Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Feminism

245

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Namaste wrote: »
    It's just that they're considered 'normal'. How many men do you know who've pinched a woman's backside?

    As a matter of interest how many women do you know who've pinched a man's?

    As far as I'm aware I don't know any man who's pinched a stranger's backside and its a totally different ball game if you come up behind your significant other and give her a squeeze...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Namaste wrote: »
    It's just that they're considered 'normal'. How many men do you know who've pinched a woman's backside?

    Out round town with a stranger, one (and far more women who've pinched a man's backside). In everyday life, like in the workplace, none.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    As a matter of interest how many women do you know who've pinched a man's?

    As far as I'm aware I don't know any man who's pinched a stranger's backside and its a totally different ball game if you come up behind your significant other and give her a squeeze...

    I don't know any women who have pinched a man's behind unless they are with him, but of course it's different with your partner, you're not doing it to degrade her. I don't think the ladette culture is a good thing at all because it is women trying to take on 'male' traits for survival/respect, rather than just being themselves. By which I don't mean how personalities are becoming more androgynous, transgendered, third gendered, butch lesbians or tomboys, but the whole "WHHOOOEEEEY LOOK AT THA SIX PACK ON 'IM!!!" whilst holding a pint of lager and falling over the knickers around her ankles.

    I don't think it's right for women to touch men at all and for the record before anybody brings it up (as somebody always does on any thread involving women)... Yes, men get raped, experience domestic violence, can be the brunt of sexist jokes ect ect... But there isn't the history behind it of oppression.
  • Indrid ColdIndrid Cold Posts: 16,688 Skive's The Limit
    Namaste wrote: »
    I don't think the ladette culture is a good thing at all because it is women trying to take on 'male' traits for survival/respect, rather than just being themselves.
    Here's a thought: How do you know they aren't being themselves?
    Define "being myself" too. If they've grown up thinking this is a good way to behave, then aren't they being themselves no matter what?
  • SkiveSkive Posts: 15,282 Skive's The Limit
    Namaste wrote: »
    I don't think the ladette culture is a good thing at all because it is women trying to take on 'male' traits for survival/respect, rather than just being themselves.

    Sorry but I think that's bollocks.
    Weekender Offender 
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    but are they "male traits" or are they human traits that previously had been conditioned out of females.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Namaste wrote: »
    rather than just being themselves.

    :confused:

    So how does a women act to just "being herself?"

    If a woman chooses to hold a pint of lager in her hand and pinch a fellas arse when he walks past then so be it. It's happened plenty of times to me and I don't mind, feminism is about equality, but it's also about freedom of choice and you don't seem to accept women can chose to adopt certain traits that are stereotypically attributed to men.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    but are they "male traits" or are they human traits that previously had been conditioned out of females.
    Tbh, it depends on whose perspective.

    Personally I don't believe that there are biologically 'male' or 'female' traits, more that we're socialised in to labelling them like that.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yerascrote wrote: »
    :confused:

    So how does a women act to just "being herself?"

    If a woman chooses to hold a pint of lager in her hand and pinch a fellas arse when he walks past then so be it. It's happened plenty of times to me and I don't mind, feminism is about equality, but it's also about freedom of choice and you don't seem to accept women can chose to adopt certain traits that are stereotypically attributed to men.

    I disagree, I think that it's cultural (as is most things).

    Personally I dislike the ladette culture because it isn't liberation, although it gets treated like it is. That doesn't mean that I don't believe that it's wrong if a woman wants to stumble about in the streets wankered, but it worries me that many women may feel like they have to act in a certain way as a form of defense. It is mirroring 'lad culture' (i.e. fucking, beer, being loud, puking in the streets), but it is not liberating. Shouting lewd things at a man does not make a woman more liberated... Being able to walk down the street without being shouted at by men is. It's being respected.

    I dislike the loud and obnoxious types like that because they make people think that feminism has achieved more than it has. They seem to give the impression that it is somehow acceptable to pinch a guys arse and that gives the impression that it's Ok to pinch a woman's arse. Why does this aggression have to be mirrored to survive?

    Why can't people just leave each other the hell alone?
  • SkiveSkive Posts: 15,282 Skive's The Limit
    Namaste wrote: »
    it worries me that many women may feel like they have to act in a certain way as a form of defense.

    Do they? Again I think that's bollocks.

    A lot of young men given the freedom to behave as they wish behave like 'lads', fucking, beer, puking being loud etc etc.. beacause they enjoy it (I know I do). Why would women behave any differently given the same freedoms?

