sense to you.

Because quite frankly it's sexist: I've outlined how needless and illogical it is. To do it is sexist. But if it makes you feel nice about yourself then do it all you like. I'm not saying it's a big deal but it is sexist strictly speaking. And everyone's different. I'm not a man but if I were I wouldn't cross the street because I know I'm bloody well not a rapist and so why on earth should I?

[Darcy88]

Because quite frankly it's sexist: I've outlined how needless and illogical it is. To do it is sexist. But if it makes you feel nice about yourself then do it all you like. I'm not saying it's a big deal but it is sexist strictly speaking. And everyone's different. I'm not a man but if I were I wouldn't cross the street because I know I'm bloody well not a rapist and so why on earth should I?

How is it sexist? Quite frankly your attitude towards it is ridiculous. Go tell that 16 year old girl who got raped and then strangled while out walking alone after dark that any anxiety on her part about the man approaching her was unfounded. Go tell her sister or mother that they shouldn't worry about it either, if they even go outside at that time anymore.

I go walking during the day and every woman and every girl will almost always smile and say hello. At night with no one around they usually look straight ahead, avoiding eye contact, maintaing rigid postures and brisk paces. In daylight I can encounter a woman alone on a wilderness trail without a soul around and she'll smile and say hello. That same woman, were it at night on a secluded street, would have the same cautious vigilant attitude I just described. They are being needlessly illogical though. The 40-50 pounds size difference and the penchant for violence and overwhelming sex drive of male youth have absolutely nothing to do with it.

I shed a tear and planted my face in my palm when I read this response of yours.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-R7s22hHIdVc/TmICLm9BCxI/AAAAAAAAAYI/YEd1lYSv38I/s1600/facepalm.jpg

[Babyguile]

Oh please.

Why don't you stop victimizing women? Also women are very good at judging character by the way; none of my girl friends would DREAM of acting in that defensive, agitated way when simply walking down a street! Absolutely pathetic.

Your concept of crime and who are the victims of crime is completely skewed by your masculine desire to somehow make women see you as fatherly and accomodating. I respect adults by not seeing them as victims. I also don't judge people I pass on the street to see if they are 'scared' of me or not (though again I'm not a man).

[Darcy88]

Oh please.

Why don't you stop victimizing women? Also women are very good at judging character by the way; none of my girl friends would DREAM of acting in that defensive, agitated way when simply walking down a street! Absolutely pathetic.

Your concept of crime and who are the victims of crime is completely skewed by your masculine desire to somehow make women see you as fatherly and accomodating. I respect adults by not seeing them as victims. I also don't judge people I pass on the street to see if they are 'scared' of me or not (though again I'm not a man).

Trolly troll troll is trolling.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-2ttw5KXtB_w/T2etjTFGL-I/AAAAAAAAAWQ/1YV7g04CA-8/s1600/DownloadedFile.jpeg

[Darcy88]

Oh please.

Why don't you stop victimizing women? Also women are very good at judging character by the way; none of my girl friends would DREAM of acting in that defensive, agitated way when simply walking down a street! Absolutely pathetic.


I am the one who victimizes women and yet you call 75 percent of the women where I live "absolutely pathetic." Wonderful. Here is my rebuttal, the only one I can think of worth saying in response to your sentiments:

ADHIIIIGABOOOO dumbala-ding-ding dong.

Also, you are not a man? A new username might be in order. TheDave is one of the most masculine sounding names on litnet. Some people thought I was a girl at first, perhaps we should trade?

[Babyguile]

...and there we go. This discussion is now over.

[Dark Star]

...and there we go. This discussion is now over.

Now that the somewhat heated discussion is over, I'm still curious about what books you would recommend on feminism.

[Alexander III]

O

none of my girl friends would DREAM of acting in that defensive, agitated way when simply walking down a street! Absolutely pathetic.


Well that is the great advantage ugly woman posses, they need not fear rapists and stalkers.

[OrphanPip]

Now that the somewhat heated discussion is over, I'm still curious about what books you would recommend on feminism.

I like Martha Nussbaum's book Sex and Social Justice, she is a Liberal Feminist. She addresses contemporary debates like sexuality rights, genital mutilation, pornography and prostitution.

Simone de Beauvoir's The Second Sex is an interesting read as well.

Other primary text that are influential:
Gender Troubles - Judith Butler
Intercourse - Andrea Dworkin (very controversial book)
Toward a Feminist Theory of State - Catherine MacKinnon
Female Masculinity - Judith "Jack" Halberstam

I'm not a big fan of pomo feminist and feminist psychoanalysis, but you could give Luce Irigaray and Helene Cixous a try.

Edit: These are feminist books rather than books about feminism per se.

About feminism you might want to read Showalter's book Inventing Herself, which is a historical survey of feminism as applied to literary criticism, but gives you a good overview of how feminism has evolved.

[Darcy88]

Well that is the great advantage ugly woman posses, they need not fear rapists and stalkers.

http://www.chipola.edu/pictures/icons/applause.gif

[Darcy88]

I like Martha Nussbaum's book Sex and Social Justice, she is a Liberal Feminist. She addresses contemporary debates like sexuality rights, genital mutilation, pornography and prostitution.


