ZOMBIE FORUMS

What does everyone think about feminism and feminists? Has the work of the original feminists already been accomplished? Is feminism still a worthwhile cause to support?

In my opinion, it is. Sure, we all love to make fun of the looney, extremist women's rights people who believe that men are inherently evil, but these individuals, much like most militant Muslims, are psychologically disturbed people who are scapegoating a certain group for their own personal problems. Mainstream feminism is another story.

It's also important to keep in mind that there are many different strains of feminism. Different forms of feminism have different takes on porn, for example, from those who believe it should be outlawed to those who dislike the more overtly exploitational genres to those who celebrate all pornography as a manifestation of both freedom of speech and a woman's right to do with her body as she pleases. The same could even be said of abortion. The important unifying aspect of all these different types lies not in the details of the programs they propose, but on the goal they are trying to accomplish, viz., to create a truly gender-equal society free of the patriarchal system that has dominated the Western World (and many other places) for thousands of years.

Thus the real question becomes, "Does patriarchy still exist in any form, and if so would a gender-equal society be desirable?" For now, I'm going to assume that the answer to the latter question is yes, although anyone can challenge me on this if they disagree. As for the former question: yes, I believe it does. You can't get rid of something that has been an aspect of our society for thousands of years simply by changing a few laws over the course of a decade or two.

Legally, of course, our society is largely gender-equal. That's not to say that there still aren't laws which discriminate against women; there are, and these laws should be changed. However, most aspects of male dominance today are largely cultural, and can't be changed by laws. Just because a power structure is not explicitly supported by the government doesn't mean it doesn't exist; after all, racism still exists, even if explicitly-government-sponsored racism has been abolished in America. For all the individual cases of women who are powerful in the business or political world, there are a dozen examples of jobless housewives pumping out babies for their wife-beating husbands. It's wonderful to see independent, strong women in power, but unfortunately, the fact that we still see these individuals as curiosities shows that they are exceptions.

The strongest bastion of male dominance in modern Western society lies within the minds of its people. What I'm referring to here is a complicated structure of unquestioned assumptions that we aren't even aware that we have. Today, the real job for those who consider themselves feminists (and I would include myself among this group) is to take a critical look at themselves, examinining the reasons they do or say certain things, or the assumptions and judgments they make about people or situations. Although there are still changes that need to be made in the law if we want to achieve a truly equal society, the most important task that lies ahead is to try to eradicate the implicit cultural prejudices that allow patriarchy to exist. Now, I'm not advocating going out and trying to convert people to radical feminism; I'm just saying that one should do all ve can, as an individual, to avoid supporting certain practices and ways of thinking.

In my opinion, Feminism works toward gender equality today, the way that the NAACP works toward convincing the Ku Klux Klan that they are wrong. Those very few people who remain overtly sexist have a mindset that will never change, and as for those other kind...

Read "Spinning into Butter".

Eradicating all prejudice from our hearts and minds is not needed. It is enough that we know these things are wrong. For example, when I step outside and see a hot girl, I (and roughly 100% of the straight male population) would like to have angry sex with her, whether she likes it or not. However, I don't act on this. Why? Because my consious mind and my morals tell me it is wrong.

In the same way, unconsious sexism (and any other kind of unconsious ____ism) is not a problem, because we all have the power to defeat that instinct, whether it be cultural or human nature.

Amen. Such as the fact that we still think of traditionally male/masculine roles and styles as superior to traditionally female/feminine roles and styles: women are regularly encouraged to get into technical/political jobs, but very few suggest that men should try to become house-husbands; girls can wear pants, but a guy in a dress is farcical or disturbed (or both). (c.f. my old post regarding this matter)


Yes, sir! I promise to try my best. 8)


WTF? I'm not quite sure what you mean by "angry sex," but if it at all resembles what it sounds like, well, then I'm very glad to hear that some part of you knows that it's wrong.

And for the record, I for one would rather take her out, show her a good time, gain her trust, and then have madly passionate and consensual sex. But then, that's just me. (And anyway, I'm not a member of the straight male population, so maybe that has something to do with my deviant tastes and preferences. )

[/procrastinating_on_finals]

Icy has no fucking balls.

Is that a 'I dsiagree that there is still a lack of equal opportunity to gender' or a 'I disagree that it's a PROBLEM that there is a lack of equal opportunity Grey'

Personally, I tend to agree with Icy. As I see it, the whole mess isn't about men VS. women, it's about society VS individual.

I mean it as in, "Icy has no fucking balls"

Its usually someone like Imp who's start spouting crap about how wonderful the many different types of moonbats are. And thats what todays feminists are, out of touch moonbats.

My thoughts exactly.



Werd.

ptlis

Not really that much experience with them myself, though I have heard that they tend to be... out of touch yeah... All the more reason to consider what problems they SHOULD be in touch with. Which is what is the reason for this discussion. What SHOULD the modern day feminists be doing, so as not to be an 'out of touch moonbat'? Or are all their goals already accomplished and is all feminism now superfluous?

