|
|
Post by Aurora on Aug 6, 2004 5:54:06 GMT -5
I don't get this. I would be outraged if someone tried to make me stop wearing bras as it would somewhat cripple my freedom of movement, but I'm actually grateful for the invention, myself. Trying to run with C cupsize or greater with no support would be downright painful!
I consider myself a feminist, and I resent being labeled with the term "feminazi" anytime I speak my mind and refuse to allow a man to make my decisions for me. That doesn't mean that I hate men. If I did, I wouldn't have married one. No, I don't hate men. I hate sexist pigs, but not men.
Actually, I hate discrimination of any sort, though everyone is guilty of it at least a little bit...including myself. This includes women discriminating against men unfairly. Saying "all men snore" isn't a fair statement unless you've been in the presence of every single man alive today while they are sleeping and can prove this. I can, however, say truthfully that all the men I know snore. My husband and his father do it in stereo whenever we have overnight family visits. Thank the gods for earplugs.
Sexism is ugly no matter who it's coming from, as is racism. Being a female doesn't excuse sexism anymore than being black excuses racism. People just need to recognize the signs withing themselves and consider how they'd feel if someone on the opposite pole were saying the same thing. If you would consider it sexist for someone of the opposite gender to say it, then what makes it okay for you to say it about them?
However, it doesn't help when people automatically call you a "feminazi" just for having your own mind, and it doesn't put a whole lot of love in your heart for men when they accuse you of this. People just need to think before they speak, I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by TNRighty on Aug 18, 2004 16:09:55 GMT -5
Great post, Aurora.
Have you read Tammy Bruce's book, TEXT? If not, you should. She addresses this subject beautifully.
|
|
|
|
Post by TNRighty on Aug 18, 2004 16:10:51 GMT -5
The book is, The Death of Right and Wrong, don't know what happened with the italics command.
|
|
|
|
Post by Essences on Sept 11, 2004 17:06:36 GMT -5
I never really understood penis envy really. I've seen girls who do go out of their way to make them impossible to distinguish as a women or a man, but then I've seen men who do their utmost to look like a woman. I've heard women who say ugly things like '*censored* ****' 'get off my sac' and various other sayings that would suggest they have male anatomy when obviously they do not. And really it rather bothers me but who am I to judge.
As for the bra burning bit. .I can't imagine doing that to my bras. .they're not exactly cheap you know? And even tho I am all for womens rights I still like to be a lady and look nice too. I don't mind if men like to look at what I have, I like to look at them too, I just don't want them thinking I should be at their beckon call or do all the house work or whatever. I want to be treated fairly but also found desirable. I should hope that just because I want to be appealing doesn't mean people are going to say I'm setting women back in their rights.
And I imagine that part of the reason they didn't burn the 'sexier' bras was that they were fighting for the everyday 'injustices' towards women, I don't wear a sexy bra everyday but the ones i do wear everyday are designed to give my breasts a more appealing shape, sports bras, which are sometimes found as the one long holder which was mentioned, aren't for everyday purposes either, they're for running around and all that so breasts don't get in the way if thats all the bras were meant for then why not just wear them all the time?
Also, I believe that the women who wish to look more like men, probably bind their breasts to hid them, they're not just letting them 'hang' free or anything so I don't know how that plays into the burning bras thing. .
whoa, it censored what I thought I already censored enough. .it was something about sucking on a bit of male anatomy. .
|
|
|
|
Post by RC364 on Sept 11, 2004 19:21:26 GMT -5
[quote author=Aurora link=board=Fem&thread=1075500068&start=15#1 date=109178964
I consider myself a feminist[/quote]
I consider myself a female who is what I should be, feminine. I don't know why we even have to have the word feminist thrown around?!
God gave women their own set of strengths just like he gave man his. I know what mine are and I use them with great pride. There is no shame in making a distinction between the two sexes. There are some things men do better than women and some things women do better than men, period.
|
|
|
|
Post by shakey on Sept 30, 2004 16:24:39 GMT -5
What the hell is that supposed to mean? More importantly why was I not consulted on the construction in question? "Social Constructionism"- A lot of sociological evidence points out that gender is socially constructed, meaning that many of the behaviors associated with being a boy or a girl are learned behaviors and not genetically engrained. Freud's postulates in relation to gender have really taken a back seat for those academics who stdu gender in our society- Hope that helps. |
|
|
|
Post by MO on Sept 30, 2004 16:58:55 GMT -5
shakey is spouting out junk science from the 1970's. The feminist b.s. notion that there is no reason to believe that just because our brains are different and we have different hormones flowing through them is no reason to think we are different. We are!
|
|
|
|
Post by shakey on Oct 4, 2004 11:55:20 GMT -5
Socially constructed gender roles are quite well proven in anumber of scientific studies. Whether or not it fits in with your picture of the world is another matter entirely. Social constructionism is widely accepted amongst the medical community and in the academic realm. You are correct in your statement that men and women do have several important biological differences such as hormone levels (we all have the same hormones) and different brain patterns and certainly do cause some differences in males and females. Even though these biological/physical differences are certainly involved in how we behave as men and women, it has been widely proven that the socialization process equips us with much of what we learn is OK for females and OK for males. To deny this, simply ignores the best available data. A good example of this is rape. Why does the US more rapes than anywhere else in the Western World?