    Beahving like that isn't liberating, but having the b[]choice[/b[ to behave like that, without being labled a slut or slapper is.
    Weekender Offender 
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Skive wrote: »
    Do they? Again I think that's bollocks.

    A lot of young men given the freedom to behave as they wish behave like 'lads', fucking, beer, puking being loud etc etc.. beacause they enjoy it (I know I do). Why would women behave any differently given the same freedoms?

    Beahving like that isn't liberating, but having the b[]choice[/b[ to behave like that, without being labled a slut or slapper is.

    So you don't see any issues with the basic sexism on both parts in the lad/ette culture?

    I disagree... The fact that women still earn a third less than men, that a woman cannot be 'butch' without being considered a lesbian and that men feminise each other for not being 'masculine is destructive imo. It's more about the rights to sell yourself and get your tits out for the lads, it's about the right not to be touched up or laughed at for the sake of a bit of fun for the lads, or for the girls.

    Don't get me wrong, I drink too... Being able to go out and do so does show that feminism has done some good, but don't you think that the fact books like 'men are from mars' are pigeonholing the sexes? Don't you think that people have the right to go around without being objectified for the size of their breasts or dick?

    Even more so (and back on the orignal point)... Why are some women so afraid to be called a 'feminist'? Don't women owe a lot to the people who have brought them so much?

    Edited to add: This still makes a lot of people think it's Ok to whistle at women in the street because often they're mirroring such behaviour instead of saying "please show me some respect, I feel uncomfortable".
  • SkiveSkive Posts: 15,282 Skive's The Limit
    I have issue with your assertion that ladettes only behave like they do because they are copying lads and 'not being themselves'.

    If you want equality you have to accept that women may actually want to behave as badly as men do sometimes.
    Weekender Offender 
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Namaste wrote: »
    Personally I don't believe that there are biologically 'male' or 'female' traits, more that we're socialised in to labelling them like that.

    There are. Higher testosterone levels in men mean they're more competitive and aggressive. Biological things like this have some impact on social roles such as the male being percieved as the "breadwinner" and taking on the role of the leader in male/female relationships.

    And what's this about women acting like men as a form of "survival"?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Although a lot of this thread is very deep and if I'm honest it goes over my head, the reason a lot of women I think don't like to call themselves feminists is because they see feminists not as people who are just trying to promote gender equality but as eople are are trying to denounce men as oppresors and make it an issue of us vs them. I'm only speaking from personal experience, one of my very best friends said she's not a feminist because one of my other friends is, and told her she was 'living up to the male stereotypes emposed on her' by having a boyfriend and not cheating on him etc.

    I think some of the over zealous campaiging which unfortunately sometimes does stretch to hyperbole about 'opressive men' or something about men being rapists may be caused simply by such a feeling of conviction in those who are campaigning for gender equality that they get carried away. I mean, look at the socialists in Russia (I was watching a documentary on this earlier lol, so thats why I brought it up) - they were starving in 1917 and demonstrated, the emporer sent the army on them, they protested more for the ideals of the common good etc. and banded together, overthrew the emporer but then some who felt they'd been opressed too long took it too far and started using people wearing expensive coats for target practice.

    In the same way, sometimes men are used as idealogical punchbags. I mean, germaine greer has openly insulted men in derogatory ways (likening them to monkeys I believe) yet she is one of the most respected feminists in the world. Because when people think of 'feminism' they think of Greer, and those who ARE heard because they shout loudest, who are often the ones who do get carried away and carelessly brand all men rapists who want women as property, the label feminist has, not necessarily become negative, but a cautionary term.

    If someone calls themselves a feminist, I'm always extra careful, because I've had my head bitten off more than once before in normal conversation because of an anecdote that may have included a woman, and someone whos very self righteous feels it's necessary to let everyone know how and why its wrong to say that and how all men are pigs anyway.

    BTW, these overreactionaries should I label them are very definately in the minority. I have one friend out of about 10 close friends, and most people I know are in the moderate / liberal camp in the sense they don't get insensed over women who show off the cleavage because they're conforming to the wants of male society rather than wearing what they want to wear, or something.

    As for the arse pinching - my 2p. Just the way I feel about interpersonal relationships I'd not be happy about it if it was me or something. But as for women who go out and drink or whatever I think thats fair enough. It's not sensible, but they have the CHOICE to do that now. And whats more, they're not looked down upon for it (except by some of those overreactionists who believe they're eroding the foundations of feminism and becoming slaves to men, or something). Well, anyone who is well and truly pissed is looked down upon, male or female.

