NationStates Jolt Archive

...Gender that is. (Granted I know sex and gender are two different things, but thats a whole other story). You know what I meant. Hopefully.

Anyhow, I figured there haven't been any interesting threads about feminism or women's rights since the "retirement" of HerPower, so I figured I'd do General a favour (ha) by starting one.

So what do you think about the current state of feminism? Are you bitter about all those women out there whom you oh-so-lovingly refer to as "man hating lesbians" or "feminazis?" Do you like the postmodern take on feminism? Maybe you don't give two shits about the feminist movement but you love women all the same.

Let the discussion begin! (And please no flaming)

Feminism schminism. I believe that most legal obstacles women faced to equality have been broken down, now we have to get rid of the prejudice. I don't believe a movement is necessary to do that.

...Gender that is. (Granted I know sex and gender are two different things, but thats a whole other story). You know what I meant. Hopefully.

Anyhow, I figured there haven't been any interesting threads about feminism or women's rights since the "retirement" of HerPower, so I figured I'd do General a favour (ha) by starting one.

So what do you think about the current state of feminism? Are you bitter about all those women out there whom you oh-so-lovingly refer to as "man hating lesbians" or "feminazis?" Do you like the postmodern take on feminism? Maybe you don't give two shits about the feminist movement but you love women all the same.

Let the discussion begin! (And please no flaming)

seeing how those so called "feminist" only seem to care about their own race (leaving black women high and dry) i dont think they are anything we should care about

If any of you read the comics and your local newspaper runs the comic Opus, you might want to take a peek at it. It relates to the issue.

Yeah, I'm sick of all these femminazis. Everyone needs to stop arguing about women and how they're related to men and their status. Men are unfortunately vital to survival of women. Thus, everyone should just shut up about it. Besides, I think women have men right where they want them. ;)

seeing how those so called "feminist" only seem to care about their own race (leaving black women high and dry) i dont think they are anything we should care about
Last time I checked, the word "women" still included women of all colours, so if you'd care to elaborate that would be nice.

Last time I checked, the word "women" still included women of all colours, so if you'd care to elaborate that would be nice.
Most feminist organizations are white dominated, I believe is what he is getting at. There's no NAAFCP. The F being female.

Simple.. the general womens movement was a white womans movement.. not a womans movement in general.. they've done nothing to support their minority sisters and help the move along.. take a woman studies class.. thats the first interesting bit you'll get from all their dribble

Well, I love women even without feminism. I also love lesbians more, especially the cute ones.

Simple.. the general womens movement was a white womans movement.. not a womans movement in general.. they've done nothing to support their minority sisters and help the move along.. take a woman studies class.. thats the first interesting bit you'll get from all their dribble
While theres probably alot of truth to what you're saying, its very difficult to say the feminist movement in itself is racist...

I think the intent was perhaps to keep racial and gender issues seperate?

Last time I checked, the word "women" still included women of all colours, so if you'd care to elaborate that would be nice.
I think you totally missed his whole statement. Perhaps you should read it over again? He is saying that the so called "femenists" are only concerned with their subgroup of females and not all females. I really don't think any elaboration is required...

While theres probably alot of truth to what you're saying, its very difficult to say the feminist movement in itself is racist...

I think the intent was perhaps to keep racial and gender issues seperate?

and the first thing you'll learn in those women studies classes i was just talkinga bout.. is that gender,race, and socio-economic status are all inseperable... you cant talk about womens rights unless you talk about race and socio-economics either.. the very fact that the movement only propagates white womens issues shows its racisim

and the first thing you'll learn in those women studies classes i was just talkinga bout.. is that gender,race, and socio-economic status are all inseperable... you cant talk about womens rights unless you talk about race and socio-economics either.. the very fact that the movement only propagates white womens issues shows its racisim
That's really interesting, I myself have never taken a women studies class (my schedule doesn't allow for it) but I am very interested in the issues. I'll have to read more about that.

That's really interesting, I myself have never taken a women studies class (my schedule doesn't allow for it) but I am very interested in the issues. I'll have to read more about that.

take one you may as well have taken them all.. I unfortunatly had to endure 4 of them for some god awful reason despite the fact my major was no where close to the issue.. just the way the dice rolls i guess (idiotic school requirements)... women are oppressed, men are evil, HIStory is all about men blah blah blah... any more oppression and i would be tearing my hair out

I'm not too keen on the feminists that try to quash my personal views just because they don't like them. Personally, if I ever have kids, I certainly plan on being a stay-at-home-wife. I think playing maid is kinky (I can't guarantee I'd be any good at it perpetually, but meh). I'd be willing to let my partner earn the money, and willing to deal with the fact that he'd get more of a say on how it's spent. The idea of a harem of willing participants (none of this 'girls raised from birth to think of themselves as sex objects' bollocks, for a start) amuses me no end. Hell, when it comes to relationships in general, the subservient role is the one I'd pick every time.

Now, naturally I don't think *all* women should have to agree with my personal views on the ideal relationship layout, but it really pisses me off when so-called-feminists look down their nose at me for my own personal views. Apparently, by wanting to do what feels natural and makes sense to me, I'm letting down the feminist movement. Basically that's lead to my all-encompassing 'fuck the feminist movement' attitude. I'm more concerned with equality than 'women's rights'. If I want to be subservient, that's an informed choice. I prefer it for my own devious reasons. Telling me that, by doing what I want to, I'm a pawn of the patriarchy just makes me laugh, and then want to stab something.

Same thing with pornography and prostitution... of course I don't agree that any woman should be made to feel *forced* into it (through financial problems or whatever), but it pisses me off how a lot of feminists say "NO woman would EVER be involved with those industries unless they were forced into it". Far as I'm concerned, that's bullshit. If you give a group of women a choice between an office job and a porn job that both pay the same, some are going to take the porn job. Just because some feminists think porn is 'degrading' doesn't mean they get the right to look down their noses at women involved in the industry. That's just... what's that word again? Hypocrisy? Yeah, that'll do. "Equal rights for women, except to do what they want if it disagrees with my moral values!". Oh grow up.

----

Also, Passive Cookies, that thread title is evil. You went and got all my hopes up. Now I'm all disappointed-like.

