Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > feminism...for discussion      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 viper1j
Joined: 11/30/2005
Msg: 89
feminism...for discussionPage 5 of 8    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8)
Granted.. But I wonder how many first class females said " How dare you put me in this life boat first you sexist! I demand my right to drown like every man here.!!!"

I'd wager not many..

Just sayin'..
 viper1j
Joined: 11/30/2005
Msg: 90
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/4/2011 1:13:23 PM

Total women survivors........ 72%
Total men survivors............. 18%

Even in First Class the numbers are very disparate:

First Class women survivors..... 97%
First class men survivors.......... 34%


My daughter says "sexist", is believing that men and women are different.

I also think water is wet. That makes me a "wettist".

Guess I'm 2 for 2.

Let's hope more feminists speak up at the next disaster so more men may live.

Know it won't happen, but we can dream can't we?
 Gashlycrumb_Briny
Joined: 9/26/2010
Msg: 91
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/4/2011 4:25:29 PM

That whole "women and children" thing does have it's little perks doesn't it?


Yes, actually, being considered vulnerable and unable to look after oneself does occasionally have its advantages. Getting off the sinking ship first was one of them. The trade-off was a very restricted range of acceptable roles in society and not a whole lot of autonomy. The Titanic sank in - 1910? - and many feminists since then have been saying: Yes, we will give up this type of 'perk,' in exchange for being considered autonomous and competent human beings - we want a chance to develop skills and abilities that will enable us to be considered assets in the face of disaster, rather than liabilities. We want to apply for a job as Captain of the ship, and study to be designers of the ship. And to not wear petticoats.



Let's hope more feminists speak up at the next disaster so more men may live.


I agree! and I have a great idea! - let's have more women in combat roles in the military.

Oohh, nevermind, I forgot that women will just try to get pregnant to get out of having to fight. Guess that's a pretty good reason not to take women in the military too seriously.

Oh, how about this: we can encourage more women to join the police force!

Oohh, but, we have to be careful not to encourage any non-white women too much, because that would be racist!


I thought that the whole idea behind things like the feminist movement and race equality was to have the best person for the job, get the job.


And what are the chances that a woman or a non-white person could possibly be the best person for the job, eh Paul? lol! We all know white men make the best police officers, otherwise why would most of the police officers be white men? Institutionalized bias, what's that?

Less sarcastically, though, Paul K - about your story about the Pakistani woman marrying off her daughter: the daughter in this story is exactly the sort of person that affirmative action programs are targeted to. The mother probably believes she is doing what is best for her daughter, because what else can a woman do to secure her future, but get married and have babies? Here in their NEW COUNTRY, we can make an effort to provide them with valid alternatives to "be just like Paul K and his family, or GET OUT!"
 Gashlycrumb_Briny
Joined: 9/26/2010
Msg: 92
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/4/2011 5:09:52 PM
Absolutely I have a problem with that, I'm very not a fan of child brides. How will sending the whole family back to Pakistan help the girl though? Assimilation involves compromise, but why work to fit in if you're still going to be marginalized? We have to be prepared to meet people halfway.

Of course the mother's feelings have to be considered. You don't have to agree with them, but understanding what motivates her actions is important step in anticipating their consequences.
 Gwendolyn2010
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 93
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/4/2011 5:56:38 PM

That whole "women and children" thing does have it's little perks doesn't it?


I would wager that the original idea of saving women and children first had nothing to do with their vulnerability, per se, but rather the recognition that if the women die, the species comes to an end. It only takes a couple of men to impregnate a LOT of women, but if the trend is reversed, not so prolific.
 viper1j
Joined: 11/30/2005
Msg: 94
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/5/2011 6:17:07 AM

In any case, I am perplexed about the reaction of some men to the sexism on the ship. Since some men are obviously anti-feminist in their belief system, and the evacuation of the ship was clearly done without any kind of feminist overview, why is their reaction so inconsistent? If you are an anti-feminist, then logically speaking, why would you complain if women were boarding the lifeboats in favour of men?


I was only noting the double standard. I know more than a few women that say they're no different than men, and expected to be treated like men, suddenly reverse themselves when the Titanic is mentioned, with the catch-all phrase: "Well, that's different.."

Either women are different or not. Gotta pick a side and stick with it.
 Gwendolyn2010
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 95
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/5/2011 6:29:37 AM

I was only noting the double standard. I know more than a few women that say they're no different than men, and expected to be treated like men, suddenly reverse themselves when the Titanic is mentioned, with the catch-all phrase: "Well, that's different.."