    But girls shouldn't feel like they're 'letting the side down' if they go out and get drunk and have a laugh, because a lot of people do like to let their hair down on the weekend and act like an idiot and do things they wouldn't normally to escape from the mundanities of normal life where everything is dictated to you. Heh, now I'm getting too deep. But seriously, I think they just want to have a good time and they should be entitled to, whether thats watching hollyoaks reruns with friends a bottle of wine or going clubbing and having drinking competitions with men.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Namaste wrote: »

    B
    eing able to go out and do so does show that feminism has done some good, but don't you think that the fact books like 'men are from mars' are pigeonholing the sexes?

    Pretty much all the greatest psychologists have believed in inherent differences between the sexes (such as Freud and Jung) as do the vast majority of people. Why should a desire to avoid "pigeonholing" get in the way of an almost univerally-accepted truth?

    Interesting you go by the name of 'namaste' when Hinduism & Eastern Mysticism base their understanding of men and women on the duality of masculine & feminine!
    Don't you think that people have the right to go around without being objectified for the size of their breasts or dick?

    So preferring what feels good to women, and looks good to men, is somehow wrong? In a perfect world, you might like everyone to be equally attractive but in the real world, that isn't so and never will be.
    Even more so (and back on the orignal point)... Why are some women so afraid to be called a 'feminist'? Don't women owe a lot to the people who have brought them so much?

    Are they? Maybe they don't agree with feminism in the first place and accept inherent differences as most of us do?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Spliffie wrote: »
    Are they? Maybe they don't agree with feminism in the first place and accept inherent differences as most of us do?
    What's that got to do with feminism? Feminism isn't about denying differences, it's about considering members of both sexes to be of equal worth to society and allowing equal opportunities for both.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What's that got to do with feminism? Feminism isn't about denying differences, it's about considering members of both sexes to be of equal worth to society and allowing equal opportunities for both.

    Feminism (strands on the fringe of the movement aside) promotes the idea that inherent differences between men and women are the result of socialisation enforced by 'hetero-patriarchy'.

    Namaste has already said as much on this thread, and for further confirmation check out feminist contribution to previous threads on feminism.

    No wonder then that a lot women - regardless of the views on equal pay for equal work, and so on - don't want to do have anything to do with it. They don't need to, because believing in that sort of basic legal equality doesn't necessitate becoming a feminist, a movement whose leading lights - deranged lunatics like Dworkin and Greer - have derided men, femininity and motherhood for decades.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Spliffie wrote: »
    Feminism (strands on the fringe of the movement aside) promotes the idea that inherent differences between men and women are the result of socialisation enforced by 'hetero-patriarchy'.

    Feminism promotes the idea that inherent inequalities between men and women are a result of socialisation enforced by 'hetero-patriarchy' not the differences themselves. Otherwise it would be flying in the face of all available scientific evidence. Some feminists may also argue a level of learned behaviour caused by social factors, but I've yet to hear a feminist argument that men and women are biologically identical, and any differences between the two are as a result of nurture. But I find the idea that there is a single definition of feminism about as convincing as there being a single definition of Christianity, communism, or any other social, political or religious theories.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Feminism promotes the idea that inherent inequalities between men and women are a result of socialisation enforced by 'hetero-patriarchy' not the differences themselves. Otherwise it would be flying in the face of all available scientific evidence. Some feminists may also argue a level of learned behaviour caused by social factors, but I've yet to hear a feminist argument that men and women are biologically identical, and any differences between the two are as a result of nurture. But I find the idea that there is a single definition of feminism about as convincing as there being a single definition of Christianity, communism, or any other social, political or religious theories.

    I'll provide some refutation of that tomorrow, but for now I'm off for a pizza. :wave:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Feminism promotes the idea that inherent inequalities between men and women are a result of socialisation enforced by 'hetero-patriarchy' not the differences themselves. Otherwise it would be flying in the face of all available scientific evidence. Some feminists may also argue a level of learned behaviour caused by social factors, but I've yet to hear a feminist argument that men and women are biologically identical, and any differences between the two are as a result of nurture. But I find the idea that there is a single definition of feminism about as convincing as there being a single definition of Christianity, communism, or any other social, political or religious theories.
    Feminism:

    Belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes.