I'm not too keen on the feminists that try to quash my personal views just because they don't like them. Personally, if I ever have kids, I certainly plan on being a stay-at-home-wife. I think playing maid is kinky (I can't guarantee I'd be any good at it perpetually, but meh). I'd be willing to let my partner earn the money, and willing to deal with the fact that he'd get more of a say on how it's spent. The idea of a harem of willing participants (none of this 'girls raised from birth to think of themselves as sex objects' bollocks, for a start) amuses me no end. Hell, when it comes to relationships in general, the subservient role is the one I'd pick every time.

Now, naturally I don't think *all* women should have to agree with my personal views on the ideal relationship layout, but it really pisses me off when so-called-feminists look down their nose at me for my own personal views. Apparently, by wanting to do what feels natural and makes sense to me, I'm letting down the feminist movement. Basically that's lead to my all-encompassing 'fuck the feminist movement' attitude. I'm more concerned with equality than 'women's rights'. If I want to be subservient, that's an informed choice. I prefer it for my own devious reasons. Telling me that, by doing what I want to, I'm a pawn of the patriarchy just makes me laugh, and then want to stab something.

Same thing with pornography and prostitution... of course I don't agree that any woman should be made to feel *forced* into it (through financial problems or whatever), but it pisses me off how a lot of feminists say "NO woman would EVER be involved with those industries unless they were forced into it". Far as I'm concerned, that's bullshit. If you give a group of women a choice between an office job and a porn job that both pay the same, some are going to take the porn job. Just because some feminists think porn is 'degrading' doesn't mean they get the right to look down their noses at women involved in the industry. That's just... what's that word again? Hypocrisy? Yeah, that'll do. "Equal rights for women, except to do what they want if it disagrees with my moral values!". Oh grow up.

----

Also, Passive Cookies, that thread title is evil. You went and got all my hopes up. Now I'm all disappointed-like.

Well, then fine let's talk about sex! I'm feel a little sexually-deprived. You can discuss that.

I consider myself a feminist, and think any woman who's not either has a very distorted idea of feminists or hasn't got much self interest or even brains.
BTW-Read MS.
They have a lot of articles about the specials issues lesbians and women of color face.

and the first thing you'll learn in those women studies classes i was just talkinga bout.. is that gender,race, and socio-economic status are all inseperable... you cant talk about womens rights unless you talk about race and socio-economics either.. the very fact that the movement only propagates white womens issues shows its racisim

My womens studies covered minority women. Ever heard of Bessie Coleman?

Also, Passive Cookies, that thread title is evil. You went and got all my hopes up. Now I'm all disappointed-like.
My apologies ^.^
If you'd like to go a little "off topic" I promise to look the other way...

PS: I totally agree with what you have to say about homemakers/pornography/prostitution. Just because the feminist movement doesn't condone the "traditional" lifestyle, doesn't mean its a bad thing for women to do. Thats the same for prostitution, sure women should be free of the financial preasures to be a prostitute, but if a women chooses to do so based on her own free will, all the power to her!

I'm not too keen on the feminists that try to quash my personal views just because they don't like them. Personally, if I ever have kids, I certainly plan on being a stay-at-home-wife. I think playing maid is kinky (I can't guarantee I'd be any good at it perpetually, but meh). I'd be willing to let my partner earn the money, and willing to deal with the fact that he'd get more of a say on how it's spent. The idea of a harem of willing participants (none of this 'girls raised from birth to think of themselves as sex objects' bollocks, for a start) amuses me no end. Hell, when it comes to relationships in general, the subservient role is the one I'd pick every time.

Do whatever you feel is best for yourself. I admire that to no end.

Now, naturally I don't think *all* women should have to agree with my personal views on the ideal relationship layout, but it really pisses me off when so-called-feminists look down their nose at me for my own personal views. Apparently, by wanting to do what feels natural and makes sense to me, I'm letting down the feminist movement. Basically that's lead to my all-encompassing 'fuck the feminist movement' attitude. I'm more concerned with equality than 'women's rights'. If I want to be subservient, that's an informed choice. I prefer it for my own devious reasons. Telling me that, by doing what I want to, I'm a pawn of the patriarchy just makes me laugh, and then want to stab something.

Refer to my statement above.

Same thing with pornography and prostitution... of course I don't agree that any woman should be made to feel *forced* into it (through financial problems or whatever), but it pisses me off how a lot of feminists say "NO woman would EVER be involved with those industries unless they were forced into it". Far as I'm concerned, that's bullshit. If you give a group of women a choice between an office job and a porn job that both pay the same, some are going to take the porn job. Just because some feminists think porn is 'degrading' doesn't mean they get the right to look down their noses at women involved in the industry. That's just... what's that word again? Hypocrisy? Yeah, that'll do. "Equal rights for women, except to do what they want if it disagrees with my moral values!". Oh grow up.

It's your body; do what you want with it. Stab yourself, drug yourself, bang your head on a concrete slab, fuck with everybody on the block --- Do whatever you wanna do. You're not harming anybody by harming yourself.

I am female, but not particularly feminist. In any relationship, though, I would expect to be an equal partner. That is not to say I dismiss any other views as such, that's just the way I'd like it.
Feminism has to a certain extent gone too far nowadays - men can be subjected to sexist jokes, but if a woman was it would create an uproar. At the same time, a woman's pay is still lower than that of a man doing the same job, which I think is wrong, though the idea of forcing women into jobs where men are more suitable than women is ridiculous - the armed forces to an extent and even politics to a degree. There are some jobs men can do better, and others women can do better. Unless feminists agree that men and women are fundamentally different, this sort of thing will continue.
However - feminism in the past is certainly nothing to sneer at. While I don't take the view of 'men are evil', there was a great deal more inequality in the past, and the fights for emancipation and the breaking down of (some) prejudices were necessary and good.

Well, then fine let's talk about sex! I'm feel a little sexually-deprived. You can discuss that.

I say we kidnap Passive Cookies and then go create a male-less harem somewhere. I can bring the fluffy handcuffs, and the Vanilla and Raspberry lickable body spray ^.^

Hell, we could hijack the Myrth harem and use the bar/spa/silk cushions there. Hurrah for a life of luxury and sexual excess paid for by someone else!

