Feminism

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pacific_Loner

Pacific_Loner

Pirate from the North Pole
I couldn't watch the video "feminism was created to destabilize society" because I'm using an antique laptop, but I agree at least with the statement. Change will inevitably create chaos and it will take time (a lot of decades) before things settle back to an equilibrium, which, ideally, will be a better order than the one before....?

Also agreed with that:

BlackPuma said:
Isn't feminism (in its traditional understanding) not more about the ability to choose rather than suggested social conduct? If you see a need to stay at home and mend family bonds then that is in itself a admirable aspiration.

Strength and independence lies in taking action in what you feel needs to be done, despite what others think about it.
Click to expand...

If every stay at home moms are ashamed of it, of course it's bound to stay a shameless thing. If everyone of them act like being a stay at home mom is meaningful, people will stop seeing it as unproductive, eventually.

Anyway, interesting thread.
 
chibiXphantom

chibiXphantom

Well-known member
Addressing the whole equal pay issue. It's a common thing that's said that women are paid less for the same work. This is a myth. (In America. I havent looked into other countries)

If you hire two people (a male and a female) to do the same job with all the same responsibilities and both are equally qualified, they cannot be paid differently. If they are, they either negotiated for a higher wage, or the employer is illegally discriminating against the other.

Women are not paid less than men for the same job. The whole "wage gap" is an average, like comparing all female doctors to all male doctors.

Statistically, men work more hours than females. Men are more likely to ask for raises, negotiate a higher starting rate, and ask more hours. Women may have children and need more time off work. Women also are more likely to call in sick than men.
All of this goes into creating that "wage gap" which is not the result of sexism, but rather personal behaviors and choices.

There are some things that people often attribute to sexism, such as fields that are primarily dominated by men or women (women as secretaries or childcare workers, and men as truck drivers or laborers). But then you have to think "is this because of the employer? or are women just less likely to want to do those jobs?". You can complain all you want about a field being dominated by men, but if the women just arent interested in that field, you can't blame it on sexism.
 
planetweirdo

planetweirdo

Well-known member
I've heard people say that if you believe that women should have equal rights, than you are a feminist. But I feel that feminism (especially feminism in the U.S) is a political ideology that promotes a specific set of beliefs about men and society. Most feminist organizations exclude women and men that either disagree with their political ideology or question rather or not certain aspects of the ideology is really in the best interest of all women. How can feminist groups claim to be representatives for all women when a lot of women disagree with the ideas that they promote?

I strongly believe that women should have rights equal to men, and no women should get paid less then a man for doing the same job. But I can't say that I'm in to the feminism thing.
 
Last edited:
Argentum

Argentum

Well-known member
Feminism has done good, but now it's time for society to change on a more emotional level. I don't want to have to depend on a man when I love computers, love working, and want to work with computers as it was often traditional for men to do. I'm even better than many classmates who have to turn to me for help, including some of the men. I finish faster. I'm intuitive. I predict problems before they occur. I learn things not required for class.

But I don't want to be seen as a freak or undesirable as a woman because I wouldn't enjoy cooking, keeping house, and watching kids all the time. I don't think women who would prefer to focus on raising a family should be seen as negative, either, and that's something people - not feminism or lack thereof - need to be responsible for.

Same when it comes to men. If the only reason women respect them or treat their husbands well is because they can't care for themselves and their children without a husband, then is it really respect? If people are thinking and empathizing correctly, respect for men shouldn't be tied exclusively to the role of sole provider.

Why don't we just start expecting people to respect the men in their lives for the financial contributions they do make, their ability to parent, their emotional support, their intellectual cunning, and anything else they bring... like, you know, a good way to treat a person?

Why blame feminism for what human beings are doing wrong?
 
Last edited:
Opaline

Opaline

1
Odo said:
I think that gender is most certainly a social construct.

If you see a traditionally feminine male, you will probably think he is less of a man than a more masculine male. But you don't think this because of some instinctual urge, you think this because society has conditioned you to react to feminine males with disgust... and this type of thinking also presumes there is some ideal state of 'man' that all males must aspire towards, and failing to reach that standard means that they are inferior. And of course, under these rigid definitions the same is true for women.

Envisioning gender as a spectrum liberates men and women from that pursuit of their gender-specific 'ideal', so that they can simply be themselves and find acceptance without trying to conform to the rigid man/woman dynamic.

And transgenderism does in fact biologically exist and is more common than you might think. These people do tend to identify with one gender over the other due to social pressures, which is a consequence of gender being defined so rigidly. This is also why they can be dismissed as 'freaks' by people who simply don't get it and are under no pressure to get over their ignorance.

I think the idea of gender being a spectrum is a very positive thing that is far more natural than the traditional view. Nature isn't simple or biblical, it's rich and diverse and complex and beautiful... so why can't there be a spectrum of genders in the same way there is likely spectrum of sexual orientations?
Click to expand...

How is there a spectrum of sexual orientations? As far as I can tell there is heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, and asexual. What other orientations could there possibly be? You fall into one of those. You can like the opposite sex or the same sex or both, or not be interested at all. What other possibilities are there?

