Feminism

[Lady_Foxfire]

No, not all feminists are ugly man hating baby-killing lesbians. As a matter of fact, I don't think you could find one example of a feminist who fits even most of those stereotypes. In fact, my favorite feminist blogger/author, Jessica Valenti, just announced her engagement to a man.

And yes, feminism is still necessary. Just because we supposedly have achieved legal equality (and I say supposedly because rapists and wife murderers are routinely being given ridiculously light sentences), we still have not achieved anything close to social equality. Sexist stereotypes and objectification are rampant in the media, The sexism against Sarah Palin and Hilary Clinton during the presidential elections was appaling, and poor Rush Limbaugh doesn't understand why women don't like him (hint: he's a misogynist asshat).

Oh and for the poster who said that the NAACP is unneccessary too, you missed the monkey cartoon didn't you?

[AFPheonix]

Oh and for the poster who said that the NAACP is unneccessary too, you missed the monkey cartoon didn't you?

He's also missed that hate groups have had the largest uptick in new registration in a decade or two since Obama has run for president and won.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/02/26/hat...ort/index.html

[Evandril]

No, not all feminists are ugly man hating baby-killing lesbians. As a matter of fact, I don't think you could find one example of a feminist who fits even most of those stereotypes. In fact, my favorite feminist blogger/author, Jessica Valenti, just announced her engagement to a man. ?

Depending on how you define 'ugly', I've *met* more than one that fit everything except 'baby-killing'...and if you want to define that as being pro-abortion, as some do, they even fit that. My Mother set at least three 'first woman in the state' records before I was born, and was always a VERY good role model that a person, male or female, can do anything they set their minds to...and I was *STILL* told how I was actively trying to surpress women, and how I deserved to die for my actions. One of 'em was attractive...until she opened her mouth, then I realized how ugly she was. *shrugs*

And yes, feminism is still necessary. Just because we supposedly have achieved legal equality (and I say supposedly because rapists and wife murderers are routinely being given ridiculously light sentences), we still have not achieved anything close to social equality. Sexist stereotypes and objectification are rampant in the media, The sexism against Sarah Palin and Hilary Clinton during the presidential elections was appaling, and poor Rush Limbaugh doesn't understand why women don't like him (hint: he's a misogynist asshat).?

That I won't argue...though I would LOVE for it to be more about equal rights across the board, rather than 'x' group wanting to be treated like 'y' group...hence why I was saying 'Equalist' rather than Feminist.

Oh and for the poster who said that the NAACP is unneccessary too, you missed the monkey cartoon didn't you?

Out of curiosity...If that was supposed to be the President, wouldn't the caption read 'They'll have to find someone else to SIGN the next stimulus bill', rather than writing it? I don't believe the President is going to be the one writing a bill, personally...Yes, it *CAN* be viewed with the monkey-black mindset (See the other thread on this), but I just don't think it was likely to have been intended that way.

[guywithashovel]

I don't think that's quite fair. Not all women sit around and 'bash' men.

I was being a bit sarcastic when I wrote that. The analogy popped into my head, and it made me laugh.

However, I did hear quite a bit of male bashing when I was growing up (1990s). I don't hear as much these days, though. Maybe the ladies have gotten it all out of their systems.

poor Rush Limbaugh doesn't understand why women don't like him (hint: he's a misogynist asshat

The only people who like Rush Limbaugh are radical right-wingers and die-hard Republicans who think members of their party can do no wrong. Most everyone else treats him like the old, senile, and deranged grandpa or uncle at family get-togethers. You know the one I'm talking about. The one the whole family worries about and discusses. (e.g. "Okay, we've got the dinner all planned out now. But *cue concerned tone of voice* what are we going to do about Grandpa?)

That's my observation, anyway.

[AFPheonix]

Out of curiosity...If that was supposed to be the President, wouldn't the caption read 'They'll have to find someone else to SIGN the next stimulus bill', rather than writing it? I don't believe the President is going to be the one writing a bill, personally...Yes, it *CAN* be viewed with the monkey-black mindset (See the other thread on this), but I just don't think it was likely to have been intended that way.

Since he's the one urging Congress to actually do something about it and made it part of his election platform towards the end that he would be insisting on this bill becoming reality, it could easily be read as "his" bill.
I don't suspect that it was meant that way, but it can definitely be seen that way, and whatever editor gave it the go ahead should be reprimanded. Either it didn't occur to the editor that it could be seen that way which is scary enough, or he did and gave it the go ahead anyways, which is even scarier.
That cartoon was such a non-sequitur to begin with, it should have been tossed for just not being particularly clever.

[Seshat]

because rapists and wife murderers are routinely being given ridiculously light sentences)

And male victims of rape or spousal abuse are having an incredibly hard time being believed. STILL.


Gender equality still has a long way to go. Whether it continues under the banner of 'feminism', or moves the banner of 'gender equalism', doesn't concern me. As long as it keeps moving.

[Lady_Foxfire]

Evandril: Ok, you got me on the fact that there are a few women who do fit the stereotype of an angry feminist to a tee. I still don't think that there's enough of them to stand as a valid criticism to feminism.

As for the monkey cartoon maybe not being a reference to President Obama, considering that Obama is the public face of the bill, and that it's often referred to by the media as "President Obama's stimulus bill", the first thing that a lot of people thought when they saw that cartoon was that the cartoon was a reference to Obama. Yes, technically the cartoon could have been referring to congress or Nancy Pelosi (who I've heard is the one who actually wrote the bill), but considering the history of black people (especially Obama) being compared to monkeys, and the post's oddly defensive apology, I have a sneaking suspicion that the cartoonist did not have entirely pure motives.