(wait, won't this count as going offtopic, into Spam World TM? I wouldn't want to get poor PC's thread locked by the eeeeeevil oppressive mods.

...mmmoppression...)

I'm all for totally equal gender rights.

But feminists- Please use deodorant and shave your armpits. It's not very pleasant having to sit behind a girl in a university lecture that has bushier armpits than me and smells like a compost heap.

I'm sorry, but I don't see how you are liberating anything by doing that.

(And yes, I hate stereotypes too, but this is becoming an all-too-common trend, and I witness it every time I venture outside to uni.)

I am female, but not particularly feminist. In any relationship, though, I would expect to be an equal partner. That is not to say I dismiss any other views as such, that's just the way I'd like it.
Feminism has to a certain extent gone too far nowadays - men can be subjected to sexist jokes, but if a woman was it would create an uproar. At the same time, a woman's pay is still lower than that of a man doing the same job, which I think is wrong, though the idea of forcing women into jobs where men are more suitable than women is ridiculous - the armed forces to an extent and even politics to a degree. There are some jobs men can do better, and others women can do better. Unless feminists agree that men and women are fundamentally different, this sort of thing will continue.
However - feminism in the past is certainly nothing to sneer at. While I don't take the view of 'men are evil', there was a great deal more inequality in the past, and the fights for emancipation and the breaking down of (some) prejudices were necessary and good.

I know. I'm getting tired of the commercials that portray men as oafs and idiots, yet if there was ever a commercial that showed the woman as such, there'd be a massive uproar. And I agree with the whole draft thing --- It would be ridiculous to force women to fight.

I'm for "equal pay for equal work". I still don't get why women are paid 15 to 30 percent less than men just because they're women. It's fucking insane!

and the first thing you'll learn in those women studies classes i was just talkinga bout.. is that gender,race, and socio-economic status are all inseperable... you cant talk about womens rights unless you talk about race and socio-economics either.. the very fact that the movement only propagates white womens issues shows its racisim
Well, that and the fact that the women with the most time on their hands to march and go to various rallies would be middle to upper class. So the question becomes was it intentional racism or not. Many times, it wasn't.

I'm all for totally equal gender rights.

But feminists- Please use deodorant and shave your armpits. It's not very pleasant having to sit behind a girl in a university lecture that has bushier armpits than me and smells like a compost heap.

I'm sorry, but I don't see how you are liberating anything by doing that.

(And yes, I hate stereotypes too, but this is becoming an all-too-common trend, and I witness it every time I venture outside to uni.)

Whoooooa wh-wh-whoooooa grooooss!!

Whoooooa wh-wh-whoooooa grooooss!!

I'd go as far to say that 10-25% of the girls in my classes are like that. (I try not to inspect unless it's kinda obvious, and I can't avoid it.)

*gags*

I'm all for totally equal gender rights.

But feminists- Please use deodorant and shave your armpits. It's not very pleasant having to sit behind a girl in a university lecture that has bushier armpits than me and smells like a compost heap.

I'm sorry, but I don't see how you are liberating anything by doing that.

(And yes, I hate stereotypes too, but this is becoming an all-too-common trend, and I witness it every time I venture outside to uni.)
Although this is more of a personal hygiene issue than a feminist issue, I'm going to have to agree: being smelly is in no way liberating.

I'd go as far to say that 10-25% of the girls in my classes are like that. (I try not to inspect unless it's kinda obvious, and I can't avoid it.)

*gags*

*shudder*

*shudder*

*shudder*

*shudder*

*shudder*

*shudder*

He He, she said sex.

Sorry, I had to do that. :D

Well, that and the fact that the women with the most time on their hands to march and go to various rallies would be middle to upper class. So the question becomes was it intentional racism or not. Many times, it wasn't.

While you make a good point, I'm quoting you because you have BM in your sig. Thus I must worship you as a minor deity. Would you prefer to be in the 'Norse' section or the 'Pagan' section?

Although this is more of a personal hygiene issue than a feminist issue, I'm going to have to agree: being smelly is in no way liberating.

It's really only the vocal feminists that do it. The ones that argue with the lecturer and blame things on the male heirarchy, etc. Otherwise I wouldn't have brought it up. :p

I'm all for totally equal gender rights.

But feminists- Please use deodorant and shave your armpits. It's not very pleasant having to sit behind a girl in a university lecture that has bushier armpits than me and smells like a compost heap.

I'm sorry, but I don't see how you are liberating anything by doing that.

(And yes, I hate stereotypes too, but this is becoming an all-too-common trend, and I witness it every time I venture outside to uni.)

Puh-leez!
I consider myself a feminist. I love feeling attractive. I love men. (Most of them) I think people have a very one-dimensional idea of feminism these days. They get their ideas from a vocal minority. It's like thinking all Christians are like Fred Phelps or all muslims are Bin-Laden. :rolleyes:

He He, he said sex.

Sorry, I had to do that. :D
Thats she. She said sex. I'm a girl. (Just to clarify, this is by no means an angry feminazi comment).

PS: I hate the word feminazi.

I say we kidnap Passive Cookies and then go create a male-less harem somewhere. I can bring the fluffy handcuffs, and the Vanilla and Raspberry lickable body spray ^.^

Hell, we could hijack the Myrth harem and use the bar/spa/silk cushions there. Hurrah for a life of luxury and sexual excess paid for by someone else!

(wait, won't this count as going offtopic, into Spam World TM? I wouldn't want to get poor PC's thread locked by the eeeeeevil oppressive mods.

...mmmoppression...)
fluffy handcuffs you say?

...I'm intrigued.

Thats she. She said sex. I'm a girl. (Just to clarify, this is by no means an angry feminazi comment).

PS: I hate the word feminazi.

Don't be silly, there aren't any girls on the internet!

Oh... wait...

*dissipates*

Puh-leez!
I consider myself a feminist. I love feeling attractive. I love men. (Most of them) I think people have a very one-dimensional idea of feminism these days. They get their ideas from a vocal minority. It's like thinking all Christians are like Fred Phelps or all muslims are Bin-Laden. :rolleyes:

No, i'm not relying on stereotypes, i'm going by what i've seen and heard them say. These people call themselves feminists and i've drawn a correlation. I don't mean to say that all feminists are like that, but the more vocal ones that I know all are. I hope it's just a temporary trend.

fluffy handcuffs you say?

