Modern Feminists - aren't playing with a full deck, they have a 3.

[SlayerFest]

Lastly the ''Can't we tell THIS was written by a man!'' comment was uncalled for, but again further strengthens the argument that modern feminism in the western world is not concerned with equality, as it is somehow deemed acceptable to say such things, and indeed look kindly upon such sexist condescension.
Put yourself in my shoes, Imagine I wrote to you ''Can't we tell THIS was written by a woman!'' in response to your post?
Would I be able to get away with that, without rightly being called out as a bigot?

I agree that, that was a bit uncalled for. To me feminism is about men and women having equal rights, not that women are better than men or anything silly like that. It is about equality. I feel like you're implying that modern feminists believe that women are superior to men, and I've gotta tell you, the majority of us do not feel that way.

 

[Cast No Shadow]

If I were discriminated against for being xyz I sure as hell would make sure my ex-employer get a healthy dose of legal medicine.

Fighting the likes of this is exactly what I agree with.




Women don't have as great an interest in politics: I'm not just spouting opinionated nonsense.
http://apr.sagepub.com/content/17/1/105.short
Although women now vote in national elections at the same rate as men, they are still less politically interested. Using regression analysis and two new scales to tap an orientation toward women's place in the public arena (Traditional Feminine Role Scale) and political interest (Political Apathy Scale), this article seeks to test the utility of the three standard explanations for women's political orientations (situational, structural, and sex-role socialization) in understanding the continuing "gender gap" in political interest.

Men don't have as great an interest in Fashion, therefore men are under-represented in fashion and the fashion industry, an industry, I presume that is female dominated.

Men don't have as great an interest in nursing, therefore there are more females in the nursing business etc.

men don't have as great an interest in the perfume industry, therefore, I presume, that is another female dominated industry.

This does not appear to be discrimination, just what different genders are interested in, how our different minds work.

I whole-heartedly welcome more women to get involved in politics, I'm actually a personal semi-fan of a female politican in Ireland.

Again, utterly ridiculous. Women are just as interested as men, citing an academic article doesn't make it true. I'm sure given the time, I could do the exact same thing and find one voting in favour of women's political interest.

And when it comes to fashion, give me a break. Christian Louboutin, Marc Jacobs, Christian Dior, Yves St. Laurent, Ben De Lisi, Julian MacDonald, Louis Vuitton...males dominate the fashion industry!

 

[Sweet J]

This woman is not in any way an accurate representation of what feminism is; it is a collective effort by both males and female to support and rally for equal rights everywhere.

I agree that is what the true spirit of feminism is about, I'm not arguing that, nor am I expressing equality is a bad thing, on the contrary. However what I am saying is that Modern feminism appears to have taken a bizarre turn in recent years and transformed into a bit of an abomination.

In thread post #19 I give another example of how messed up feminist thinking has become.


''Getting back to a lot Modern Feminists not having full deck:
Maybe, I should say 'radical feminists', although many are considered mainstream.
http://blacklikemoi.com/2012/03/afr...r-says-she-rejects-her-moms-radical-feminism/
''

 

[This Year's Girl]

I agree that is what the true spirit of feminism is about, I'm not arguing that, nor am I expressing equality is a bad thin. Modern feminism however appears to have taken a bizarre turn in recent years and transformed into a bit of an abomination.

In thread post #19 I give another example of how messed up feminist thinking has become.


''Getting back to a lot Modern Feminists not having full deck:
Maybe, I should say 'radical feminists'
http://blacklikemoi.com/2012/03/afr...r-says-she-rejects-her-moms-radical-feminism/
''

But, as [MENTION=11317]Cast No Shadow[/MENTION] says, you can't just find random articles and think that they are proofs of what an entire movement is about. When you're doing that it just seems like you want to convey that feminism isn't a good thing, reffering to the very vague idea of "modern feminism out of control" (what do you mean with "modern feminism"?). And at the same time you say that you agree with what the core of feminism is. It's really contradictive.

 

[Sweet J]

I agree that, that was a bit uncalled for. To me feminism is about men and women having equal rights, not that women are better than men or anything silly like that. It is about equality. I feel like you're implying that modern feminists believe that women are superior to men, and I've gotta tell you, the majority of us do not feel that way.