(and eys, the obvious funny answer is 'make me a sammich', but we'll skip that)

Why are a bunch of guys discussing this? we have no idea.

Is femininsim useless? to me it is, 'cause i'm a guy. Just like masculinisim is useless to females.

What we need is some femmes saying whether feminisim has doen anything new for them in the past few years.

The problem is the word 'feminism' eh... I much prefer 'equal opportunity' as it suggests that in the areas that MEN aren't really 'appreciated' there's work to be done as well. (such as that stay-at-home-dads are seen as lazy bums by a large part of society, including females)

All of us can look at ourselves and society and wonder. 'If I was of the other gender, could I still do the things I wanted as much as I can do now, direct biological limitations aside?' If the answer is no, then I say there is still work to be done.

I think the answer is no. (Though as Icy said, in our Western society, the legalities have mostly been done)

White people fighting for black rights? ZOMG USELESS.

Get out of debate, Mad.

Anyway, yes, icy has no balls. You spent a very long post saying that "the job of a feminist is to make sure you're not prejudice if you realise that some aspect of you is."

Oh, shit, I never thought of that one!

How about this one, as well: job x (let us say, for the sake of argument and to keep my research to a minimum, garbage man) is dominated by african americans. It is a low-prestiege job.

Does that mean garbage man should be just as prestiegous as the traditionally white CEO?

No, of course not. What is wrong with the above, then (from a sociological perspective), is the fact that Africans are not moving into higher-level jobs at a rate that is similar to the rest of the society.

(as an aside, this is mostly due to the stain of collectivism that pervades our society; the importance placed implictly in this society on the approval of your peers shows how negetive it can get in the most direct way possible, when being successful is associated in many black communities as a negetive, thus perpetuating the situation of many black americans. As further evidence to the problem being African American culture and not white vs black prejudice, African immigrants (who come from a vastly different culture) succeed at a rate similar to that of whites.)

Similarly, the title 'housewife' is not a prestiegous occupation in this society, not because its occupied by women but because it isn't associated with productive work that is valued here. Equality then involves giving women the opportunity to choose a more prestiegous job, not by making prestiegous a job that isn't, at least in the sense you are thinking.

-MiB

Shave. Shave, and you can have whatever rights you want. I have to fucking shave. You have to fucking shave.

-Kitty

Which original feminists? The ones of the 1970s, 1950s, 1930s, 1890s, 1750s, or maybe the 400 BCE feminists? (Viz. Aristophanes' Lysistrata, albeit written by a man -- nevertheless, still a significant document.)

Feminism, to me, is the insistence upon the equality of women in all social and societal venues. In my country, we have had precisely one woman as prime minister; unfortunately for the country and for women, she was lousy at the job. In IcyMonkey's country, they have had no women as heads of national government. In both countries, the elected organs of power are at least two-thirds male. Similar or even more extreme states of affairs exist within the commercial and financial sectors of society.

I do not advocate a quota of women or men; such is patently unjust and obviously foolish. Where feminism is needed is to make people of both sexes realize that sex is not a measure of ability. The idea of a woman as (for example) President of the United States of America or Chief Executive Officer of General Motors should not be remarkable in any fashion. Feminism is useful and meaningful until the time that half the candidates for nomination to such positions are female -- and only because they are considered equally competent as their male counterparts by the people making those nominations.



Patriarchy exists, because people still make the assumption that males are better at powerful jobs than females are. People still make the assumption that females are incompetent in mathematics, too. I take both assumptions personally, whether they are expressed by a male or a female. Girls who think that they can't do math because they don't have penises annoy me no end.

A "gender-equal society" would be impossible in an English-speaking country; the English language distinguishes masculine from feminine ...

Oh, wait, you meant "a society in which the distribution of consistent functions is not differentiated according to sex". That could happen, though. If we tried hard enough, maybe, someday. The striving, itself, is worth while, don't you think?

(I am being pedantic: the word "gender" is properly applied only to other words, not to people or societal roles. Incorrect uses of the word "gender" are euphemisms for the correct word, which is "sex". Euphemisms hinder communication, and are therefore bad -- though I do admit that your phrase was shorter and easier to say than mine was, hmmm.)



A bunch of guys are discussing it because contrary to the statement in your second paragraph, it isn't useless to you. I don't know what "masculinism" entails, but men want women to respect them and like them, right? Feminists are telling you, "this is how to get us to respect you and like you." You are muttering to each other through your beards about how much that is worth to you.



Yes. The U. S. Supreme Court just overturned a ban against so-called partial-birth abortions, for example. A woman's right to choose what to do with her own body is very much a feminist issue, whether or not you agree with the feminist point of view.



Does the use of depilatory cream count? And must people of Asian or New World aboriginal ancestry, who naturally have less hair than hirsute Europeans and Africans, thereby be marginalized?

Tamayo

There are anti-abortion feminists.

Not every feminist is your feminist, saying that is the "feminist" view is like Jesse Jackson running around representing blacks, don't.