You can't quote a "double standard" and not examine the reason for its existence. Men decided that it was women and children first (see my post above yours). In fact, most of the double standards concerning traditional roles of women were results of the patriarchy--women didn't work the man was the self-avowed earner. There are others that I could mention, but it is early in the morning.

I would like the names of those "more than a few women" because I find that numbers often get inflated on these forums.


Either women are different or not. Gotta pick a side and stick with it.


Women are different from men: men are different from men. In the case of the Titanic, or any disaster, and the "men" in charge are true humanitarians, tell me, would they put the man in the wheelchair in the lifeboat before putting the able-bodied guy in?

Regardless of our differences, there are standards that should be upheld for those areas in which we are the same: men do not need pregnancy leaves from work, do they? But shouldn't they have leaves for the time when the baby is brought home? Isn't it the responsibility for both parents to care for a newborn?

As for the Titanic scenario, if someone said to me, "GET IN THE LIFEBOAT!" I would get in--and it has nothing to do with being female: it has to do with self-preservation.

Oh, and if anyone is going to **** about women and children going first, start ****ing about rich men--they often get preferential treatment, eh?
 trinity818
Joined: 9/1/2006
Msg: 96
view profile
History
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/5/2011 7:18:07 AM
I was only noting the double standard. I know more than a few women that say they're no different than men, and expected to be treated like men, suddenly reverse themselves when the Titanic is mentioned, with the catch-all phrase: "Well, that's different.."


In 1980, Congress re-instated the requirement that young men register with the Selective Service System. At that time it was required that all males, born on or after January 1, 1960 register with the Selective Service System.

I remember rumors around that time, that women would be required to register as well. I would have been one of them. I was fully prepared to do just that and I think women should also be required to register.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 97
view profile
History
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/5/2011 8:26:52 AM
Beyond the cultural norms of the time, MEN did make the ship as well as ran it into the iceburg. It was only fair that those who did not cause the situation be given preferential treatment in the lifeboats.

On a larger scale, it is men who still predominately make the ships of states and women and children who suffer inordinately from repeated and predictable collisions with iceburgs and reality.
 mrcs84
Joined: 12/9/2008
Msg: 98
view profile
History
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/5/2011 8:36:19 AM
Just because the rules were -made- by one sex or the other, it doesn't make someone feel any better or worse as to how it was implemented.

In regard to this whole "women as property" thing.

"Women were treated as property. What the feminists missed was the understanding that men were treated as less than property. That is, men were expected to die before their property was even hurt. They were expected to protect their property before themselves. If a woman committed a crime under English law, the man went to jail. Feminists never told us about that. Even if a woman spent too much money in running her home, the man went to debtors' prison."

"Property was passed down through men because it was the man's responsibility to provide the property. Men's incentive to attain property was partially that no woman who was beautiful and had class would marry a man without property. He was not worthy of this woman--not equal to her--until he provided property.

Providing property was a sign of obligation, not privilege. This, however, did not mean that men had more obligation than women. Women had the obligation--or responsibility--to provide the children. Neither sex had rights--both sexes had obligations and expectations and, if they fulfilled those expectations and obligations well, they received status and privileges."
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 99
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/5/2011 9:46:50 AM

Circular reasoning.

According to English Common Law, all property which a wife held at the time of a marriage became a possession of her husband. Eventually English courts forbade a husband's transferring property without the consent of his wife, but he still retained the right to manage it and to receive the money which it produced.


I'm not a legal scholar, and can't really challenge this. But I did read Pride and Prejudice. I remember that the rapscallion in that book (don't remember his name) couldn't get his hands on his wife's money when he married the younger Bennet sister. That was written in the 18th century.
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 100
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/14/2011 1:56:07 PM
I can speak to that:

When you register a birth in BC (or at least 20 years ago), there's a line for the mother's name and a line for the father's name. The last name is automatically registered as the father's.

They will reject certain first names: God is turned down for example.
 viper1j
Joined: 11/30/2005
Msg: 101
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/14/2011 3:07:09 PM
Perhaps, the most ironic thing about this thread, is that now women are fighting for the right to die..

Please move to the front of the line. Just don't expect me to let my daughters join you.
 Gashlycrumb_Briny
Joined: 9/26/2010
Msg: 102
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/14/2011 6:53:45 PM

now women are fighting for the right to die..


Oh, I see. If the women get in the lifeboat first, they're selfish, exploitative b1tches, and if they stay on the ship, it's cause they're too stupid to live.

Women are fighting for the right to make their own choices. Sometimes we will make stupid choices, or wrong choices, but hey - so do men! We are willing to take responsibility for them. (Our choices, not the men.) So don't worry, the weight of all the dead women on sinking cruise ships will not be placed on your shoulders.