I agree, as a feminist too and I'm aghast at what some modern feminists come out with. But it's more sinister than me simply being alienated, as I fear that this crazy abomination of feminism is casting a bad light on equality worldwide, essentially scuttling efforts by true feminists to create a more equitable world.

---------- Post added at 08:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:34 AM ----------

Again, utterly ridiculous. Women are just as interested as men, citing an academic article doesn't make it true. I'm sure given the time, I could do the exact same thing and find one voting in favour of women's political interest.

You called me chauvinistic and ignorant for what I said, then I cite an academic article supporting what I said...and somehow I guess I'm still ignorant?

And when it comes to fashion, give me a break. Christian Louboutin, Marc Jacobs, Christian Dior, Yves St. Laurent, Ben De Lisi, Julian MacDonald, Louis Vuitton...males dominate the fashion industry!

phew I'm so glad I said 'I presume' the fashion industry was female dominated! I confess, I'm totally ignorant of the fashion industry.

I was using, Fashion,Nursing, Perfume etc. as examples of things that I presumed are female dominated because women are more interested in them.

oh look I just found that female doctors will outnumber male doctors in the NHS.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8077083.stm

 

[SlayerOfVampyrs]

There seems to be a lot going on this board recently having to do with the question of "equality" and/or equal rights. Or maybe that's just me.

At any rate, I didn't read EVERY single post in this thread, I read the first page, and most of the second page, some of the third, and skimmed the rest. I would just like to say to [MENTION=11786]Sweet J[/MENTION] the following: Equality is NOT just about making the laws and legislation recognize women as actual human beings. Sure, strict laws against gender discrimination, rape, etc., have been around in the western world for a while. That is not being disputed against. What equalists want, what feminists want, is for EVERY MALE (or repressed woman,) to see all women, everywhere, as human beings, instead of just baby machines, maids, secretaries, etc. And unfortunately, you can throw all the legislation at people who don't view women this way that you want, it doesn't mean they follow it, nor does it mean that they don't teach those around them to think in the same way they do. I've met male feminists, and I've met male bigots. I've met female feminists, just like I've met females who act and think as though we are still in the 50's. I've had debates, meeting of minds, with all of these people - Even after so many debates, though, I still cannot even begin to see the reasoning for the 'bigoted' way of thinking. (Bigot referring to males as well as females.) Is it possible to change the mind of someone who is hardcore into this way of thinking? Perhaps not. Or perhaps, it really is. Perhaps someone who is for equality will present these arguments in a way they never thought of them before. Just because it's possible that it won't work is NO reason not to try. If everyone simply didn't try simply because failure was a possibility, this world would never go ANYWHERE.

I don't think that any equalist, feminist, whatever it is you like to call them, expects it all to happen overnight. (Though it would be amazing, don't get me wrong.) However, it IS possible that we could muffle the bigoted views little by little, until eventually, our sons and daughters, are entirely shocked to discover that a world in which those views existed. And that is what 'equality' and 'feminism' means to me, and that is what I think a good bulk of them are aiming for. Not more legislation and laws to tell them these things are wrong, but an active change in society and mindset.

That is all.

 

[david4wt]

I'd really like you guys to watch this documentary. It deals with how women are portrayed in italian television. I'm sure that everyone will find it interesting. Especially [MENTION=10175]This Year's Girl[/MENTION] 🙂 Oh and [MENTION=11292]kittenpoker[/MENTION] this is the documentary where I got the quote I wrote in the other thread when I quoted you 🙂
It's in italian with english subtitles, it's only 20 minutes long.