...I'm intrigued.

Alas and alack, I'd need to find the blasted things first. My interest in maid-dom only works when it's for someone else. Left to my own devices, my method of 'cleaning' follows the 'piles of crap in select (read: not viewable from the doorway to my room) locations' method.

...

I have the *key* to my fluffy handcuffs, if that helps any.

I consider myself a humanist, but generally call myself a feminist because I think there's still work to be done and the movement needs the variety I bring to it ;)

I think one of the big problems in feminism is separating what should be accomplished with education and what should be accomplished with state policy. I think the movement definitely suffers from an image crisis, which, much like many contemporary "liberal" movements, is due in large part to letting the vocal minority/the opposition define the whole of the movement.

This certainly can be seen in feminism's seeming lack of interest in minority women. To many it seems as if all feminists are concerned with is banning pornography, hosting lesbian love-ins and bashing "DWEMs."

As a feminist, those are the least of my worries. I'd like to see the movement forcefully focus on things like a working wage, sweatshops, heath care and child care. These are human issues, and I disagree with the feminization of domestic issues in general, but it's a reality that many women are rather disenfranchised politically, socially and economically, and focusing on "real" issues would bring them into the fray.

And I could say a lot more, but damn, this is a long-ass post and I need to go to class in the morning. Thanks for the forum for my rant, and if anyone is interested, read The Mismeasure of Woman by Carol Tavris. Awesome, well researched book.

This certainly can be seen in feminism's seeming lack of interest in minority women. To many it seems as if all feminists are concerned with is banning pornography, hosting lesbian love-ins and bashing "DWEMs."


Hey now, no discouraging those lesbian love-ins, y'hear? Some of us are taking a break from the horrors of male-female relationships and *need* those love-ins.

Nifty first post though ^.^

While you make a good point, I'm quoting you because you have BM in your sig. Thus I must worship you as a minor deity. Would you prefer to be in the 'Norse' section or the 'Pagan' section?
I'll go with the Norse section, I've always felt an affinity for Loki.

I consider myself a humanist, but generally call myself a feminist because I think there's still work to be done and the movement needs the variety I bring to it ;)

I think one of the big problems in feminism is separating what should be accomplished with education and what should be accomplished with state policy. I think the movement definitely suffers from an image crisis, which, much like many contemporary "liberal" movements, is due in large part to letting the vocal minority/the opposition define the whole of the movement.

This certainly can be seen in feminism's seeming lack of interest in minority women. To many it seems as if all feminists are concerned with is banning pornography, hosting lesbian love-ins and bashing "DWEMs."

As a feminist, those are the least of my worries. I'd like to see the movement forcefully focus on things like a working wage, sweatshops, heath care and child care. These are human issues, and I disagree with the feminization of domestic issues in general, but it's a reality that many women are rather disenfranchised politically, socially and economically, and focusing on "real" issues would bring them into the fray.

And I could say a lot more, but damn, this is a long-ass post and I need to go to class in the morning. Thanks for the forum for my rant, and if anyone is interested, read The Mismeasure of Woman by Carol Tavris. Awesome, well researched book.
Aha! Someone with both knowledge and interest. I like. I agree that feminism is more of a humanist issue; instead of focussing on the differences between men and women, we should come together and celebrate our similarities. It all boils down to equality, and that is what women are striving to achieve. By viewing all genders and races as equal we can finally find global unity.

I suppose that's alot to ask for though.

Hey now, no discouraging those lesbian love-ins, y'hear? Some of us are taking a break from the horrors of male-female relationships and *need* those love-ins.

Nifty first post though ^.^

hahah! I would never discourage those. Sometimes you need a loan from the girl zone ;)

I consider myself a feminist, and think any woman who's not either has a very distorted idea of feminists or hasn't got much self interest or even brains.
BTW-Read MS.
They have a lot of articles about the specials issues lesbians and women of color face.

There's nothing wrong with feminists. There is something wrong with "femminazis".

"Let's Talk About Sex"

(Punch it, Hurb
Yo, I don't think we should talk about this
Come on, why not?
People might misunderstand what we're tryin' to say, you know?
No, but that's a part of life)

Come on

[CHORUS]

Let's talk about sex, baby
Let's talk about you and me
Let's talk about all the good things
And the bad things that may be
Let's talk about sex
Let's talk about sex
Let's talk about sex
Let's talk about sex

Let's talk about sex for now to the people at home or in the crowd
It keeps coming up anyhow
Don't decoy, avoid, or make void the topic
Cuz that ain't gonna stop it
Now we talk about sex on the radio and video shows
Many will know anything goes
Let's tell it how it is, and how it could be
How it was, and of course, how it should be
Those who think it's dirty have a choice
Pick up the needle, press pause, or turn the radio off
Will that stop us, Pep? I doubt it
All right then, come on, Spin

[CHORUS]

Hot to trot, make any man's eyes pop
She use what she got to get whatever she don't got
Fellas drool like fools, but then again they're only human
The chick was a hit because her body was boomin'
Gold, pearls, rubies, crazy diamonds
Nothin' she ever wore was ever common
Her dates heads of state, men of taste
Lawyers, doctors, no one was too great for her to get with
Or even mess with, the Prez she says was next on her list
And believe me, you, it's as good as true
There ain't a man alive that she couldn't get next to
She had it all in the bag so she should have been glad
But she was mad and sad and feelin' bad
Thinkin' about the things that she never had
No love, just sex, followed next with a check and a note
That last night was dope

Let's talk about sex, baby (sing it)
Let's talk about you and me (sing it, sing it)
Let's talk about all the good things
And the bad things that may be
Let's talk about sex (come on)
Let's talk about sex (do it)
Let's talk about sex (uh-huh)
Let's talk about sex

Ladies, all the ladies, louder now, help me out
Come on, all the ladies - let's talk about sex, all right
[repeat]

(Yo, Pep, I don't think they're gonna play this on the radio
And why not? Everybody has sex
I mean, everybody should be makin' love
Come on, how many guys you know make love?)

[CHORUS]

My womens studies covered minority women. Ever heard of Bessie Coleman?