    I think that sums it up pretty well for me. As a previous poster suggested - it may even have been you - feminism should be everyone's default position.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Spliffie wrote: »
    Namaste wrote: »
    Pretty much all the greatest psychologists have believed in inherent differences between the sexes (such as Freud and Jung) as do the vast majority of people. Why should a desire to avoid "pigeonholing" get in the way of an almost univerally-accepted truth?
    Freud also believed that women have 'penis envy' and that boys wanted to sleep with their parents. psychology is very subjective, but using Freud to prove your point???
    Interesting you go by the name of 'namaste' when Hinduism & Eastern Mysticism base their understanding of men and women on the duality of masculine & feminine!
    I really don't understand your point of this statement, or how it is supposed to undermine my arguement somehow or show me to be a hypocrit, if that is what you intend.

    "Namaste" is a Nepali greeting ("Namaskar" is pretty much the same thing) and also is used in some forms of Buddhism, which in my opinion is one of the more egalitarian religions. I use it because I went out to Nepal last year. :) It was a beautiful experience and it reminds me of some amazing people we encountered there.
    Are they? Maybe they don't agree with feminism in the first place and accept inherent differences as most of us do?
    Do you understand what feminism is? What it has brought?

    If you disagree with 'feminism' and what it has achieved, surely then you think that rape isn't anything serious, that women are sexless, that women should not be allowed to work (arguably, there is the WW1 case behind that), that women are not entitled to an abortion... Ect ect

    If you believe women are equal to men, you are a feminist.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Namaste wrote: »
    Spliffie wrote: »
    Freud also believed that women have 'penis envy' and that boys wanted to sleep with their parents. psychology is very subjective, but using Freud to prove your point???

    I'm not using Freud to prove my point; what I'm saying is that just about all the great pyschologists would have found the notion of culture being the root cause of differences between man & woman utterly laughable.

    In any case, didn't you say a while back that opposition to incest is merely a product of Judeo-Christian morality? In which case you'd be agreeing with Freud...and some feminists such as Dworkin.

    Do you understand what feminism is? What it has brought?

    Yes, I'm perfectly aware of what feminism is, and what the various strands of feminist thought promote.
    If you disagree with 'feminism' and what it has achieved, surely then you think that rape isn't anything serious, that women are sexless, that women should not be allowed to work (arguably, there is the WW1 case behind that), that women are not entitled to an abortion... Ect ect

    If you believe women are equal to men, you are a feminist.

    LOL! I can't believe you've suggested not being a feminst equates to considering women sexless and viewing rape as permissible. That's UTTERLY ridiculous. If that's what you truly believe, i'd suggest it's you who has a fundamental misunderstanding of what feminism actually is...

    Considering women equal to men doesn't entail being a feminist either. In an evolutionary sense, of course we equal, because the species requires both sexes to further itself. But that doesn't mean to say that, as two collective groups, both are equal in every field, something which a great many feminists sinces the 60s have claimed to be the case.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Feminism promotes the idea that inherent inequalities between men and women are a result of socialisation enforced by 'hetero-patriarchy' not the differences themselves.

    And did those supposed 'inequalities' come about by chance, or because of those difference in the first place?

    If much of feminist thought hasn't been concerned with dismissing the idea of inherent difference, then why such focus on opposition to the promotion of gender roles and claimed the need to raise boys more like girls, and girls more like boys?

    Some feminists may also argue a level of learned behaviour caused by social factors, but I've yet to hear a feminist argument that men and women are biologically identical, and any differences between the two are as a result of nurture. But I find the idea that there is a single definition of feminism about as convincing as there being a single definition of Christianity, communism, or any other social, political or religious theories.

    Yes, I have acknowledged different strands and already referred to those feminists who accept inherent difference:
    Difference feminism is a philosophy that stresses that men and women are essentially different beings. The movement titled "difference feminism" is comparatively new compared to the feminist movement, and it is criticized by the feminist movement. Difference feminism can stress either the assertion of a fundamental biological difference, or an emotional difference, or both.

    Difference Feminism
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Here's an excellent essay which will help explain to those who wonder why few modern women embrace feminism: http://www.friesian.com/feminism.htm
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    the main problem with feminists is that the most outspoken members of the movement, aren't the people who believe in treating people fairly regardless of sex, its about putting women over men

    well that's the impression i get... might be wrong for example the last one i read was a columist in the guardian effectively saying that a womans accusation of rape is more important than actually determining beyond reasonable doubt, the guilt of the defendent - that is a shamble to the legal system and what you'd see in a banana republic, at least they have cheap food in a banana republic though
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    the main problem with feminists is that the most outspoken members of the movement, aren't the people who believe in treating people fairly regardless of sex, its about putting women over men

    well that's the impression i get... might be wrong for example the last one i read was a columist in the guardian effectively saying that a womans accusation of rape is more important than actually determining beyond reasonable doubt, the guilt of the defendent - that is a shamble to the legal system and what you'd see in a banana republic, at least they have cheap food in a banana republic though

    I post on another messageboard and the topic came up. I defended men because some people were hailing and bigging up this biodeterminist piece of work which was overly harsh on men... Then I basically got accused of sympathising with racists.

