The official feminism thread [Merged threads]

[Luveno]

Does anyone else see the irony in feminist theory, which is about equality of all human beings regardless of traits, being called feminist theory?

 

[learningtopimp]

Feminism, like any movement, is not perfect. Definetely, we can see some of it's problems in the way some women act. Expecting equal rights but not responsibilities is an issue.

But, at the same time, it has advanced US society in certain ways, like was said earlier, just examine the countries without these movements and where they are. They cut out half the population and have a whole slew of problems. I read a lot about how Asian women are supposed to be more feminine and submissive. This may be true, but also realize that women in lots of Asian countries save Japan have had advancement and would eat most American males alive in competition for certain jobs, especially those that require more intellect. The number who come to study here from elsewhere is a great example of this.

Women wanting to be able to work or get equal pay may seem unreasonable to some, but it's good for the society as a whole in advancing. I have a feeling a lot of the guys who are blaming feminists for their lack of women success or problems with women DO make some legitimate points, but definetely others are only trying to excuse or explain their biterness or jealousy at their lack of success, which has probably more to do with themselves or the type of women they are attracted to than with feminism.

Psychologically, some of our own impulse to blame is becuase of our percieved shortcomings. Same thing with the guys who yearn for foreign women. Some are genieunvly fed up with the antics of American women, which is more than understandable. But just as many lack the confidence or ability to handle a woman with any independence or opinion, and should recognize this rather than just deluding themselves about feminists or american women. Feminism, like any other movement, is not perfect and has had both its positives and negatives, and I understand some of the points against it, but for those of you who have sisters or female relatives ( I assume all of you), I hope that you would at least support feminism in the sense that they can pursue a career if they want to.

 

[alboh]

Originally posted by BGMan
Kinsey was himself a pervert (child molester) and was gay, and he did his studies on men convicted for sexual crimes and made them out as average men. Because of this, his report is wildly inaccurate, and would be almost funny in a sick sort of way if so many people didn't actually believe it.

Kinsey has been the subject of lots of character assasination as of late from the religious right. Do a google search of kinsey and pervent and every website you find will be along the lines of "christianvalues.org" etc. Of course it is easier to call someone a pervert than challenge his findings. You're right BG, we should all be ashamed of our sexuality. I guess I am a pervert as well then.

 

[Virtú]

The benefit of feminism that I see is the creation of a generation of women that aren't parasites.

They earn their own money.
You don't have to take responsibility for them.
They don't want children.

Helplessness and neediness are not attractive traits, and feminism has gotten rid of a lot of them.

 

[diplomatic_lie]

Originally posted by penkitten
this can be sexual harrassment either way. men can sue the company and the woman just like a woman could sue the company and the man.
everyone has to realise that sexual harrassment goes both ways.

so if you have an ugly fat boss who backs you into a corner, do not be chicken to say "get off me bi+ch"

But how well would this stand in court, compared with when a guy gets sued for "harrassing" a woman?

I see nothing wrong with lighthearted flirting in the workplace, and I wouldn't go and sue someone for doing that to me (even if she was a fat ugly thing that looks like Peter Jackson), but I find it a little odd how quick women are to call sexual harrassment when a guy looks at her.

 

[alboh]

Diplomatic -- are they really so quick to do that? Are there any actual stats? I just don't think that most women would waste her time or risk the backlash of filing a sexual harassment claim unless it was serious. Filing a claim in the first place is a huge risk and will probably result in alot of animosity from your employer.

I agree that a guy flirting with a girl or something is not sexual harassment, unless it is frequent and unwelcome. But on the other hand there's the realm of sleazyness -- saying "___ sure has a nice ass" (this sh1t happened to my mom alot in the 70s when she was among the first wave of women breaking into the journalism business), groping, asking innapropriate questions etc. This cr@p still occurs, I've seen it in the offices I've worked at on summer breaks and such.

There's also the issue of women with equal or better qualifications being turned down for promotions. Right now there's a giant lawsuit against Wal Mart in the States for this.