-MiB

While I admit to your central statement -- indeed, I would expand it to say that the word "feminism" is much diluted in modern society, sadly often invoked to mean precisely what the invoker wishes it to mean -- I would respectfully submit that that is beside the point. I have not advocated for or against abortion. Nor indeed have I ascribed either position to feminists in general:



All I said was that feminists were interested in the question. However, in this forum at least, I personally shall remain disinterested; I refuse to divert the topic by introducing a highly volatile side issue. There is another nearby forum in which that issue could be discussed.

Tamayo

Equal rights my ass. Humanitarians want equal rights for all people. Feminists only give a shit about themselves. This leads to those wonderful gits like the Vagina warriors. So what if you have a spam purse? So does half the human race. Get over it.

Hooray for the ad-hominem brigade! Or at least in this case, the ad feminam. (See, I can do it too.) Now, I have never heard of these "Vagina warriors" to whom you refer, but I can guess they might have something in common with my own favourite group of loonies, SCUM: the Society for Cutting Up Men.

Let me digress a moment.

John Brown's body lies a-mould'ring in the ground;
John Brown's body lies a-mould'ring in the ground.
John Brown's body lies a-mould'ring in the ground,
But his soul goes marching on.

John Brown was a psychopath. He was an asshole. He was a terrorist. He was an embarrassment to polite society. Nevertheless, he had one good thing going for him: he was an abolitionist. Slavery was, and is, just plain wrong -- and Brown fought against it, in his own unacceptable way. But the fact that Brown's methods were unacceptable did not at all mean that what he believed about slavery was incorrect -- only that he should have used other methods.

As for half the species having a "spam purse" aren't you grateful for that fact? Hey, all you people who don't have a "spam purse" -- don't you think that it's rather grand that there are lots of other people out there who are perfectly happy to let you insert your tab-As into their slot-Bs? (Yes, I can even do the weird imagery thing.) Funny thing is, though, those slot-B type people tend to get the shitty end of the stick in lots of social situations, and have done for millennia now. They seem to be a bit upset about it. Gosh.

The only thing women get a really bad deal on in America, really, is biology. Women get reminded of how good we guys have it once a month. (Mind you, they do take it out on us.) But I'd rather put up with that than the pain.

They also get to have the kids too. If men had to give birth you would have a sudden deadline on the life expectancy of the human race.

Bio-Feminism hasn't caught on, seeing is how it's not exceptionally possible. Even if they did come up with a way for guys to have kids, the five of them that would agree to it wouldn't help too many people even the score.

Women could safely and healthily avoid their periods by taking Birth control without the Placaebo. I read the studies on it, unfortunately the drug companies and doctors are stuck on 50 year old gynecological myth and keep putting it in. It was a woman doctor who did the study, no surprise there.

EXTRA NOTE: My mother and several of my female friends are less heppy about feminism than I am. They think it'll all end in women getting drafted to go to war, and they are rather against that idea.

FINAL NOTE: I think feminism certainly has a place cleaning up the acts of third world countries that treat them worse than we in the first world treat livestock. These Arab countries to get particular who so many are always leaping to the defense of. Fundamentalist Muslim countries generally have fewer human rights for women than we have protections for animals against cruelty.

In New York or Los Angeles or Dallas or Chicago, or in any large American city, is it the case that women and men are equally safe from harm when walking alone after dark through deserted parking lots? No? Hmmm.

No, it's not my habit to walk through deserted parking lots after dark by myself. It's something my brothers can do, though, that they most sensibly never permitted me to do.

In Cincinnati or Detroit or Hartford or Seattle, are there great battalions of women who work as corporate presidents or senior law partners or -- heck -- Cadillac dealership owners? No? Really?

How many women are members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the American military? Lots of women general officers, then? What about field-grade officers, serving on the line? Fighter pilots, maybe? Not too many? There might be a pattern here ....

Here's the kicker. How many women are state governors? Senators? Presidents?

Okay, why aren't these people women? In some cases, it makes sense that a profession is dominated by one sex or the other. Men are just stronger, on the whole, so I would really rather have it that a man be allowed to take military special-forces training than a woman, a priori; but should there be a woman who is as tough and as strong as her brother candidates, then she should have her chance.

However, physical strength just isn't a sensible qualification for owning a Cadillac dealership or planning a war or running a government. Not anymore, at any rate.



Yes, that is the obverse side of the coin. One must pay the price of every freedom one gains. A slave does not need to worry about budgeting his paychecks. If men are subject to conscription, then women must be too. I would be ashamed to cower at home if my brothers were conscripted and I were deemed too delicate or too feeble or too ... something. Ashamed and insulted.

Grey... I think you're missing the point. The question is not whether the feminist organizations of today are doing a good job getting equal rights, or as you say, are even INTERESTED in that. The topic is whether there IS still work to do to get equal rights.It's not about what the feminsits ARE doing, bu what they SHOULD be doing.

And I think there's plenty for them to do.

(Also agreed with tamayo that with such equal rights comes 'the bad stuff' as well. I don't wanna hear any equal-opportunity-feminist saying about divorce cases that 'the child shold go to the mother because mothers are closer to their children' *has some personal stake in that issue regarding his little brother*)