    Like wtf?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Spliffie wrote: »
    Namaste wrote: »
    Spliffie wrote: »
    LOL! I can't believe you've suggested not being a feminst equates to considering women sexless and viewing rape as permissible. That's UTTERLY ridiculous. If that's what you truly believe, i'd suggest it's you who has a fundamental misunderstanding of what feminism actually is...

    Considering women equal to men doesn't entail being a feminist either. In an evolutionary sense, of course we equal, because the species requires both sexes to further itself. But that doesn't mean to say that, as two collective groups, both are equal in every field, something which a great many feminists sinces the 60s have claimed to be the case.

    Look at attitudes towards women in the 1940s, then at attitudes today (in the UK) and say that feminism hasn't brought anything for women. It actually has and you cannot deny it. The fact that a lot of people today believe that women are equal is because of feminism and female empowerment. It's just a fact of life. If feminism had never come about, women would not have the rights they have today.

    Too many people are feminists and don't self-define as one, despite holding many feminist views. That's my opinion anyway.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Namaste wrote: »
    Spliffie wrote: »
    Namaste wrote: »

    Look at attitudes towards women in the 1940s, then at attitudes today (in the UK) and say that feminism hasn't brought anything for women. It actually has and you cannot deny it. The fact that a lot of people today believe that women are equal is because of feminism and female empowerment.

    What do you mean 'equal'? It's a vague term. In the evolutionary sense, or in the sense that difference in certain capabilities and inclinations is a product of socialisation?
    It's just a fact of life. If feminism had never come about, women would not have the rights they have today.

    What rights are you talking about?
    Too many people are feminists and don't self-define as one, despite holding many feminist views. That's my opinion anyway.

    You mean most women believe they have a right not to be raped, and should be able to work if they so desire? Hardly feminist monopolies of thought, are they? Other than those beliefs - which have been around long before the '60s - I know few women who would agree with little else feminists have been promoting (such as the idea of cultural determinism and the subsequent need to become masculinised, refusing to take their husband's name or wear a ring etc etc).

    Have you read the link I posted btw? It will explain a lot.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What do you mean 'equal'? It's a vague term. In the evolutionary sense, or in the sense that difference in certain capabilities and inclinations is a product of socialisation?
    That's a good point. I believe that it really would depend on what feminist you talk to, her nationality, her religion and so on.

    What do you mean 'evolutionary sense'? Do you mean the biological differences between men and women as pure fact (e.g. the objective physical aspects) or as in the idea that one sex is more 'evolved' than others?

    My personal experience and I don't speak for every feminist is that it is looking at the negative aspects of patriarchy in society and how deeply ingrained it is in to our culture. It also looks at policy change, laws, the media and so on.
    What rights are you talking about?
    The right to their own bodies, the right to birth control, the right to report both sexual violence and domestic violence incidents, the right to vote, the right to equal pay, the right to report being sexually harassed.
    You mean most women believe they have a right not to be raped, and should be able to work if they so desire? Hardly feminist monopolies of thought, are they?
    I disagree.
    Other than those beliefs - which have been around long before the '60s - I know few women who would agree with little else feminists have been promoting (such as the idea of cultural determinism and the subsequent need to become masculinised, refusing to take their husband's name or wear a ring etc etc).
    Yup, feminist thought has been around long before that (e.g. Wollstonecraft). The latter part of what you say though and all due respect, panders to stereotypes put out about feminists. You don't have to be a stone butch lesbian to be a feminist, nor do you have to refuse to take your husband's name. Sure, some women will do that because they feel like it... But it is about choice, not about moral obligation to a 'sisterhood'.
    Have you read the link I posted btw? It will explain a lot.

    Will do
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    the womens rights movement has come a long way and has a long way to go still...

    noone deserves to be raped either, and people should get paid equal amounts for equal qualities and amounts of work

    personally i think a lot of the issues women face regarding children and work would be better served by providing equal paternity and maternity rights at work (at the moment they're different) they should only differ in the recovery time after actually giving birth of course - this would help by shifting attitudes so it would be assumed less that if a woman has a kid that shes going to be the main child carer

    a lot of feminist issues can be resolved or at least helped by not looking at them in a feminist perspective but by being a bit broader in perspective - like altering other womens attitudes, not mens and providing a more equal and fairer system overall
Sign In or Register to comment.