I expect you to let your daughters do whatever they choose to do, once they're old enough.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 103
view profile
History
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/15/2011 5:50:33 PM
The MRA movement and it's convoluted websites like MGTOW and Happy Bachelors, etc, have become dominated by guys who blame women for all their ineptitude at relating, and harboring a hate-fest against the females of the species, decrying "feminism" as their scapegoat for merely being misogynistic, narcissistic, ***holes who suffer from karma.

It's the fault of feminism, ERA, and everything but personal responsibility. Not sure yet if this is another corporate construct to divide and conquer, or a Fox Newsish plan gone awry yet again, but the result has led to violence against women, with echo chambers of misogynistic narcicists re-enforcing their hatred, disdain, displeasure, and anger against people who saw them for what they were and chose not to participate with these reactionaries. The founder of Happy Bachelors intended on a viable support group to bring guys together for a positive re-enforcement, get over it, move forward, find other interests, and be smarter about future choices, sort of advocacy, but like Fox and other hate sites, it quickly became a forum for divisiveness, blame, and anger. He shut down the site for awhile, but others resurrected it, fanned the hate flames, and it became a losers club for narcisistic misogynists, guys who need their sickness re-enforced by others so affected and incapable of accepting personal responsibility.

The MGTOW and HB crowd are trolling on sites like these to get a rise. Recognize them, explore their sites, and fight back against this division, no matter who is fommenting it.

The following is a thoughful response from a "mangina". These misogynistic narcisscists, feed on the echo chamber and are not gentle with thoughtful people of any gender. There are women with Stockholm syndrome who try to protect them.
http://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/solution-mra-problems-more-feminism/

This is in context of some dear friends who have suffered under, and/or been victimized by this women-haters reactionary movement. To know it, is to understand it and fight back intelligently to it.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 104
view profile
History
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/15/2011 7:04:03 PM
Mom, sister, cousin, and step sisters, an aunt, second cousins, friends, and others in my life have been victims of this backlash. It is first hand, it is personal, and if not for my dedication to non-violence, ......

When I see sites like I mentioned, the hatred, the fomenting of such, and know still, the women in my life, subjected to such ugliness, it pains me that this somehow acceptable behavior in this day and age. I was put into the position at age 12, to either defend my mother from an attacker/stepfather by killing him on the spot, justifiably, or succumb to her bloody pleas to not do so as to alter my life forever. I honored her bloody pleas, but both paths would have altered my life. Tis the shits to have such crappy options at such an age. Thus...my high intolerance of misogynistic narciscists, drunken wife beaters, and general****hits who wish to blame women for not putting up with their bullshit.
 happybunny8
Joined: 4/16/2010
Msg: 105
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/15/2011 7:16:04 PM
I don't know where all these men (according to these forums) who keep getting sniped at by women live. I am a feminist; I live in Missouri, and men open doors for me all the time. I smile and say, "Thank you." I teach at a college, and as many young men open doors for me as do old men. I have even had young men rush ahead of me to the door so they could hold it open before I got there.


I love having the door opened for me or those other small things that men do. I've never once in my life thought it wrong or felt demeaned.

I also hold doors for all people. In fact, the other day I was caught up with something and forgot to hold the door for someone, so I turned around and apologized. It was a man and he responded "no problem" with a smile.

These are small things that add extra to any person's day.

As for feminism, I grew up with the notion that a man would not be taking care of me, so I should work; however that didn't mean I should not accept help from a man or anyone else for that matter if I needed it.

I have never felt that I didn't "need" a man, I have always felt I could manage without a man and live just fine. Sadly, experience has taught me that the men I have chosen have not been there for me when I needed it the most, when I was ill. They are there for me when I move, when I need help installing an air conditioner etc., but I don't "need" a partner to get this done, I could hire someone or ask my brother to do it. I need someone to be strong for me.

As Scorpio mentioned, if I were living in a different time, things would be very difficult for me, but due to the feminist movement, I'm able to take care of myself so that I can live and this is a good thing - for any human being.

What I find interesting is that there are not that many hard-core feminists out there. Even reading these forums I can see that. I don't need to be in competition with a man in the professional world just because I'm a woman. If I'm happy with my job and salary, that is all that matters; I'm not going to go on a crusade if Billy makes more than me for the same job. That may be insulting and not supportive of women, but frankly my family and loved ones are what matter and there are injustices in the world for which I feel much more strongly about and some are not gender specific.
 Gwendolyn2010
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 106
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/15/2011 8:42:40 PM


Quite often women receive the message that feminism is bad, for them as well as men. You would therefore expect that women who do not embrace feminism would be liked and admired. Yet, women who do not espouse feminism and expect men to assume traditional roles, are also belittled as clingy gold-diggers without career aspirations, while the feminists are derided for taking male jobs or being b!tchy opportunists.