 

[BGMan]

Originally posted by alboh
Kinsey has been the subject of lots of character assasination as of late from the religious right. Do a google search of kinsey and pervent and every website you find will be along the lines of "christianvalues.org" etc. Of course it is easier to call someone a pervert than challenge his findings. You're right BG, we should all be ashamed of our sexuality. I guess I am a pervert as well then.

Likewise with Joe McCarthy from the left. Only McCarthy was telling the truth. And saying that a pervert who said that homosexuality, infidelity, and so forth was widespread is full of crap has nothing to do with "being ashamed of your sexuality".

BGMan

 

[Sexy_Malibu]

Originally posted by BGMan
Likewise with Joe McCarthy from the left. Only McCarthy was telling the truth. And saying that a pervert who said that homosexuality, infidelity, and so forth was widespread is full of crap has nothing to do with "being ashamed of your sexuality".

BGMan

LOL. Are you saying that homosexuality and infidelity aren't widespread? Where do YOU live?

 

[BGMan]

Originally posted by Sexy_Malibu
LOL. Are you saying that homosexuality and infidelity aren't widespread? Where do YOU live?

No. WEREN'T. As in, when the Kinsey "Report" was written.

Geez... some people come off as dumber than a box of rocks sometimes. Next time, actually read what I and Alboh were talking about, preferably twice so you'll understand, before you make your silly comments.

BGMan

 

[Sexy_Malibu]

Originally posted by BGMan
No. WEREN'T. As in, when the Kinsey "Report" was written.

Geez... some people come off as dumber than a box of rocks sometimes. Next time, actually read what I and Alboh were talking about, preferably twice so you'll understand, before you make your silly comments.

BGMan

Take a joke man.

But...

If you agree that homosexuality and infidelity are widespread now, what makes you think that it was so different then? The difference was not that it wasn't happening, but that it wasn't talked about. You don't have to trust Kinsey to know that, just use common sense.

 

[Acheron]

Originally posted by alboh
Kinsey has been the subject of lots of character assasination as of late from the religious right. Do a google search of kinsey and pervent and every website you find will be along the lines of "christianvalues.org" etc. Of course it is easier to call someone a pervert than challenge his findings. You're right BG, we should all be ashamed of our sexuality. I guess I am a pervert as well then.

Dude,

You seem to have the nasty habit of putting words in everyone's mouth. I mean, "we should all be ashamed of our sexuality"? Wtf? BGMan didn't say anything of the sort. He merely criticized Kinsey's methodology, which many other disinterested parties have done. I guess, though, that you're conditioned to reflexively step in with a progressive cliché upon encountering anyone who's less enlightened.

 

[MysteryWoman]

You also stated that it is ok for men to f-ck around but not for women. I think you should think this statement through. I hear it all the time from women and quite frankly it doesn't make any sense. How can you blame men for this? Can you really blame a guy for not wanting a woman who f-cks around? Maybe he just wants someone he can trust. We all know that you can't trust someone who ****s around a lot. So why as a woman would you want a guy that ****s around? Why do you even go for that kind of guy? Shouldn't you as a woman say it is WRONG for a guy to be that way. Isn't it up to you as a woman to MAKE it wrong for a guy to be that way? That is the problem here. It is your problem as a woman for being so stupid. You can't blame men for something that YOU are not doing.

As a feminst woman, you are NOT told to be picky and to be smart. You are told to be just like the worst of all the men. The very men that you can't trust yourslef. You are told that you should **** around just like they do. And then you have the NERVE to blame the problem on men! Well F_CK YOU YOU DUMB ASS B-TCH! you are a dirty ass wh-re for even making that stat-ment. If it bothers you that some men **** around and get away with it then it is because you just want to f-ck around yourself and get away with it. Admit it! you just want to **** around. say it again with me, "I just want to **** around". well.. don't expect a good guy who has any respect to take you serious for a LTR. after all, "you just want to **** around"

one of the reasons women get into relationships where their guy cheets on them is because they where not picky enough. They became for some stupid reason attracted to "the player".

men are not that stupid. if we want an LTR we won't go for a sl-t"
it is so f-cken simple, but this b-tch can't even understand that concept. would some here please f-ck her and shut her up?


but yeah.. there is one benefit to feminism. It creates a bunch of women that just want to **** around for all the men that want to do the same. [/B][/QUOTE]


Steady on!