WOMEN BODIES. This project took off as a matter of urgency. It all started with the observation that women–real women–are an endangered species on television, one that is being replaced by a grotesque, vulgar and humiliating representation.
We sensed the enormity of this loss: the erasure of women’s identity is happening right before our eyes, but without a proper reaction, not even from women themselves.
This led us to select television images that share a common manipulative exploitation of the woman’s body, to let people know what is happening–not only people who never watch television, but especially those who watch it but “don’t see.”
Our aim is to ask ourselves questions, and to pose questions about the reason behind this erasure, a real “pogrom” of which all of us are silent spectators.Our project grants special attention to the erasure of adult faces on television, to the use of plastic surgery to erase any sign of the passage of time, and to the social consequences of this erasure.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y42hqlTmM00"]WOMEN'S BODIES - www.ilcorpodelledonne.com - Subtitled english version of "Il Corpo delle Donne" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Cast No Shadow]

You called me chauvinistic and ignorant for what I said, then I cite an academic article supporting what I said...and somehow I guess I'm still ignorant?

Ergh, I had this problem with another member recently. I didn't call you chauvinistic, I said your opinion was. You're probably just lovely, and regardless of whether I like your opinion or not, you have every right to have it. Saying I think your opinion is ignorant doesn't mean that I think you're ignorant on the whole.

And citing an academic article doesn't automatically mitigate those things. I could cite academic articles saying that gay marriage is wrong, that doesn't make them correct, and doesn't make it fact. It's just someone with a bit of academic prowess stating their opinion. They're just as likely to be wrong as the rest of us. Back it up with hard facts, and maybe I'll agree.

 

[Bluebird]

phew I'm so glad I said 'I presume' the fashion industry was female dominated! I confess, I'm totally ignorant of the fashion industry.

I was using, Fashion,Nursing, Perfume etc. as examples of things that I presumed are female dominated because women are more interested in them.

Presumptions, and general prejudice, are usually why people get discriminated against in the first place...

My opinion on this is that this argument is invalid. Seems to be an opinion on feminism based on one article about one women. And, to me, the tone of her writing isn't angry, it's more in exasperation at the reaction it received.

 

[Skytteflickan88]

Wow, taht second article pissed me off. Not Penny, but Venker. She has a weird view on feminism and I commented on that. Not sure when the comments will show up. Another comment to the article pointed out that Penny wasn't at all that anti-man as Venker made her seem. It was somewhat taken out of context.

Here's the original article:

http://gawker.com/5899046/ryan-gosl...-war-in-the-middle-east-so-everyone-calm-down

 

[Sweet J]

As many have mentioned I seemingly am focusing on only two feminists, I thought I'd take the opportunity to give some more examples of the insanity of Modern Radical Feminist thinking-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/15/suzanne-moore-time-to-get-angry?INTCMP=SRCH

It appears that in a great deal of this Modern Feminism Patriarchy is considered to be a cancer rooted so deeply in our culture that even the language with which we speak and think reinforces male dominance: the word history rather than herstory is merely one example. Entire branches of human knowledge, such as history and science, must be reconstructed because its research is patriarchial. A prime example of this is the scientific method which emphasizes evidence and replicable results over personal experience; this constitutes another male attempt to dominate nature, rather than remain open to it.

In her book Our Blood, Andrea Dworkin, one of the loudest voices against patriarchy, explains the scope of this much anticipated gender revolution:

"In order to stop...systematic abuses against us, we must destroy these very definitions of masculinity and femininity, of men and women...We must destroy the very structure of culture as we know it, its art, its churches, its laws."

Feminists, such as Ruth Hubbard and Evelyn Fox Keller, criticize traditional scientific discourse as being historically biased towards a male perspective
Hubbard, Ruth (1990). The Politics of Women's Biology. Rutgers University Press.

The above arguments sound absurd...until you realize that radical Postfeminists are almost the only women in the feminist movement speaking out in the western world.

Any ideology that promotes "lifelong victimhood" is a self-fulfilling prophecy. No thanks.

Why treat radical feminists any different to any other form of irrational bigot?

As a True Feminist, one who beleives in gender equality I for one view this radical form of feminism as absolute poppy-cock and due to it's irrational anti-scientific nature it is hindering the process of creating an entire world free from gender discrimination.

