The NationStates Feminist Thread III

[The Blaatschapen]

I am actually playing two prejudices against each other. The one where men want sex vs. the one where men do not commit.

You're probably better off remaining uncommitted.

Nah, I'm not cynical enough for that

[Costa Fierro]

You're probably better off remaining uncommitted.

Nah, I'm not cynical enough for that

Suit yourself.

[The Blaatschapen]

Nah, I'm not cynical enough for that

Suit yourself.

I'll birthday suit myself on such occasions

[Jello Biafra]

I agree that these are problematic sexist tropes.

So why are you reinforcing them?

#notallmen , but sometimes the ads are euphemistically explicit about this sort of thing.

Replacing a trope with another one.

Do you think the best way to combat sexist tropes is to pretend that they sprang out of thin air and that there are no real-world examples of them?

[Costa Fierro]

So why are you reinforcing them?



Replacing a trope with another one.

Do you think the best way to combat sexist tropes is to pretend that they sprang out of thin air and that there are no real-world examples of them?

Do you think that the best way to combat sexist tropes is to legitimize them?

[Jello Biafra]

Do you think that the best way to combat sexist tropes is to legitimize them?

When did I legitimize them? Pointing out their existence is not legitimizing them.

------

Also, related to the idea of women fearing men.

[Costa Fierro]

When did I legitimize them? Pointing out their existence is not legitimizing them.

In your response to Blaat where you said men would be wanting to not discriminate against women in advertising for flatmates because they would want to seduce them.

[Jello Biafra]

In your response to Blaat where you said men would be wanting to not discriminate against women in advertising for flatmates because they would want to seduce them.

The question Blaat asked was not about not discriminating against women, it was why one would specify 'women only' and not 'men only'. The ads where the person with the room available doesn't care about the gender of the person renting tend to be different in tone.

[The Grene Knyght]

I think you are being reductionist, and also kinda ignoring the fact that history has very much fitted that idea... that women are weak and as such must obey/fear men. It isn't like the idea of scary men came out of thin air, has it? Can hardly see women as being the one "doing anything wrong" when there was a time they could hardly DO anything.
I think the attitude on it has to change. I think each gender needs to become more accepting of the other. HOWEVER, we cannot ignore the reasons for why certain views have formed in the first place, and still affect attitudes in society now.

So no, I find no need for the comment you have made past "Lets see if I can reverse the roles of sexism lol".

I watched an interesting documentary on Victorian England - this notion that women are sweet innocent beings is fairly new, societally speaking.

In fact, it was apparently fairly common (although not the majority of cases) in the Middle Ages for powerful women (i.e. Nobles) to quite literally kidnap men and hold them hostage until the man agreed to marry her.

The concept of the damsel in distress never actually existed.

Whats the name of the documentary? I can tell you right away that if they said the concept of the damsel in distress never existed, they shamelessly lied (also, minor point, I'd imagine they were talking about the literary era of Romanticism, which really is proto-Victorian). I mean sure, on those other points, there certainly was this idea (in Europe) that all women were inherently evil/sinful/childish (thanks a lot, Eve), but on that idea of women kidnapping men, you're really only talking about a percent of a percent of the society, and it happened with more frequency from men. Now if you really wanna see how men saw women back then, read the Malleus Maleficarum.

[Costa Fierro]

The question Blaat asked was not about not discriminating against women, it was why one would specify 'women only' and not 'men only'. The ads where the person with the room available doesn't care about the gender of the person renting tend to be different in tone.

The point of the matter is that you trotted out a trope and portrayed it like it was legitimate fact.

[The Grene Knyght]

Feminist thread, explain something to me:

I'm looking for a place to live in a big EUropean city, and 20% if not more of the ads for rooms are 'women only'. I have not seen any 'men only' ads. Why is this?