Yes.. and Bessie Coleman does not show a case in which the womens movement as a group sought to address minority womens issues... infact it shows just my point, that they had to work on their own to acheive what was meaningful to them. Im not saying Women sutdies courses dont cover Minority women, on the contrary they glorify them. Im saying the feminist movement in terms of the activists and groups themseleves concentrated on white womens issues.. not minority womens

I repsect what the feminist movement stood for, not what it stands for now. All I really want to say about the feminist movement is that Chivalry is dead, and women killed it. The Feminist Movement used to stand for equality but now it stands more for just seizing power. How is it equal to give women the right to make fun of men but not vice versa? It's not necessarily a right per se, but it is very hypocritical. Though I will acquiesce that it has always been the way in American life to allow the underdog to say whatever it wants without the people in power being able to retort. The feminist movement, in its hypocrisy, goes hand in hand with the same hypocrisy's that destroyed the black movement. He can make white jokes about me, but I can't make black jokes about him. That's called hypocrisy and racism. Racism and/or Sexism is the undue perseuction of one race or gender by another. Now, if both sides can do it to each other, that's not racism or sexism that's called equality.

And I'm sorry to say it but there is one thing that I must comment on... People say that history books don't talk enough about women. Now, I agree, back in the day that might be true, but not anymore. The reason you don't see history books talking about women is because women did less then men that changed a nation and or a people and with it affected history.

OH MY GOD!!! HE SAID IT!

But it's true though. When was the last time you heard of a woman taking over France and Poland in a Blitzkrieg, or a woman leading the people to the promised land from slavery, or a woman starting a revolution that would toppl e a Monarchy and implace a communism? History taught in mainstream High School and College level classes which is not for students majoring in that subject is not about the mundane or minute. Joan of Arc, Queen Elizabeth, Catherine The Great, Cleopatra, Queen Zenobia, Sojourner Truth, Susan B. Anthony, each one of these women contributed something to society that changed its course or affected it a great deal (These are mostly western/mediterranean women I know but these are the only women I could think of on the spot at midnight).

Equality for women I'm all for. Undue Superiority I'm definately not.

I am female, but not particularly feminist. In any relationship, though, I would expect to be an equal partner. That is not to say I dismiss any other views as such, that's just the way I'd like it.
Feminism has to a certain extent gone too far nowadays - men can be subjected to sexist jokes, but if a woman was it would create an uproar. At the same time, a woman's pay is still lower than that of a man doing the same job, which I think is wrong, though the idea of forcing women into jobs where men are more suitable than women is ridiculous - the armed forces to an extent and even politics to a degree. There are some jobs men can do better, and others women can do better. Unless feminists agree that men and women are fundamentally different, this sort of thing will continue.
However - feminism in the past is certainly nothing to sneer at. While I don't take the view of 'men are evil', there was a great deal more inequality in the past, and the fights for emancipation and the breaking down of (some) prejudices were necessary and good.

judging from what I hear.. you are a feminist.. do you belive women should have equal rights ? if yes.. then your a feminist.. I for one am a feminist.. its as simple as that.. your getting caught up in the sterotypes and cliches.. dont !

I agree that feminism is more of a humanist issue; instead of focussing on the differences between men and women, we should come together and celebrate our similarities. It all boils down to equality, and that is what women are striving to achieve. By viewing all genders and races as equal we can finally find global unity.

I suppose that's alot to ask for though.

You should seriously check out that book.

One of the biggest problems is one of basic definition. Because we're not the same, but we're not opposite, either. I really believe there's more differentiation within the sexes (and any other group) than there is between them. Another amazing read by an amazing woman is The Second Sex, by Simone de Beauvior, she goes into the effects of always being considered the deviation, the "other." AND you can read it for free here: http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/2ndsex.htm

I'll go with the Norse section, I've always felt an affinity for Loki.

Certainly [sir]/[madam] (delete whichever is inappropriate). And would you prefer the quaffing or the non-quaffing section?

judging from what I hear.. you are a feminist.. do you belive women should have equal rights ? if yes.. then your a feminist.. I for one am a feminist.. its as simple as that.. your getting caught up in the sterotypes and cliches.. dont !
Yes I totally agree with you here... People are now afraid to call themselves feminists. Immediately one conjures up an image of a short haired, man-hating lesbian, and quickly thinks "I'm not like that, therefore I'm not a feminist." That is SO wrong on so many levels...

The moral of this story is: women and men alike should not be afriad to call themselves feminists. We need more sane people under this title to balance out the extremists.

(on a side note, are there any men here who willingly refer to themselves as a feminist? If so, thats way cool)

I'm more concerned with equality than 'women's rights'.
How much equality? 100%?

You should seriously check out that book.

One of the biggest problems is one of basic definition. Because we're not the same, but we're not opposite, either. I really believe there's more differentiation within the sexes (and any other group) than there is between them. Another amazing read by an amazing woman is The Second Sex, by Simone de Beauvior, she goes into the effects of always being considered the deviation, the "other." AND you can read it for free here: http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/2ndsex.htm

That's neat. That's also bookmarked. :)

How much equality? 100%?

I don't think she would. At least I don't. Perfect equality is a dangerous concept.

And I'm sorry to say it but there is one thing that I must comment on... People say that history books don't talk enough about women. Now, I agree, back in the day that might be true, but not anymore. The reason you don't see history books talking about women is because women did less then men that changed a nation and or a people and with it affected history.

OH MY GOD!!! HE SAID IT!

But it's true though. When was the last time you heard of a woman taking over France and Poland in a Blitzkrieg, or a woman leading the people to the promised land from slavery, or a woman starting a revolution that would toppl e a Monarchy and implace a communism? History taught in mainstream High School and College level classes which is not for students majoring in that subject is not about the mundane or minute. Joan of Arc, Queen Elizabeth, Catherine The Great, Cleopatra, Queen Zenobia, Sojourner Truth, Susan B. Anthony, each one of these women contributed something to society that changed its course or affected it a great deal (These are mostly western/mediterranean women I know but these are the only women I could think of on the spot at midnight).

Equality for women I'm all for. Undue Superiority I'm definately not.