 

[Skytteflickan88]

Sweet J agrees: Penny -''But as a feminist...and a gentlewoman of fortune, I refuse to be cast in any sort of boring supporting female role,'' Wtf? someone saves your life, so you go on the web to essentially say ''I refuse to acknowledge being saved by a man''

This is kind of dumb to say, but her main point in the article was that she thought it was silly that it got such big attention that a star saved a mortal(I think that's harmless attention, but I haven't read the article's read) and I don't think she meant that she had issues with men saving women, just that the story got such big focus. I realize how what she said could be misinterpreted as being man-hating, but after reading the whole article, I don't think she meant it that way. Maybe the article's she got pissed of off made a big deal about her being a woman and that made her phrase it that way? Either way, Venker's article was out of line.

 

[david4wt]

[MENTION=11786]Sweet J[/MENTION] the video is about italian television. And "since Buffy is an attractive character, that means BtVS is a sexist show." is absolutely never suggested in that video!

 

[Sweet J]

I'd really like you guys to watch this documentary. It deals with how women are portrayed in italian television. I'm sure that everyone will find it interesting. Especially [MENTION=10175]This Year's Girl[/MENTION] 🙂 Oh and [MENTION=11292]kittenpoker[/MENTION] this is the documentary where I got the quote I wrote in the other thread when I quoted you 🙂
It's in italian with english subtitles, it's only 20 minutes long.



WOMEN'S BODIES - [url]www.ilcorpodelledonne.com - Subtitled english version of "Il Corpo delle Donne" - YouTube[/url]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_Chauvinist_Pigs
''Levy takes issue with women who make their way in a man's world by playing by men's rules. Sometimes, she argues, these women even make their fame and fortune by objectifying other women; for example, Levy finds it interesting that the Playboy organization was run by a woman, Christie Hefner, Hugh Hefner's daughter.''

The whole ''I'm being objectified by men'' victimhood story is again a great example of how warped modern feminism has become. How has this anything to do with equal rights?

Gender equality and enforcing anti-discrimination laws is where I stand as a 'feminist' but going any further than that is an exercise in indulging neurotic paranoia.

At 18:50 in your italian video we hear the narrator stating that women nowadays are nothing more than pretty borders, she says they're treated as nothing more than ''furniture'', then we see a few pics of women standing off of center. Lol, what about Male dancers who surround Madonna at her concerts? Are they furniture too?
Are they being treated as objects?

This is clearly baseless paranoid nonsense and is crippling efforts to made an equitable world, this is the reason why I made this thread, to discuss the abomination that is modern western world Feminism.

 

[Buffy Summers]

I think Madonna would give an enthusiastic "hell yeah" if you asked her if she objectifies the men in her shows...

 

[Sweet J]

I think Madonna would give an enthusiastic "hell yeah" if you asked her if she objectifies the men in her shows...

It's an act, the men are there out of their own free will, just as the women in the italian video are. Furthermore if you agree that objectification is horrible and you agree with the paranoid viewpoint presented in the Italian video then why isn't there likewise similar videos and petitions to stop Madonna from objectifying her male dancers?

This is the kind of muddy illogical feminist thinking I've been talking about, it's crippling the very real and urgent need for more countries to adopt equitable gender laws.

 

[This Year's Girl]

It looks like you've allready made up your mind how you feel about feminism [MENTION=11786]Sweet J[/MENTION]. People have made some really good points but I feel like you're not really listening and keep going back to things people have allready prover to be false. And for the record, talking about discrimination and injusticies like objectification and unfair representation does not make one a victim. It makes one very much NOT a victim since you're talking about it to change it, being very active.

Anyway. It is very frustrating to read this thread, so I'm going to stay out of this thread from now on. Nothing against you personally, just your view on the subject.

Have fun discussing everyone! 🙂

 

[Buffy Summers]

It's an act, the men are there out of their own free will, just as the women in the italian video are. Furthermore if you agree that objectification is horrible and you agree with the paranoid viewpoint presented in the Italian video then why isn't there likewise similar videos and petitions to stop Madonna from objectifying her male dancers?

This is the kind of muddy illogical feminist thinking I've been talking about, it's crippling the very real and urgent need for more countries to adopt equitable gender laws.

Please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't give my viewpoint on any of those things, I just made a statement. Also, I do not consider myself a feminist, so my thinking is my own.