How do you know that, for instance, women view more masculine men as more manly simply because of culture? As this article points out, it's possible it is due to culture, but there is also a good chance it is evolutionarily hard-wired. The theory is that women find deeper voices more attractive because it is indicative of a larger body size (and higher testosterone levels). This is instinctive. Same thing for height. I'm sure you've heard this already. It's likely people think of very masculine males as more manly because that's how we are biologically wired to view things, all having to do with hormones. Men prefer women's voices when they indicate smaller bodies (and they prefer youthful features), which plays a part in our conception of a "feminine" woman (more estrogen = more "feminine" features = more "womanly"). It is likely we are attracted to the "traditional" genders for a biological reason. There are two genders, then, and if you are transgender you are still male or female in GENDER, but your sexual parts are different. You can be a mix of feminine and masculine, but I don't think leaning more toward one or the other is due to cultural pressure. It seems obvious to me :idontknow:

I'm not religious or politically conservative, and I'm all for people having the freedom to identify how they want and not to have to conform to rigid standards. But it seems to me that people are just being nitpicky and wanting to create an issue where there is none. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I just don't see what these people are talking about. I've watched videos about it and read articles and it just doesn't sound legitimate to me.
 
surewhynot

surewhynot

Well-known member
Well, as you point out, feminism at its core is gender equality which is fundamentally good, however it did introduce a shift in paradigm which always has indirect "side effects", some bad and some good. Basically any major change in culture is destined to have cons among the pros. This does not remove from the fact that gender equality should be something that we strive for.

What we should do now is work towards fixing those issues by other means than taking away women's rights.
 
Odo

Odo

Banned
Opaline said:
How is there a spectrum of sexual orientations? As far as I can tell there is heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, and asexual. What other orientations could there possibly be? You fall into one of those. You can like the opposite sex or the same sex or both, or not be interested at all. What other possibilities are there?
Click to expand...

It's a spectrum because the categories aren't rigidly defined. Alfred Kinsey did extensive research into sexual orientation in the 40s and 50s:

The Kinsey Institute - Kinsey Sexuality Rating Scale

The confusion that people experience is due to the fact that they assume sexuality is something they are instead of something they do.

Opaline said:
How do you know that, for instance, women view more masculine men as more manly simply because of culture? As this article points out, it's possible it is due to culture, but there is also a good chance it is evolutionarily hard-wired. The theory is that women find deeper voices more attractive because it is indicative of a larger body size (and higher testosterone levels). This is instinctive. Same thing for height. I'm sure you've heard this already. It's likely people think of very masculine males as more manly because that's how we are biologically wired to view things, all having to do with hormones. Men prefer women's voices when they indicate smaller bodies (and they prefer youthful features), which plays a part in our conception of a "feminine" woman (more estrogen = more "feminine" features = more "womanly"). It is likely we are attracted to the "traditional" genders for a biological reason. There are two genders, then, and if you are transgender you are still male or female in GENDER, but your sexual parts are different. You can be a mix of feminine and masculine, but I don't think leaning more toward one or the other is due to cultural pressure. It seems obvious to me :idontknow:
Click to expand...

But then another study found that deep voices were only attractive to women who were interested in a fling:

Women are attracted to men with deep voices, but only for a fling: study | Globalnews.ca

And the article you posted also concludes with this paragraph:

As the same time, what we commonly consider attractive varies dramatically over time and location—for example, dozens of prehistoric “Venus figurines,” discovered all over the world, portray extremely voluptuous female figures. So, if we tested the preferences of all humans throughout history, we might find a less obvious trend. This preference for small-voiced females and big-voiced males, then, might simply be an artifact of our contemporary cultural concepts of “attractiveness,” rather than a deep-seated evolutionary choice after all.
Click to expand...

So I don't think it's 'obvious'... more like they don't know. But if you buy into the whole 'nature programs us to like these things', you will also end up entertaining ideas about white women being more attractive than black women, etc.

Opaline said:
I'm not religious or politically conservative, and I'm all for people having the freedom to identify how they want and not to have to conform to rigid standards. But it seems to me that people are just being nitpicky and wanting to create an issue where there is none. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I just don't see what these people are talking about. I've watched videos about it and read articles and it just doesn't sound legitimate to me.
Click to expand...

Well it's up to you whatever you believe. I would agree that some people probably just want attention, but if that's the price we pay for escaping repression then it's really not that bad. It's a lot better than telling anyone who doesn't fit the norm that they're disgusting, sick, etc.
 
Ithior

Ithior

Well-known member
kihira said:
curious, examples?
Click to expand...

Sorry for the late reply. I have some links here, though they apply to the US (I'm not sure how it is in other countries). Some of them have sources. I don't think all of them are true, but many are.

Female Privilege Checklist | You don't really need feminism
Discrimination of Men Facts | You don't really need feminism
Just to let them know, lets hear those rights men don't have that women do, again. | You don't really need feminism
egalitarianism-is-equality: A short list of... | You don't really need feminism

Edit: I don't really agree with the title of the page (You don't really need feminism), but I think the page itself has interesting things.
 
Last edited:
Odo

Odo

Banned
Opaline said:
:confused:

Whatever you say.
Click to expand...

The same person who wrote the article attacking feminism posted by Alienated (Satoshi Kanazawa) wrote an article about why black women are less attractive than white women.

He drew these conclusions by looking at data proving that black women are viewed as less attractive and then concluded that men must be hard-wired to perceive them that way.

This is the same reasoning you used here to argue that women are hard-wired to find deeper voices attractive-- ie: women are attracted to manly men with deep voices, therefore it's 'obviously' biological as opposed to sociocultural= most men find black women less attractive, therefore it's obviously biological as opposed to sociocultural.

It's the same argument applied to a different study.

“Why are black women less attractive?” asks Psychology Today - Salon.com
 
Last edited:
kihira

kihira

1
Odo said:
The same person who wrote the article attacking feminism posted by Alienated (Satoshi Kanazawa) wrote an article about why black women are less attractive than white women.
Click to expand...

"In response to ongoing controversy over views such as that African countries suffer chronic poverty and illness because their people have lower IQs and that black women are "objectively less attractive" than other races, he was dismissed from writing for Psychology Today"

Satoshi Kanazawa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
kilojoule

kilojoule

1
It is natures decision to let just one sex have the children and there's no reasoning with nature. Theres no equality for men and women really. Women can't choose and neither can men.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top