I love Matha Nussbaum. I've only read a lengthy essay she wrote comparing Aristotle and Plato's contrary ideas on the subject of love, but it was remarkably well-written and insightful.

[JuniperWoolf]

Well that is the great advantage ugly woman posses, they need not fear rapists and stalkers.

Actually my dad works at a prison and my friend's mom is the prison psychologyist, and most rapists aren't picky apparently. The girls aren't what turns them on, they just like raping and anyone will do really. I'm sure there are exceptions though.

[Dark Star]

Well that is the great advantage ugly woman posses, they need not fear rapists and stalkers.

Very mature.

[Alexander III]

Very mature.

I'm a 19 year old guy, gender stereotypes apply to me too.

As Berlusconi once said at a dinner party "stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason."

[Babyguile]

Not only was the post factually untrue and immature, as two posters have pointed out, but it wasn't even witty. Which is its worst flaw. It was so bad that it wasn't even offensive.

This is not Alexander III's finest hour on this forum.

[Darcy88]

My clapping hands beg to differ.

[Delta40]

I saw a great cartoon of a naked guy once where his penis was replaced by St Paul's Cathedral. This male self image of his own power is expressed through such actions of rape. I don't think a womans looks have anything to do with it.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Juniper actually offered some evidence that looks don't matter to rapists, but everyone seems to be ignoring it. . .

[Delta40]

Juniper actually offered some evidence that looks don't matter to rapists, but everyone seems to be ignoring it. . .

Sorry didn't mean to :beatdeadhorse5: But St Paul's Cathedral stays....:p

[blazeofglory]

In fact rape is committed by females too. It is not always men whose physical prowess subdue women. I have seen some males victimized by women. They are physically assaulted, mentally tortured and socially abused.

At the same time the way girls present them, at times sexually is likely to lead to acts of sex.

Feminists should advocate for moderating dressing habits, to appear moderately glamorous in order that men do not become sexually stimulated

[tonywalt]

In fact rape is committed by females too. It is not always men whose physical prowess subdue women. I have seen some males victimized by women. They are physically assaulted, mentally tortured and socially abused.

At the same time the way girls present them, at times sexually is likely to lead to acts of sex.

Feminists should advocate for moderating dressing habits, to appear moderately glamorous in order that men do not become sexually stimulated

Good Lord, get ready to duck blazeofglory, you are going to get :smash:

[Alexander III]

Juniper actually offered some evidence that looks don't matter to rapists, but everyone seems to be ignoring it. . .

I saw the evidence, but I didnt find it credible. We ought not to forget that in the 40's there was plenty of evidence stating that blacks and jews were mentaly inferior.

Lets face it, were I to go to jail, I would most likley get raped, I have a boyish face and feminine features and body, that is the one who always gets raped in jail.

Common sense is common sense, it seems prety obvious that an ugly woman is much less likley to get raped than a beautifull one. Feminist have made a whole theory on the desire of man to express his dominance and such things, but let us not loose our common sense, rape is rape, and it has a very specific purpose, to satisfy extreem sexual desire, a beautifull woman is good for that, and ugly one is not.

[blazeofglory]

Good Lord, get ready to duck blazeofglory, you are going to get :smash:

I do not understand your slang and do not see any reason to antagonize me. What Ia said is true and I like to see things through a transparent lens, not through a smeared social lens.
Yes in my society women are abusers too, and men suffer and undergo a variety of tortures. You should not predicate your notions on what you see around you and make a hypothesis. This world is big and cultural fabricks from place to place vary.

Things like values, customs, mores vary through mobility and that is why you must travel a lot to see different social habits and human natures.

[iamnobody]

I saw the evidence, but I didnt find it credible. We ought not to forget that in the 40's there was plenty of evidence stating that blacks and jews were mentaly inferior.

Lets face it, were I to go to jail, I would most likley get raped, I have a boyish face and feminine features and body, that is the one who always gets raped in jail.

Common sense is common sense, it seems prety obvious that an ugly woman is much less likley to get raped than a beautifull one. Feminist have made a whole theory on the desire of man to express his dominance and such things, but let us not loose our common sense, rape is rape, and it has a very specific purpose, to satisfy extreem sexual desire, a beautifull woman is good for that, and ugly one is not.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/why-do-young-men-rape-elderly-women-and-why-does-nobody-care-a-special-report-by-linda-grant-on-a-shocking-crime-which-it-seems-we-all-prefer-to-ignore-1408839.html

So much for "common sense".
Rape is rarely just about satisfying sexual desire, it's about power and control. The victim is most often whoever is the most convenient target, not the one that's most desirable.

[JuniperWoolf]

Yeah, it's not so much about "beauty" as it is accessability. I thought that was common knowledge, since the law tends to write everything down studies on rape are fairly simple and straitforward. For example, it surprises me that this:


I think the problem with locating this debate on the idea of women walking around scantily clad is that it ignores the reality of how and when rapes occur. Most cases of rape involve men the women know. The masked attacker in the park is relatively rare occurrence.