As for Equalism vs. Feminism: considering that women are the historically disadvantaged group, technically, feminism is equalism. However, I won't deny that our current system of patriarchy has downsides for men; it certainly does. But I don't see that as being feminism's problem. If men really care about fixing their problems, they can start their own movement to combat those inequalities. They can't force the feminist movement to do so for them, nor can they tell feminists to shut up and sit down because they have problems too. They can solve their own damn problems, and let us solve ours.

(note: not calling out anyone here with the above rant, just addressing a general mindframe)

[AdminAssistant]

Lady Foxfire - allow me to recommend Helene Cixous "Laugh of the Medusa". She's a feminist theorist who calls for much of what you've suggested. She also totally dismisses phallocentrism (and thank dog because I'm tired of hearing about how all women have 'penis envy').

[Amethyst Hunter]

As for Equalism vs. Feminism: considering that women are the historically disadvantaged group, technically, feminism is equalism. However, I won't deny that our current system of patriarchy has downsides for men; it certainly does. But I don't see that as being feminism's problem. If men really care about fixing their problems, they can start their own movement to combat those inequalities. They can't force the feminist movement to do so for them, nor can they tell feminists to shut up and sit down because they have problems too. They can solve their own damn problems, and let us solve ours.

(note: not calling out anyone here with the above rant, just addressing a general mindframe)

YES. THIS. It boils down to the mindset of "men make the mess, women get to clean it up." Um, no, I don't think so. You make your own mess, you clean it up. Guess who historically has made the most (and worst) messes?

Patriarchy is a power-based system that rewards those in power, and since those in power are overwhelmingly men (and often sexist ones at that), they have very little incentive to change things. Why would you want to, if you grew up with the expectation that everything was put here on earth for your whim and was to cater to you?

On a related tangent, something that drives me nuts is women who are patriarchal suck-ups- think Ann Coulter, Phyllis Schafly or Sarah Palin types. These vultures circle around the patriarchs hoping that by betraying all women with their particular poison, they'll be the exception to the rule and get some sort of special status for doing so. What they fail to realize is that 1) if it wasn't for feminism, *none* of them would ever have achieved the power and status that they currently hold, and 2) no matter how much venom they spew, no matter how hard they try to prove that they're 'just one of the good 'ol boys', they will still forever be held in contempt for the simple fact of being female (something that they can't control, obviously, and sex changes don't count because sexists also regard transgendered people as less than human) by the most sexist men who hold power - because those men that are sexist refuse to acknowledge that women are anything other than meat and materials.

[Seshat]

As for Equalism vs. Feminism: considering that women are the historically disadvantaged group, technically, feminism is equalism. However, I won't deny that our current system of patriarchy has downsides for men; it certainly does. But I don't see that as being feminism's problem. If men really care about fixing their problems, they can start their own movement to combat those inequalities. They can't force the feminist movement to do so for them, nor can they tell feminists to shut up and sit down because they have problems too. They can solve their own damn problems, and let us solve ours.

True: but just as women can't fix inequality that hurts women on our own, men can't fix inequality that hurts men on their own.

So I try to be conscious of the inequalities against men, and attempt to avoid being part of the problem. And (most of) the men around me try to be conscious of the inequalities against women, and attempt to avoid being part of that problem.

On the other hand, I'm more likely to be found teaching computer classes to women than early childhood classes to men. Part of that is feminism - part of that is cause I don't know enough early-childhood stuff to teach it.

[AdminAssistant]

because those men that are sexist refuse to acknowledge that women are anything other than meat and materials.

And baby-making machines. Don't forget that!

[Evandril]

Evandril: Ok, you got me on the fact that there are a few women who do fit the stereotype of an angry feminist to a tee. I still don't think that there's enough of them to stand as a valid criticism to feminism.

I agree with you there, that's why I made the distinction of 'Feminist' and 'feminazi' in my first post...the idiots fall in the second catagory

As for Equalism vs. Feminism: considering that women are the historically disadvantaged group, technically, feminism is equalism. However, I won't deny that our current system of patriarchy has downsides for men; it certainly does. But I don't see that as being feminism's problem. If men really care about fixing their problems, they can start their own movement to combat those inequalities. They can't force the feminist movement to do so for them, nor can they tell feminists to shut up and sit down because they have problems too. They can solve their own damn problems, and let us solve ours.

No, Feminism is trying to get women, and women only, on an equal level with men. When I used 'Equalism', I'm looking at more than just sexual differences, I'm talking about a broad 'Don't pre-judge' idea, covering far more than what plumbing you're born with. In *MY* opinion, if we don't fight the mindset that your heritage determines your worth, or that it's ok to look down on someone because they are different...we'll be fighting the SAME battle over and over...just the names in the fight will change.

[Seshat]

No, Feminism is trying to get women, and women only, on an equal level with men.

Feminism has many definitions. The feminists that I know act on all unfair discriminations*, even if they do so under the term 'feminist'.



* noting that discrimination that prevents me - a disabled person - from being a front-line firefighter is fair discrimination. I am incapable of doing the job, thus I am not considered for hire.

[The Shadow]

Anyone who says white heterosexual males are "oppressed" or "discriminated" against in this country is either lying through their teeth or is incredibly blind.

Really?

I'm a white heterosexual male, but I also happen to be physically *and* cognitively disabled. I'm going to be charitable and assume it was just an oversight on your part that you didn't acknowledge mental/physical ability as a barrier when you made that statement. That's very common and I would also argue that it's evidence to suggest that out of all the marginalized groups in society - women, minorities, LGBT people...the disabled are often more marginalized than the others and the fact that they so often don't get that kind of recognition is proof of that. But that's just my opinion.

[the_std]

Really?

I'm a white heterosexual male, but I also happen to be physically *and* cognitively disabled.

I think the point was that white heterosexual males aren't discriminated against for BEING white heterosexual males, outside of their other disabilities/differences.