 

[Tha Realnezz]

Men & women are clearly not equals.Women who understand that live easier lives.

 

[penkitten]

son, feminism is a cult and much like any other cult, cults are bad...

 

[BGMan]

Originally posted by Sexy_Malibu
Take a joke man.

If you had added a smiley such as then maybe I would have reacted differently. In the context it sounded as if you were dead serious and mocking me, like Alboh just did.

Originally posted by Sexy_Malibu
But...

If you agree that homosexuality and infidelity are widespread now, what makes you think that it was so different then? The difference was not that it wasn't happening, but that it wasn't talked about. You don't have to trust Kinsey to know that, just use common sense.

I think it's much worse now than it was back then. When it's considered okay, then naturally people are more likely to do it than if everyone thinks or is told that it's not.

Although, I am in no way saying that homosexuality and infidelity were nonexistent. By no means. (Ozzie and Harriet are idealizations.) For instance, when my grandmother was a young woman, she got date proposals from three different guys. She had a funny feeling about two of the guys, and backed off. Turned out that both of them were married, with children (one had one, the other had four!) Grandma was like, WTF?! (or whatever they said back then!) As for the third guy, he became my granddad.

BGMan

 

[Sexy_Malibu]

I think it's much worse now than it was back then. When it's considered okay, then naturally people are more likely to do it than if everyone thinks or is told that it's not.

Yeah. But that's like saying that people are gay because "it's okay to be gay". That's just not the way it works. People are gay because they are gay. Whether they are in denial of it or whether they ACT on it... might depend on societal norms, etc... but it doesn't make them any LESS gay.

(And um... how did this thread change topics so drastically? Let's go back to saying how those man-hating femi-nazis are ruining the world... I'm much more equipped to respond to that )

 

[ogre]

THER ARE NO BENEFITS TO FEMINISM

Feminism has ruined my life. My mother was a big fat liberal feminist fruitcake. her nagging drove my father to drink, smoke, drugs, and then eventually death. My father was a skinny little wuss who didn't know what cajones were for.

I was a classic case of what happens when a male grows up in a feminist environemnt. Emotionally castrated, self-esteem in the toilet, maturity of an 8-year old, spanking my monkey and worshipping Women as unattainable Goddess. Although there were dating books available in print, get this: I was too ashamed of my own sexuality to even buy a book.

I hate feminists and feminism for what it did to me. I'm not politically correct and I don't wanna be. I have no problem sharing my opinions either. if they don't like it FINE. Buzz off!

somewhere around age 21, I started to realize that there was something seriously wrong with my belief system, but what that was I didn't figure out until maybe 10 years later. now I'm 40 and I have the maturity level of a 25 year old. So I'm catching up but I still have a ways to go.

let me offer these links to websites that have really been helpful to me in my recovery from feminism:

http://www.savethemales.ca

http://www.heretical.com
(note: this site may be down due to the ADL thought police hacking it off the net)

 

[BGMan]

Originally posted by Sexy_Malibu
Yeah. But that's like saying that people are gay because "it's okay to be gay". That's just not the way it works. People are gay because they are gay. Whether they are in denial of it or whether they ACT on it... might depend on societal norms, etc... but it doesn't make them any LESS gay.

(And um... how did this thread change topics so drastically? Let's go back to saying how those man-hating femi-nazis are ruining the world... I'm much more equipped to respond to that )

Hey, don't look at me!

BGMan

 

[MVPlaya]

Originally posted by Sexy_Malibu
What's really humorous to ME, is that most of these women who will say "Oh well I'm a feminist" most likely has NO IDEA what it means to be a feminist. That is, I doubt she's familiar with ANY feminist theory at all.