...doesn't seem to be more commonly known among my fellow forum members.

[miyako73]

about rape again?

If a hot rapist comes my way, I'll welcome him and teach him kama sutra, so next time he craves sex, he won't go for the quickie. Kama sutra is long but multi-orgasmic.

If an ugly one attempts, I either use my gun or my bare hands to prove to him that I can stick something deadly in his holes and that I orgasm too from violence.

[JuniperWoolf]

about rape again?

Topics tend to trend around here.


If a hot rapist comes my way, I'll welcome him and teach him kama sutra, so next time he craves sex, he won't go for the quickie. Kama sutra is long but multi-orgasmic.

If an ugly one attempts, I either use my gun or my bare hands to prove to him that I can stick something deadly in his holes and that I orgasm too from violence.

...'Kay.

[BienvenuJDC]

I am really amazed at the ignorance of people about rape. Seems that just a couple people here have an accurate perspective about rape.

[BienvenuJDC]

Actually my dad works at a prison and my friend's mom is the prison psychologyist, and most rapists aren't picky apparently. The girls aren't what turns them on, they just like raping and anyone will do really. I'm sure there are exceptions though.

I don't really know much about it, but this seems very logical. Men rape men in prison, not because the are necessarily homosexual, but because they can.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I saw the evidence, but I didnt find it credible. We ought not to forget that in the 40's there was plenty of evidence stating that blacks and jews were mentaly inferior.

Lets face it, were I to go to jail, I would most likley get raped, I have a boyish face and feminine features and body, that is the one who always gets raped in jail.

Common sense is common sense, it seems prety obvious that an ugly woman is much less likley to get raped than a beautifull one. Feminist have made a whole theory on the desire of man to express his dominance and such things, but let us not loose our common sense, rape is rape, and it has a very specific purpose, to satisfy extreem sexual desire, a beautifull woman is good for that, and ugly one is not.
Well, as several have pointed out, whether or not you think it conforms to common sense is moot, because it looks as if looks are rarely the only deciding factor for a rape victim.

As much as a like to see everyone saying they think it's in now way the fault of the victim's no matter what, I must assume this board's general population is a little more, oh, let's say rational, than a lot of society. The "she was asking for it" excuse is still quite rampant today--I've heard many people, women included, say that, or upon hearing a woman was rapes they'll ask, "How was she dressed," as if it matters.

I also like how someone posted that for some women, it's near impossible not to be attractive. I've encountered many women who would still be quite attractive even if they constantly wore baggy sweat-suits all the time.

[Delta40]

Well if looks are the deciding factor, I guess the ugly ones don't actually get raped so we can just drop the charges. Tell me, are the rapists required to be good looking or can they be ugly as well? What a load of tosh!

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Most rapists I've seen are ugly as ****.

[Delta40]

Most rapists I've seen are ugly as ****.

Not according to their mothers. Hey perhaps it is women's fault after all! We're just not thinking far enough back to the cradle...

[JuniperWoolf]

Most rapists I've seen are ugly as ****.

I saw a rapist irl once. The jail where my dad works used to be a minimum security, so it was mostly just people who cheated on their taxes and people who have been in prison for decades already. We were in GP and my dad pointed out this guy in his early fifties maybe, this small, wattery-eyed anxious looking practically translucent-white person with some long *** fingernails. I could have probably broken his spine like a dry twig. Apparently he just got out after a 25 year sentence. When he saw my dad he made like a "eep!" and shuffled off. It was pathetic, he looked and acted exactly like a rat. Raped his kids a lot, apparently. I wonder what the law would do if one of his now grown daughters tracked him down and beat the **** out of him? I bet they'd just charge her with assault and not take the fact that he raped her when she was a little kid into account. I guess that's "right," he did his time.

[Delta40]

Perhaps it isn't wise to stereotype rapists just as it isn't wise to stereotype the victims.

[JuniperWoolf]

Perhaps it isn't wise to stereotype rapists just as it isn't wise to stereotype the victims.

Is that the rapist stereotype? I always thought it was like, "drunk frat guy." If my dad's former con fit the stereotype, then that's a coincidence.

[Delta40]

I'm probably referring to MM's comments about rapists more than yours Juniper. My concern is to not throw these guys into one bucket because they come from all walks of life, just like their victims do and frankly it's all too easy to see rapists in a particular light.

[JuniperWoolf]

I'm probably referring to MM's comments about rapists more than yours Juniper. My concern is to not throw these guys into one bucket because they come from all walks of life, just like their victims do and frankly it's all too easy to see rapists in a particular light.

That's true.

[Alexander III]

Perhaps it isn't wise to stereotype rapists just as it isn't wise to stereotype the victims.

That's true, back when I was in the secon year of high school one of the guys in the final year, was charged with drugging and raping a girl. He was one of the most popular and handsome guys in the school, and he came from a very old and well known family. Rape is a strange thing and like all men in war can learn to kill, all men under certain condition can learn to rape for whatever reason.

[tonywalt]

........