Feminism - What it means to me

[Lisnpuppy]

Again you miss my point. My point is that a woman can and should be able to be all things. And because a woman may decide they wish to be something many feminist would consider part of the "old type of woman" doesn't mean that is all she is...or that she would accept being treated with any less respect or less rights than another woman.

[DeadMansFist849]

The thing is, everybody wants to be their own person. Nobody's saying that choosing a socially constructed role makes you a bad person. I'm choosing a socially constructed role right now--I'm living a very gender-typical life. Lots of people do fall into typical gender roles, BUT this doesn't mean everyone does or wants to.

 

Femininity is not in and of itself bad--radfems made the mistake of labelling it such. The view of femininity as contrived, "self-objectifying", frivolous and worth less than masculinity is bloody outdated and ridiculous. I could actually spend all day writing about how radical feminists screwed it up with their maternalistic concern-trolling and general old-bat-like behaviour--you know, they really play into the "virgin" vs "sex beast" dichotomy and make themselves out to be the "virgins".

 

Also, wanting to be sexy and wanting to be a sex object are different things. There's a huge difference between being the subject of your partner's desire (which involves being sexy) and the object of a rather dislikeable person's desire. "Subject" is where you're still viewed as a person. "Object" is when they reduce you to your bits and think only of what they want.

[Lisnpuppy]

The quote was not meant by me or the author to mean "sex object" that one wishes to be objectified. It always amazes me how things are taken so literal and the ENTIRE point of the quote, which I think is good..is missed.

 

It means that women can be sexy and hot and maybe bat their eyes at some fool and all that is ok because there is so much more going on inside that they can also be oscar winners and theoretical physicist and everything else.

 

And I know that being an object of someone's desire and being a sex object are different. Your post takes a very sad tone to me as if you think I am a child that needs things explained to me. I am sure that is not your intent.

[DeadMansFist849]

No, I did not mean anything bad and was going by the common definition of "sex object", which is one who is defined by how much fanboys want to sleep with them. That quote came off as a complete misunderstanding of the term "sex object" and a gross generalisation with the "All feminists need is a big strong caveman to take care of them" undertone of many such pithy phrases that are so frequently thrown around to dismiss feminists.

[Aurielius]

Here is a quote I like...and pretty much sums up how I feel about it. I guess I am saying that I do not believe "gender neutralizing" people will solve the issue and why should a woman do this to be treated equally. I should be able to celebrate my differences as female and still be treated as an equal. I am not saying it happens, but in my opinion it should.

 

Scratch most feminists and underneath there is a woman who longs to be a sex object. The difference is that is not all she wants to be. ~Betty Rollin

Women are sex objects, rocket scientists, diplomats, warriors, mothers, wives and a host of other things that I have not listed, thats the truly charming thing about them. But to underestimate or pigeonhole them in a single category is the one thing that leads to disaster.

 

“What would men be without women? Scarce, sir...mighty scarce.”

― Mark Twain

[grannywils]

First of all, I would like to thank my good friend ffa 1 mf for reminding me that my use of the Comic Sans font is not only my right, but in fact has some very good practical and beneficial usages as well. Thanks pal.:thumbsup:

 

And as usual, Aurielius, you and LP have gotten the point across perfectly, and of course, brilliantly, yet again. :dance: Hurray for people!!

[Nintii]

I want progress on gender issues because our broken gender dynamics hurt men just as much as women.

 

Scratch me and you will not find a woman longing for sexual objectification.

 

Just thought I'd point that out.

 

The problem here is that the primordial role of men has changed tremendously ... there are no more animals to go out and kill, no more driving off of the enemy at the water hole or protecting the clan from the one across the river.

Men's domain has slowly been eroded and today ... we don't even need them for babies anymore ... and when it comes to sex, ah well I can think of a dozen different ways to exclude a man.

 

Women are everywhere and the men find themselves with their backs to the wall fighting for identity ... men want to be hero's ... so I let a man - even though I know how to do stuff like electrical wiring and a host of other things - thank heavens for a dad and brothers and uncles who didn't try to sideline me - anyhow, I let a man "show me" or "teach me" how it's done .... not because i'm an ass, no, but because when he feels good about himself and "feels" like a hero then he's going to act like a hero and treat me with respect and it doesn't just end there.

 

The reason why MOST guys don't "do" the things we want them to do is because there is no "reward", see, I told you that men are simple ... they want to be rewarded ... and praise i've discovered, can make a man turn a failure into a success, it can make him invent stuff and buy stuff you never thought he'd buy (hopefully with cash he HAS) and this list just goes on and on.

 

So go ahead and give the dog a bone and watch him do the most amazing tricks you ever did see.

And restore respect for women.

So, when it comes to " .... progress on gender issues .... " let's just start at home by treating each other with respect ... like a stone thrown into water this too will ripple out and influence and bring change.