I on the other hand, HAVE read a lot on the subject. While I can say I agree with many key points brought up by various 'kinds' of feminists... I wouldn't dare fox-hole myself into the category of "I'm a feminist". It's just stupid in my opinion.

To me, 'feminist' isn't a noun, it's an adjective... and a very vague, varied one at that.

So what feminist theorists have you read, Malibu?

 

[MVPlaya]

It seems that a lot of people tend to have some fairly strong misconceptions about human sexuality and society's increasing openness to the act of sex.

Firstly, many people believe that it is only "suddenly" that social interactions are beginning to revolve around sex and that this is only a feature of modern society. People believe that this new sexuality has developed only after the sexual revolution of the 60's. This, by itself, is completely false. First of all, if you look at the 50's, which many stereotype as that idyllic age of sexual prudence and social conservatism, American men and women had plenty of sexual partners and tended to be fairly sexually experienced. Look for the Kinsey report, Kinsey was a psychologist/sociologist in the 50's who interviewed tens of thousands of couples on their sex lives and compiled a book known as the Kinsey Report, where he summarized his findings. His work is apparently being made into a Hollywood movie, should be out in theaters if you're interested. A lot of people criticize people for his methodology, his sample included people who were primarily upper middle class White Americans, and there was the inclusion of prisoners in his survey, yet studies into Kinsey's have shown that even when you factor out most of the controversial material, the conclusion remains relatively similar. Besides, the prisoner/sex-offender portion of his sampling population was statistically negligible.

Second of all, open sexuality is not a feature new to the post-1950's era. Racy sex poems can be found in classic Latin literature where poets talk, in detail, about what they want to do to their lovers. Scriptures of these poems have been found in public forums in Roman ruins, showing that society was accepting or understanding of sexuality. Seneca himself wrote about how noble women looked at gladiators as sex objects and wrote on the sexual objectification of gladiators, both men and women. Women gladiators, btw, often kept their left breast uncovered to please the audience, and were depicted as half-naked in the official invitations and later depictions of fights. Even games, such as the Olympics in Greece, were known for turning into sexual orgies at times.

But also, look to the Victorian age, a simple example to point to is the works of William Shakespeare. In EVERY SINGLE ONE of Shakespeare's works you will found countless allusions to sex and simple crude sex jokes. Shakespeare's plays are filled with these, completely filled with them, take a Shakespearean Lit class with a real professor and you will see that quickly enough. These plays of his were designed for the common audience, who was understanding of the sexual humor involved and often rowdy in their responses there to. In fact, the majority of renaissance and victorian love poetry was not "romance" and all that "how do I love thee, let me count the ways" crap. In fact, countless scholars have said how these poems were meant to seduce women, how they operated as preludes to one night stands. Several poems made blatant references to how the poets themselves new where in the city they could find ass, they called it "hind," meaning that they knew the spots in the city to pick up chicks.

Victorian society in England was also very open about sexuality. During the Victorian era people did not stop talking about sex and it did not become socially taboo, instead people started talking about it more, a LOT more. People didn't simply talk about the act of sex, but everything surrounding it: People talked about how they felt before sex, during sex, after sex; about what they wanted to do in sex, what they dreamed about, what they fantasized about, what they did prior to sex, what they did after the sex, how they felt during and after, who they did it with, who they wanted to do it with, etc. See, during the Victorian age, another institution was being born as social sexuality was supposedly being suppressed: the confessional. Religion became extremely interested in sex and the confessional became more and more focused on this aspect of our lives.

The act of the confessional did not stay in religion either, it spread throughout many parts of society and Victorian England became a “confessional-based society.” Psychiatry was very interested in sex and everything else you could have told them. Sexual health, reproduction, and attitudes became a strong focus for the medical establishment.

Essentially, what this means is that the social dialectic has always focused on sex and that people wanting sex, people playing women, and people being promiscuous are not new things that our generations are discovering, they have been around for ages. A lot of people believe in these myths about the good old conservative days that are based on popular misconceptions about sexuality.

If you're interested in this topic, I highly recommend reading Foucault's History of Sexuality, Part I (and Part II if you're committed).