There *might* be petitions about Madonna's shows, I don't know. You were the one who brought that up, not me. But as for what is crippling the adoption of gender equitable laws, I think statements such as "women aren't in politics more because they aren't interested in it" does more damage than saying Madonna objectifies the male dancers in her shows...

 

[Sweet J]

Please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't give my viewpoint on any of those things, I just made a statement. Also, I do not consider myself a feminist, so my thinking is my own.
But as for what is crippling the adoption of gender equitable laws, I think statements such as "women aren't in politics more because they aren't interested in it" does more damage than saying Madonna objectifies the male dancers in her shows...

I also know that Women are under-represented in politics in just about every western country, but this is not out of discrimination, but seemingly out of a female lack of interest.
.

Women don't have as great an interest in politics: I'm not just spouting opinionated nonsense.
http://apr.sagepub.com/content/17/1/105.short
Although women now vote in national elections at the same rate as men, they are still less politically interested. Using regression analysis and two new scales to tap an orientation toward women's place in the public arena (Traditional Feminine Role Scale) and political interest (Political Apathy Scale), this article seeks to test the utility of the three standard explanations for women's political orientations (situational, structural, and sex-role socialization) in understanding the continuing "gender gap" in political interest.

I whole-heartedly welcome more women to get involved in politics, I'm actually a personal semi-fan of a female politican in Ireland.

As the article rigorously backs up, there is a 'gender gap' in political interest. That is clearly real, not a statement born out of ignorance or prejudice. So I don't know how you can construe this very real gender gap issue as being responsible for hindering the adoption of more equitable gender laws worldwide?
Men are generally more into cars and politics then women. Therefore it stands to reason that they'd be more represented in Car & political clubs. This is not something to attack as untrue, or hinting that women could have more representation in governments, or in car clubs, if they ''tried harder'' as someone mentioned earlier.

I'd imagine if the same kind of study was done on a country vs country comparison basis it might find that say for example, Americans of all genders are more politically interested than Canadians, Does that mean Canadian people need to ''try harder'' or they're somehow inferior to Americans because they care less for politics? Course not. They're just into different things.

http://volokh.com/2011/02/15/the-gender-gap-in-interest-in-politics/

On the other hand contradictory double standards about objectification certainly do hinder the adoption of equitable laws. How can a position possibly be taken seriously if it contradicts itself and is anti-scientific?

''In her book Our Blood, Andrea Dworkin, one of the loudest voices against patriarchy, explains the scope of this much anticipated gender revolution:

"In order to stop...systematic abuses against us, we must destroy these very definitions of masculinity and femininity, of men and women...We must destroy the very structure of culture as we know it, its art, its churches, its laws."

Feminists, such as Ruth Hubbard and Evelyn Fox Keller, criticize traditional scientific discourse as being historically biased towards a male perspective
Hubbard, Ruth (1990). The Politics of Women's Biology. Rutgers University Press.''


But most interestingly, I'm intrigued to know more about why you do not consider yourself to be a feminist? that is certainly different.

 

[Sweet J]

[MENTION=11846]Vamp Jenny[/MENTION] disagrees: The car thing is only a stereotype that is still overused by car sellers. Women may not "seem" into cars but they love them just as much -if not sometimes more - than men do.

The data affirms that western women are generally less interested in politics than men:
http://multivu.prnewswire.com/mnr/harrisinteractive/44732/

Women are more likely than men to read mystery, thrillers and crime novels (57% versus 39%), romance (37%) vs. (3%), chick-lit (12% vs. 4%) and religious books (30% vs. 21%). Men, on the other hand, are more likely to read science fiction (32% vs. 20%), history books (40% vs. 23%), political books (25% vs. 10%), and business books (16% vs. 4%).

Women subscribe less to automotive magazines and do less automotive hobbyist related activities. Yes Women may love to drive, and may love their car just as much as some guys, but the vast majority of women would not be described as automotive enthusiasts. There are of course exceptions, like Danica Patrick. Just like there are political exceptions. Of course,
Some women love politics more than some men & Some women love cars more than some men, I agree, despite that however both are predominately male interests and the data backs that up.

Why is that seemingly hard for you guys to accept?