I have witnessed exactly the same!


Mom, sister, cousin, and step sisters, an aunt, second cousins, friends, and others in my life have been victims of this backlash. It is first hand, it is personal, and if not for my dedication to non-violence, ......


I have also seen men who complain and moan about feminists and women in general who, in the same breath, say that they would harm anyone who treated their daughters in the same way that they advocate women in general be treated.

Thank you, Pups. :)
 viper1j
Joined: 11/30/2005
Msg: 107
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/15/2011 10:09:07 PM

Mom, sister, cousin, and step sisters, an aunt, second cousins, friends, and others in my life have been victims of this backlash. It is first hand, it is personal, and if not for my dedication to non-violence, ..


If such a "backlash" exists, does it not stand to reason that at some point, there must have been a "lash" in order to have a "backlash"? And if there was, then how can you say men's rights advocates are 100% wrong?

I have yet to hear anything come out of a men's rights advocate's mouth that even comes close to these feminist nuggets of wisdom for real hate and vitriol:

"In a patriarchal society all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent." Catherine MacKinnon

"I claim that rape exists any time se xual intercourse occurs when it has not been initiated by the woman, out of her own genuine affection and desire." From Robin Morgan

"Romance is rape embellished with meaningful looks." Andrea Dworkin

"All men are rapists and that's all they are." Marilyn French in People, February 20, 1983

And let's not forget all those fish with bicycles.
 60to70
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 108
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/16/2011 12:19:08 AM
Men are as damaged as their mothers...and fathers.
Women are as damaged as their mothers... and fathers.
Some are lucky and have a good grandparent or wistfully...a good mother and father.
Feminism is beside the point after a long while. What matters is what seems impossible to happen. An understanding that life holds no court in either gender.
 Gwendolyn2010
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 109
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/16/2011 3:42:29 AM

I have yet to hear anything come out of a men's rights advocate's mouth that even comes close to these feminist nuggets of wisdom for real hate and vitriol:


Try these:

1500 - Martin Luther (1500): "If they [women] become tired or even die, that does not matter. Let them die in childbirth, that's why they are there."

400 - St. Augustine of Hippo: "What is the difference whether it is in a wife or a mother, it is still Eve the temptress that we must beware of in any woman... I fail to see what use woman can be to man, if one excludes the function of bearing children."

A.D. 200 - Tertullian: "Do you not know that you are each an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the Devil's gateway: You are the unsealer of the forbidden tree: You are the first deserter of the divine law: You are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You destroyed so easily God's image, man. On account of you even the Son of God had to die."

1250 - St. Thomas Aquinas (1250): "As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active force in the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the production of woman comes from a defect in the active force or from some material indisposition, or even from some external influence."

These quotes are by church "fathers" who were highly influential in the formation of Christian ideology. These are the thoughts to which the feminist "backlash" responded.

Take a step back:

'It is the best for all tame animals to be ruled by human beings. For this is how they are kept alive. In the same way, the relationship between the male and the female is by nature such that the male is higher, the female lower, that the male rules and the female is ruled.' Aristotle, Politica, ed. Loeb Classical Library, 1254 b 10-14.

Aristotle has had a huge influence in Western thought and philosophy. Women have had such hate and vitriol thrown at them for millennia.

Also, check out a little book called The Malleus Maleficarum. Open it and point to a passage--you'll find not only vitriol, but passages that helped condemn thousands of women to death as witches.

Let us add:

"The Blessed [Buddha] one said, "Amrapali, the mind of a woman is easily disturbed and misled. She yields to her desires and surrenders to jealousy more easily than a man. Therefore it is more difficult for a woman to follow the Noble Path. This is especially true for a young and beautiful woman. You must step forth toward the Noble Path by overcoming lust and temptation"

"Cunning women and witches we read of without number, but wisdom never entered into the character of a woman. It is not a requisite of the sex. "-- Richardson, Clarissa Harlowe

"The souls of women are so small, that some believe they've none at all. "-- Samuel Butler

"There are some meannesses which are too mean even for man - woman, lovely woman alone, can venture to commit them. "-- William Makepeace Thackeray