 

(respect to you guys ... i don't consider you dogs alright, I'm sure you got my meaning, so apologies all around if you were offended)

Edited November 9, 2011 by Nintii

[Lisnpuppy]

No, I did not mean anything bad and was going by the common definition of "sex object", which is one who is defined by how much fanboys want to sleep with them. That quote came off as a complete misunderstanding of the term "sex object" and a gross generalisation with the "All feminists need is a big strong caveman to take care of them" undertone of many such pithy phrases that are so frequently thrown around to dismiss feminists.

 

It really doesn't mean that at all, though I guess everyone can take it how they please.

 

I have said all I guess I wish to say here. I hope someone understood what I was trying to convey.

[Vagrant0]

[/color][/b]"Feminism is not a vehicle to promote hate speech against men and march in potato sacks so that they can't see your body and thus translate you into a sexual object ... no, Feminism should be there to PROMOTE the FACT that women are EQUAL to any task at hand. For crying out loud no woman wants to dominate, we just want to be recognised as more than baby making machines and trinkets on your arm ... women are wired differently, but that doesn't mean we are inferior."

Pretty much this... On a general level.

 

But, although this helps promote equal rights and roles, it doesn't answer to things on an individual level. There are some people who more easily fall into passive roles for certain things. If someone enjoys being a trinket on another's arm, is not there by force or subjugation, and is not mistreated in any significant way, what is the harm? Shouldn't beauty, both male and female, be an accepted part of society? Are all forms of objectification bad, even when it's agreed upon and compensated for? Are gender roles really so bad as long as someone isn't being abused or mistreated as a human because of that role?

 

 

@Nintil

I would agree for the most part, but women are like that too in some ways. They want to feel appreciated for the things they do, feel like they're teaching their man how to behave, feel that some progress has been made in turning their partner from a knuckle dragging boozehound college kid, into a functioning member of society. Many also want to be told every now and then that they are "quite beautiful today" even though they are beautiful every day in your eyes.

 

Similarly, if you treat a woman like she's inferiorior, that she's useless, that nothing she does is right, and that "you were better doing it yourself", she will be. She will feel like a failure, she will be non-receptive to most requests for help, and will often perform poorly. But here's the thing, the same is true for a man. A man who is under a domineering wife is pathetic not because he lets a woman take a dominant role, but because he lost most of his ability to function as a person because of constantly being torn down and being at her beck and call. That's not healthy either.

 

It's about Equality. Manipulation is not equality. There is a difference between boosting someone's confidence in order to get them to do what YOU want, and boosting their confidence so that they can do what THEY want, better. The problem with all this is that most see equality as just reciprocating the same things which were done to them, or their gender. I you gouge out my eye, so I have every right to gouge yours out. Sure, this is equal... But it's a bad sort of equal. It's a sort of equality that only escalates as time goes on and people decide to repay for past evils. This sort of reactionary equality just doesn't work. People on average tend to give back worse than they get on first offenses, and substantially more as offenses continue. The carrot and stick just leads to unofficial slavery and eventual lashing out.

 

The better kind of Equality is this... Mutual respect and concern for eachother while acknowledging different strengths and roles within any relationship. For example, in stronger relationships, the one who cooks is not the woman, it isn't even when people take turns, it is when the person who is a better cook is the one doing the job, and they feel appreciated for the act. In this example, having people take turns equally usually means that every now and then a meal will be made that neither person will like, but will be cooked regardless just in the name of equality. Taking turns also helps lessen co-dependence on the partnership so that there aren't as many logistic reasons to stay together when a disagreement happens. Equality isn't a matter of 1-1 chores either. In everything that needs to be done, there is an intrinsic quality related with how necessary that act is to maintaining a positive environment, and the value varies significantly from one person to the next. What is, rather, is each person pulling their own weight, and doing the jobs their best suited to while feeling appreciated for it.

[Maharg67]

It is fine to theorize on feminism and I applaud, support, congratulate Grannywils on her, your, courage and drive to bring up this topic.

 

The big problem is that the world is profoundly and deeply biased, exploitative and down right destructive of certain sections of humanity. Women are a major part of this. Women do most of the work, on a world wide basis, and get a very small proportion of the rewards. The crimes against women are amazingly great in number and variation. The amount of wealth made from exploiting women is incredible. This world system would break down if women either stopped working or rebelled.

 

On a practical level sexism is oppression, exploitation, savagery. Such problems have to be deal with such as female sweatshops, sex slavery.... where to end.

 

Other forms of discrimination take place, other forms of exploitation and suffering such as racism, bias against certain faiths, the suffering of the poor, the world wide exploitation of both female and male children and even the cruelty against animals, the destruction of the natural ecosystems and environments. They also need to be dealt with.

 

But the issue of women's place in the world is one of the most profound concerns that has to be dealt with if this world is to become a better place for us all to live in, including the flora and fauna. Why, because it is all linked together. To truly put an end to unfair suffering one has to put an end to all unfair suffering or at least try harder to do so.

 

Perhaps it is time to have women rule the world for a while; we men have made a mess of it.