If you learned of all those women in your high school history class, you were indeed blessed. But to say that the historical achievements of women are in the mainstream, well, I certainly can't see it from here.

I don't think she would. At least I don't. Perfect equality is a dangerous concept.

...

Why?

That's neat. That's also bookmarked. :)

I bookmarked it, too. :)

I don't think she would. At least I don't. Perfect equality is a dangerous concept.
I'm interested in hearing Shaed's answer... ;)

...

Why?

Oh fuck... There goes the thread!

...

Why?

Imagine life with perfect equality...

I'm interested in hearing Shaed's answer... ;)

Isn't everyone?

I don't think she would. At least I don't. Perfect equality is a dangerous concept.
Would you prefer to be a lesser gender then, so as to avoid "absolute" equality?
Perhaps you are confusing equality and equity?

Imagine life with perfect equality...

I understand your point, but I think what he's talking about is perfect equality in the civil rights sense. And the business sense.

Yes I totally agree with you here... People are now afraid to call themselves feminists. Immediately one conjures up an image of a short haired, man-hating lesbian, and quickly thinks "I'm not like that, therefore I'm not a feminist." That is SO wrong on so many levels...

The moral of this story is: women and men alike should not be afriad to call themselves feminists. We need more sane people under this title to balance out the extremists.

(on a side note, are there any men here who willingly refer to themselves as a feminist? If so, thats way cool)

Argh! Apparently our lag time is back. :rolleyes:

So true though. I want to get one of those shirts that say "This is what a feminist looks like."

BTW-My dad describes himself as a feminist.

I don't think she would. At least I don't. Perfect equality is a dangerous concept.

Enforced, Harrison Bergeron-style equality is certainly a fearful thing.

But when did "equality" become a bad word? It need not mean uniformity.

I want to get one of those shirts that say "This is what a feminist looks like."

I wanna get a shirt that says "This is what you'd look like if you weren't so ugly.". That would be gold.

Argh! Apparently our lag time is back. :rolleyes:

So true though. I want to get one of those shirts that say "This is what a feminist looks like."

BTW-My dad describes himself as a feminist.
I'd gladly wear one of those shirts.

And kudos to your dad. That is supercool.

Enforced, Harrison Bergeron-style equality is certainly a fearful thing.

But when did "equality" become a bad word? It need not mean uniformity.
Explain, please :)

I'd gladly wear one of those shirts.

And kudos to your dad. That is supercool.

As would I, but I'd still wear the shirt I mentioned.

Argh! Apparently our lag time is back. :rolleyes:
I haven't noticed anything... :confused:

Certainly [sir]/[madam] (delete whichever is inappropriate). And would you prefer the quaffing or the non-quaffing section?
Depends, can I get caffeinated drinks in the quaffing section?

The aforementioned "This is what you'd look like..." shirt is also supercool in my opinion. haha.

The aforementioned "This is what you'd look like..." shirt is also supercool in my opinion. haha.

You're damn right it is! Of course, I'd make it myself, since I'm a DIY person.

Okay, for those missing the obvious, legal equality doesn't mean there are no differences. Men and women have different strengths in general. It doesn't mean one is inherently better than the other. It doesn't mean they are the same. Men are generally better with math and spatial skills. Women are better at verbal and emotional skills. It doesn't mean some women don't excel in math or some men don't excel in language.

And I think if either sex gets drafted, both should. Why is it better that only men die in combat? Why should only men get the honor of defending their country? Equal rights= Equal responsibility. I'm registered with the selective service, but I can't make them take me. (I'm too old now anyway)

I haven't noticed anything... :confused:

Maybe it's just me and my crappy computer then.

Depends, can I get caffeinated drinks in the quaffing section?

Certainly. You'll have to sign a waiver and buy third-party insurance on the way in though. Our insurance doesn't cover third-degree, second-degree or first-degree burns to you or any other parties. Unless you mean non-coffee caffeinated drinks, in which case the answer is a simple 'yes'.

----

Now, to the 'how much equality' thingy... TPE, are you thinking that 'equality' involves there being, say, an equal number of men and women employed in a business at any given time? Or that sort of thing? Because I don't support that (well, that particular example, at least), but it's all rather convoluted and complex. You'll need to ask more specific questions if you want a specific answer :/

Would you prefer to be a lesser gender then, so as to avoid "absolute" equality?
Perhaps you are confusing equality and equity?

No. I am not talking about equality among sexes. I'm talking about equality among everyone. Perfect equality among all people would not work.

What about abortion? If women can have babies (and/or abort them if they wish), then why can't men have abortions, since we can't have babies?

That makes no sense whatsoever.

No. I am not talking about equality among sexes. I'm talking about equality among everyone. Perfect equality among all people would not work.
And why not?

Are you saying that recognising everyone as equal people will result in humankind becoming drone-like and boring? Or perhaps this will cause outrage and chaos?

Either way I disagree. I believe that equality of all people can be achieved if we eliminate the attitudes that say "it won't work."

(keep in mind I am not saying everyone should be the exact same. We should embrace our differences and celebrate our similarities in my opinion)

Imagine life with perfect equality...

I understand your point, but I think what he's talking about is perfect equality in the civil rights sense. And the business sense.

^^

What Potaria said.

<deleted to honour PCs request, plus TPE deleted the post I was quoting. Everyone knows where they stand here anyway>

do NOT turn my thread into another abortion debate.

(pretty please)

And why not?

Are you saying that recognising everyone as equal people will result in humankind becoming drone-like and boring? Or perhaps this will cause outrage and chaos?

Either way I disagree. I believe that equality of all people can be achieved if we eliminate the attitudes that say "it won't work."

(keep in mind I am not saying everyone should be the exact same. We should embrace our differences and celebrate our similarities in my opinion)

I agree with you. But think about the events that would have to occur in order for that to happen. Do you still seem to think it could be accomplished? I still think not.

@shaed
Agreed.
[/threadjack]

Now, who said something about sex? :D

^^

What Potaria said.

Huh-uh. I mean perfect equality among all people. In business, it may be possible. In civil rights, no.

Explain, please :)

Harrison Bergeron: http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/hb.html

I think a lot of where things get mucked-up is in the ideas of either "women want equality, so they need to be 'like men'" or "women are fundamentally different then men, so the must achieve a 'separate but equal' status."