|
|
|
|
Post by MO on Oct 4, 2004 18:02:58 GMT -5
Pish posh. Any difference in the crime rates in America compared to the rest of the west is due to demographics.
|
|
|
|
Post by shakey on Oct 5, 2004 10:19:38 GMT -5
Pish Posh? Not sure what that means. Demographics? please explain. In a study of 95 differnet cultures, some w/a high incedence of rape and some w/o rape, it was found that rape cultures such as ours (20% of women are raped by the time they are 24) had consistent characteristics when looking at gender roles. For example, rape cultures value the male as the strong competetor who should get what he wants at all costs, even if it means violence. Women are seen as passive and submissive and usually lack economic power as well as political power. Also, there is a division of work along gender lines that is very stark (e.g there is no question of what is women's work and what work is for men). In societies w/o a high incedence of rape, all of these factors were virtually opposite. A lower value was placed on strength, power, and violence in men and work is shared much more equitably among the sexes. I other words, the social differences among between the sexes is much less noticable. This shows that a lot of the characteristics that we associate with being men are simply taught by the societies we live in - because the definition of what is male and what is female varies greatly between cultures. It just so happens that gender relations have a large impact on the prevalence of rape in a society. To simply say we have a high rape rate because of "demographics" either shows an unwillingness to confront a serious societal ill, or possibly indifference to the issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by scummybear on Oct 5, 2004 12:25:00 GMT -5
Pish Posh means statistical, psychosocial, hyperbabble constructed for the purpose of taking responsiblility away from the perpetrator of a crime and placing it on society as a whole.
If you're into statistics, you might find that the individuals who commit these crimes have little regard for anyone, or anything, including women, children, animals, laws, etc. . . as evidenced by a criminal record that I would suggest included other crimes as well in most cases. While this is certainly in no way meant to detract from the disgusting nature of such a crime, I don't believe society is responsible for teaching a behavior that is considered antisocial, and as such would involve more congenital / familial / developmental issues, than simply something that is "taught" by our culture.
It would seem that society teaches what is acceptable and was it not within itself; it's called the law. Some will fail to adhere to these norms no matter the effectiveness of the message.
I would be interested to see these statistics, and know what your ideas might be for confronting this "societal ill" .
|
|
|
|
Post by MO on Oct 5, 2004 13:00:33 GMT -5
Well said, Scummybear!
Demography-
Statistical study of human populations, especially with reference to size and density, distribution, and vital statistics.
Contemporary demographic concerns include the global birth rates, the interplay between population and economic development, the effects of birth control, urban congestion, illegal immigration, and labour force statistics. The basis for most demographic research lies in population censuses and the registration of vital statistics.
Simply put, much of the west is not a great melting pot.
I reject your entire premise, shakey. All the violent crime rates in the US are the highest in the urban areas that tend to be more matriarchal.
|
|
|
|
Post by shakey on Oct 5, 2004 14:03:43 GMT -5
Well you can disagree with the science all you want it really doesn't matter. I firmly believe in punishing rapists to the full extent of the law, but the fact of the matter is since rape is one of the most under reported crimes about 6% of rapists will ever spend a day in jail. To me that's not much of a detterent. I'm sure demographics come into play as they always do, but rape happens pretty equally along racial lines. For example the percentage of rapes that occur to white women out of total rapes is relative to their total percentage of whites in society. These crimes do not happen in a cultural an societal vaccum as the studies on rape prone and rape free societies show. Why is everyone so nasty on here? I was just trying to have a conversation about how to decrease the prevalence of rape in our society, which is alarming to me. If the answer is "some people will just break the rules" that's fine, but I think it absolves you of the larger issue of how do we decrease rape in society, rather than just dealing with those that have already perpetrated the crime. Ah what's the point.  rainn.org- for all of the rape statistics you like Peggy Reeves Sanday for studies in the influences of biology, psychology, culture, and society on sexuality |
|
|
|
Post by scummybear on Oct 5, 2004 17:07:52 GMT -5
Does this mean that 94% of them do? Not bad. And that's not much of an answer. I think the demographic point is particularly salient in a "rape free society" (where would that be btw?) Do you find everyone who disagrees with you to be nasty? I thought we were debating. No, the answer is not that "some people will just break the rules", however, this is a true statement, and there is always going to be sick, twisted people, no? The point is that no matter how much education, studies, statistics, charts, graphs you have, or social monkey-mandering you do, some people are are going to be broken and cannot be fixed. I think the best tools to fight rapists are crime prevention, actually punishing the perpetrators(getting them out of society so they can't do it again!). When we advance to being able to alter the genetics of scumbags, we'll be in tall cotton; but until then, I don't think another social program will help. There's nothing wrong with teaching someone what is normal and what is not. My point is that there are some things that that you should know innately from an early age. It's called being a human being. And all that that entails, such as respecting other human beings. Do you think that someone like, say, William Kennedy Smith would have listened or given a frog fart if society taught him, appropriately, that women are not here on planet Camelot for his pleasure? Me thinks not. I do thank you for the stats.  |
|
|
|
Post by MO on Oct 5, 2004 18:36:32 GMT -5
|
|
rainn.org- for all of the rape statistics you like Peggy Reeves Sanday for studies in the influences of biology, psychology, culture, and society on sexuality