 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 110
view profile
History
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/16/2011 5:03:31 AM
The trouble with battling out who is worse, the vitriolic feminists, or the vitriolic anti-feminists, is that it's easy to find nasty things being said about anyone.
One of my biggest personal frustrations, which is illustrated here again, is that so MANY people get into these debates without any intention of SOLVING anything. Because their goal is to make themselves feel good, and to put down anyone they perceive as an enemy, they will seek out the worst things said by the (usually) LEAST representative members of the opposition, and quote them as though they are the central guiding force of the other side. That's what Fox News loves to do, and what some few Liberal "news" honkers like to do. It's what those misogynists are all about, and what the small anti- male group who pretend to be Feminists are about.
The only thing WORSE than initiating such a lame argument, is to EXCUSE them on the grounds that "the other side said it first." Thus, suggesting that the misogynists are "lashing back" because the feminists "lashed first," and should therefore be accepted, is worse than nonsense. It's destructive in the worst way, because it encourages the SPREAD of the undeserved vitriolic hatred, not it's abatement.
Though I am not a religious person myself, I suspect the old adage of "turning the other cheek" might have been an admonishment about how to stop the madness: demand civility and COMPLETE accuracy from all who step up to a podium of any kind.
 viper1j
Joined: 11/30/2005
Msg: 111
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/16/2011 5:56:44 AM

I suspect the old adage of "turning the other cheek" might have been an admonishment about how to stop the madness: demand civility and COMPLETE accuracy from all who step up to a podium of any kind.


I think in some circles, that's what's called a "Mexican Showdown", where one side says:" I'll put my guns down when you put your guns down", and the other side says "No, I'll put my guns down when you put your guns down"

And so on..
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 112
view profile
History
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/16/2011 6:33:48 AM

I think in some circles, that's what's called a "Mexican Showdown", where one side says:" I'll put my guns down when you put your guns down", and the other side says "No, I'll put my guns down when you put your guns down"

Nice analogy, but for the fact that one side had all the guns and power for most of time, and the other side is still highly outgunned, only now getting into some sort of bargaining position and the highly gunned side is getting fearful, reactionary, more prone to violent rhetoric, and inciting violence against the less armed. We just had a congressman from Georgia introduce legislation to make it a death penalty offense for a woman who has a miscarriage if she cannot prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was no human intervention.
http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2011/02/miscarriage-death-penalty-georgia

I don't see anywhere in history, where such a powerful, well armed, strong majority has ever played the "victim" card so loudly and with so much whining. The anti-feminism backlash is about power, keeping it, and being able to use it at will.

The solution is simple. Just do the golden rule thing.

On another note..Daniel Craig in drag in honor of Internatinal Womens' Day.
http://thenativemexican.tumblr.com/post/3725153773/nightdreamer-daniel-craig-in-drag-for
 slybandit
Joined: 7/10/2006
Msg: 113
feminism...for discussion
Posted: 3/16/2011 8:07:00 AM
viper1j and Gwendolyn2010 are BOTH perfectly right.

1. Many self-appointed feminist spokeswomen (spokeswomyn, spokeswimmin, spokespeople-- I just love post-A.J. Ayer nonsense etymology) have said all kinds of ludicrous and irresponsible things in public. Many of which were nothing more than attention-seeking ploys.

2. There's a long and well-bearded tradition of misogyny in this culture (and many others). All kinds of very intelligent and well-read people have said and written rather misogynistic things.

But without being too much of a religious chauvinist about it, many of those same people were of the firm opinion that painful childbirth and wearing clothing were both results of a rib-woman getting a clay-man to eat a magic apple because a talking snake told her it was a good idea. (The same school of thought that produces the Georgia politician to which earthpuppy makes reference.)

Civilized countries have had independent judiciaries for much longer than they have had meaningful democracy (which showed up in the U.K. around 1928, in Canada around 1960 and in the U.S. around 1965), precisely to deal with irresponsible and stupid legislation passed by attention-seeking hacks.

3. The "anti-feminism" backlash is not about power, or at least not in the way earthpuppy is claiming. The people engaged in it do not have power-- that's what they're whining so loudly about. No one is impressed. They're not a "powerful, well armed, strong majority", that's just a left wing stalking-horse. These people are *powerless*, which is why they are doing what the powerless do: whine and complain. They're all graduates of the "it's not my fault" school of thinking, where blaming others for your inability to succeed or accomplish anything meaningful is a substitute for actually *doing* something practical about your personal situation.

Mom was mean to me and broke up our family by divorcing Dad to shack up with her personal trainer. My girlfriends used me for free food and entertainment while cheating on me with guys who were better looking and less polite. My ex-wife grunted out two kids then got fat, lost interest in our s*x life and took me to the cleaners in the divorce. Now I'm saddled with child support and a dead-end job. WAH!! The world's not fair, girls have cooties and it's ALL YOUR FAULT. Who is impressed with that?
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > feminism...for discussion