I think both of these are too extreme. Everyone should have an equal chance to become what they are. Everyone should be equal in the eyes of the law and state.

I acknowledge these concepts are at once simple and total bitches due to their vagueness.

You have to define what equality means. Is it intent are outcome? And after Kant and Mill fight it out, then you have to ask yourself: how skewed is the playing field already? and to what lengths should we go to level it? and how can you tell when it's more level? Because we aren't in a vacuum, just because laws change doesn't mean that erases what history has wrought.

Personally, I think a moderate amount of "help" is a good thing, but at the same time, I think it should be based on more factors than just race or sex (read: economics and class).

And I'm a huge advocate for not making distinctions where there are none (as in cognitive abilities, etc.) and not trying to universalize those things that only women (or men) go through (like pregnancy).

I'm probably not giving you that great of answer, but the best answer is, well, it's complicated, and one law or one book or one bumper sticker isn't going to make it all better.

And I'm tired and you've all drawn me into this awesome convo *shakes fist*

Huh-uh. I mean perfect equality among all people. In business, it may be possible. In civil rights, no.

Why not?

If a woman has an equal chance to get an education and get a decent job as me, that's equality, right?

@shaed
Agreed.
[/threadjack]

Now, who said something about sex? :D

It was Passive Cookies! Let's get her!

Oh wait, that'd be threadjacking too. Damn and blast. You could always go play True Love. Or XOXO. Plenty of sex and sex-related stuff there.

Why aren't women allowed to have equal civil rights?
Could you give us an instance where this would be problematic?
I'm really confused as to why you think civil gender equality is impossible to achieve.

Why not?

If a woman has an equal chance to get an education and get a decent job as me, that's equality, right?

I mean of all people regardless of sex, race, religion, sexuality, etc. Think about what would have to occur in order for that to happen.

It was Passive Cookies! Let's get her!

Oh wait, that'd be threadjacking too. Damn and blast. You could always go play True Love. Or XOXO. Plenty of sex and sex-related stuff there.
OR...

we could go into the NS dating service thread... ;) :D :D :D :D :fluffle: :D :D :D :D

Argh! Apparently our lag time is back. :rolleyes:

So true though. I want to get one of those shirts that say "This is what a feminist looks like."

BTW-My dad describes himself as a feminist.

btw... I am a guy.. and i already said it.. I am a feminist (one who despises women studies classes)

I mean of all people regardless of sex, race, religion, sexuality, etc. Think about what would have to occur in order for that to happen.

If a homosexual muslim woman of african descent has an equal chance to get an education and decent job as I do, that's equality, isn't it?

What do you mean "regardless of sex, race, religion, sexuality, etc.", anyway? If you remove those things from consideration, we are left with all people being the same anyway.

Men are generally better with math and spatial skills. Women are better at verbal and emotional skills. It doesn't mean some women don't excel in math or some men don't excel in language.

And I think if either sex gets drafted, both should. Why is it better that only men die in combat? Why should only men get the honor of defending their country? Equal rights= Equal responsibility. I'm registered with the selective service, but I can't make them take me. (I'm too old now anyway)

totally agree on the draft thing (as I disagree with the draft ;))

But I'm going to have to be all peevish and point out that, although it's generally presented as gospel that men and women differ in analytical/spatial/emotional ways, this is an extremely controversial subject, and there's much conflicting evidence on all sides (I say all, because there's like eleventy billion sides to this issue).

If a homosexual muslim woman of african descent has an equal chance to get an education and decent job as I do, that's equality, isn't it?

What do you mean "regardless of sex, race, religion, sexuality, etc.", anyway? If you remove those things from consideration, we are left with all people being the same anyway.

Yes, but equality is something that is achieved when all people agree with it. You may agree with it. I may agree with it. But that doesn't mean we have achieved equality. Look at Iraq and their women. Look at Israel, masive violations of civil rights by religious groups. Look at people who hate transgendered people and homosexuals? What about those who hate the Jewish? I think we are definitely far from "perfect" equality among everyone. Plesae, don't think I don't want it. I do. I just don't think it's achieveable.

Yes, but equality is something that is achieved when all people agree with it. You may agree with it. I may agree with it. But that doesn't mean we have achieved equality. Look at Iraq and their women. Look at Israel, masive violations of civil rights by religious groups. Look at people who hate transgendered people and homosexuals? What about those who hate the Jewish? I think we are definitely far from "perfect" equality among everyone. Plesae, don't think I don't want it. I do. I just don't think it's achieveable.

I think it is achievable. We're getting there, and the reactionaries can't stop it.

I think it is achievable. We're getting there, and the reactionaries can't stop it.
Seconded.

Just because certain people do not advocate equality, does not mean others should not be recognised as equal by the state. That's way backwards.

Well by the state yes. I thought you meant by all people.

Well by the state yes. I thought you meant by all people.
well technically the state represents all people... so yeah that too.

well technically the state represents all people... so yeah that too.

I'd say by government but not the entire public.

I maynot be equal with some people in brains, money, strength, dexterity, wisdom, ability, beauty or drive. But I am equal in my value as a human being.
More so if you listen to my mother, :D and :fluffle: for mom.

:D I have been reading this topic and I seem to get litle confused ,didnt we started talking about feminism here ?Or was it lesbians or gay ?Civil rigts ?Equality betwin men and women ,bla ,bla di bla. Comon lads and lasies dont we have this already ?women do what ever they are pleased ,gay people get married, my wife left me becouse she was not sure what she wanted ,or may be thats wot the real problem? we dont know wot we wont and being unhapy go and look about for somthing else, or try somthing different .Equal chance for education ?Hold on a minute dont we go to the same scools or uni with women work in the same jobs ? Please spare me the fact that women now days earn more than men do, complaint all the time that their husband or boyfriend doesnt do nothing round the house! My self opinion and that has probably nothing to do with the topic! is , men and women are different never going to be even close to be the same and should not ever never live toghether ,then they can have the same rights or equalitys , do what ever ,be gay or lesbian or heterosexual and beleive me it will be peace for centuries, but hey thats a bit like comunism good in theory but never can be put in practice ......amen ;) :D

I maynot be equal with some people in brains, money, strength, dexterity, wisdom, ability, beauty or drive. But I am equal in my value as a human being.
More so if you listen to my mother, :D and :fluffle: for mom.
"Mother always knows best" :)

-snip-

I think playing maid is kinky.

-snip-



Does anyone else find this totally awesome?

It’s entirely individual choice. I have no problem with women choosing to work, and at the same time I have no problem with women choosing to stay home and be housewives. Personally I would like to marry a woman who would be willing to stay home and all that, but that’s just me. The idea is kinda sexy... can I say that? Well I just did, so meh.

Does anyone else find this totally awesome?
noobish perv.

I"M the perv around here! :D

Does anyone else find this totally awesome?

Oh yeah! I'm glad I just saw that.

Does anyone else find this totally awesome?

Of course. Shaed rocks. :cool:

Housewives are sexy. Uh... but so are corporatewives! And trophy wives... especially.

once women are eligible for the draft, we'll talk :sniper:

What's 'the draft'?

Heh. Women being eligible for the draft!

It's a novel idea and one I agree with, I admit, but it seems like one of those things that will happen after just about everything else. I mean, come on, ERA was defeated partly because of fears that the poor defenseless women would be eligible to be thrown into the draft as a result of its passage (which actually could happen with or without the amendment).

I think that with the fighting the American army is currently engaged in, we won't want to touch the subject of expanding the draft with a ten-foot pole, let alone expanding the draft to females. Women will probably get a more competitive wage and better access to things like healthcare and childcare before that happens. We're chauvanists after all; we don't want to expose the dear women to danger, do we?

What's 'the draft'?
Simple.

Forced entry into a nation's military by lottery. Destroyed a lot of lives during vietnam...

I think the subject of the draft is pointless since a) the big and efficient armies aren't drafted anymore (US and UK) and b) no drafted army would stand longer than 20 minutes nowadays anyway, and c) and country that still uses draft is pretty much fucked anyway. It made sense when you gave the recruit a rifle and put him in a line to get shot, but with weapons systems that are worth a few million Euro it's a bit ridiculous to let some nut who's in the military for just a few months handle those. Most European countries really have to reconsider.

But then again.

I wouldn't mind seeing a few of the bitches back from school being forced to march a few miles with full webbing *giggles* Oh how I'd love to see a certain blondie whine when she gets some mud in her face, or when she'd have to be on guard somewhere in the forest int he cold rain... *rubs hands*

Also...

"we don't want to expose the dear women to danger, do we?"

I prefer defending myself, thank you. I stick to opening a can of ass whoop on someone myself than having to depend on some macho who thinks he's overly cool.

My problem with the feminist movement:

Being in the Navy, I have seen the horrors of the feminist movement. (And I spelled that horrors, not whores.) I've heard the horrors of the feminist movement as well. I get really pissed off that women claim to want equal rights when I know they don't. Most of them want their rights, but they want my rights as well. They want to be treated the same as any man, but then there are fewer requirements for them to do the job than what is required of me. We have to make "exceptions" because they're female. They shouldn't have to cut their hair the same or wear the same uniform, or do as much physical work. And a very large portion of them still use sex to get what they want. What is that garbage?
And if you ever actually listen to the leaders of these women's groups with the angry feminiazi's at the wheel, you're not going to hear anything about equality. They want DOMINANCE. And they're not afraid to take it from the evil men. :sniper:

I mean of all people regardless of sex, race, religion, sexuality, etc. Think about what would have to occur in order for that to happen.
But not age, eh? Hmmm.

Yeah, I'm sick of all these femminazis. Everyone needs to stop arguing about women and how they're related to men and their status. Men are unfortunately vital to survival of women. Thus, everyone should just shut up about it. Besides, I think women have men right where they want them. ;)
If you look at my sig, I AM the evil feminazi! I put that in as a response to posts I'd seen and arguments I'd had around here...

And feminism can't exist in isolation. Well, real feminism anyway. It has to exist with a desire for equality and opportunity for everyone.

If you look at my sig, I AM the evil feminazi! I put that in as a response to posts I'd seen and arguments I'd had around here...

And feminism can't exist in isolation. Well, real feminism anyway. It has to exist with a desire for equality and opportunity for everyone.

Isolated Feminism is as stupid as these Punk Rock bands who are so "Punk" that they don't sign to a major label to spread their music to people. Instead of doing that, they sign to a very small, independent label that might press a thousand copies of their albums every year.

I think you see where I'm going with this :D.

ba-bump.

My problem with the feminist movement:

Being in the Navy, I have seen the horrors of the feminist movement. (And I spelled that horrors, not whores.) I've heard the horrors of the feminist movement as well. I get really pissed off that women claim to want equal rights when I know they don't. Most of them want their rights, but they want my rights as well. They want to be treated the same as any man, but then there are fewer requirements for them to do the job than what is required of me. We have to make "exceptions" because they're female. They shouldn't have to cut their hair the same or wear the same uniform, or do as much physical work. And a very large portion of them still use sex to get what they want. What is that garbage?
And if you ever actually listen to the leaders of these women's groups with the angry feminiazi's at the wheel, you're not going to hear anything about equality. They want DOMINANCE. And they're not afraid to take it from the evil men. :sniper:

*insert inane Marine jab at the navy*

So glad you know what we all want; I was so lost there for a minute.

You say "women use sex to get what they want" but doesn't that cut both ways?

The questions of fashion (uniform, hairstyle) are more inane than my jab.

I do object that some don't have to follow the same standards as others, but I think you have to look at equal outcome as well. women, in general, don't have the upper body strength that men, in general, do. But we do have lower body strength, so perhaps a good compromise would be a reduction in upper-body dependent exercises, but an increase in lower-body exercises. These wouldn't be the "same" requirements, but they'd produce an equitable result: a person in peak physical condition, i.e., a Marine ;))

I think merely reducing the requirements for women is bad for women, because what sense of accomplishment is there then?

But not age, eh? Hmmm.
No. Early teenagers haven't fully developped their pre-frontal lobe in their brain to allow them to plan/think ahead. That's why they would prefer to beat the next level in their game before doing their homework then eventually get caught up in the game, forgetting to do their homework at all.