2 reasons that I can think of:
Some people think women are less likely to leave a mess / be rowdy (something I disagree with)
Women looking for roommates feel safer with other women (Something I do agree with, in that I agree they should have a right to feel safe, and although there is a hysteria of sorts surrounding sexual assault these days, its not entirely unfounded)

[Jello Biafra]

The question Blaat asked was not about not discriminating against women, it was why one would specify 'women only' and not 'men only'. The ads where the person with the room available doesn't care about the gender of the person renting tend to be different in tone.

The point of the matter is that you trotted out a trope and portrayed it like it was legitimate fact.

So this and this don't exist?

[The Blaatschapen]

The point of the matter is that you trotted out a trope and portrayed it like it was legitimate fact.

So this and this don't exist?

None of the ads I have seen were about exchanging sex and board.

[Galloism]

I watched an interesting documentary on Victorian England - this notion that women are sweet innocent beings is fairly new, societally speaking.

In fact, it was apparently fairly common (although not the majority of cases) in the Middle Ages for powerful women (i.e. Nobles) to quite literally kidnap men and hold them hostage until the man agreed to marry her.

The concept of the damsel in distress never actually existed.

Whats the name of the documentary? I can tell you right away that if they said the concept of the damsel in distress never existed, they shamelessly lied (also, minor point, I'd imagine they were talking about the literary era of Romanticism, which really is proto-Victorian).

I phrased that poorly. Victorian England imagined the middle age damsel in distress, but she never existed. Also, English women never wore traffic cones.

I mean sure, on those other points, there certainly was this idea (in Europe) that all women were inherently evil/sinful/childish (thanks a lot, Eve), but on that idea of women kidnapping men, you're really only talking about a percent of a percent of the society, and it happened with more frequency from men. Now if you really wanna see how men saw women back then, read the Malleus Maleficarum.

I suggest you watch it.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qcoWPpE0EiE

It's quite interesting, if humorous.

[Hirota]

there certainly was this idea (in Europe) that all women were inherently evil/sinful/childish (thanks a lot, Eve),

Just in Europe?

[The Grene Knyght]

Whats the name of the documentary? I can tell you right away that if they said the concept of the damsel in distress never existed, they shamelessly lied (also, minor point, I'd imagine they were talking about the literary era of Romanticism, which really is proto-Victorian).

I phrased that poorly. Victorian England imagined the middle age damsel in distress, but she never existed. Also, English women never wore traffic cones.

There absolutely was a trope of damsel in distress in medieval literature. I've read a fair amount of it personally. It certainly was not a Victorian invention (especally since, iirc, the notion was actually revived 10 or 20 years before the victorian period).

there certainly was this idea (in Europe) that all women were inherently evil/sinful/childish (thanks a lot, Eve),

Just in Europe?

well, we were discussing europe. I don't think it was a global phenomenon, especially when I was using 'sin' specifically in the Christian sense.
Certainly as far as I know there has always been some inherent prejudice against women in most societies, but I don't think they were all three of these specific ones, which relate primarily to the idea of Eve and original sin.

[Jello Biafra]

So this and this don't exist?

None of the ads I have seen were about exchanging sex and board.

Oh, I see. I thought Craigslist might be different. Are there any in English that you'd be willing to share?

[Costa Fierro]

The point of the matter is that you trotted out a trope and portrayed it like it was legitimate fact.

So this and this don't exist?

I'm not saying they don't exist, but they are in the minority, not the norm. And because some individuals may do that, that does not give you the right to throw around tropes and legitimize them in the manner that you have been doing.

[New Edom]

I phrased that poorly. Victorian England imagined the middle age damsel in distress, but she never existed. Also, English women never wore traffic cones.

There absolutely was a trope of damsel in distress in medieval literature. I've read a fair amount of it personally. It certainly was not a Victorian invention (especally since, iirc, the notion was actually revived 10 or 20 years before the victorian period).

Just in Europe?

well, we were discussing europe. I don't think it was a global phenomenon, especially when I was using 'sin' specifically in the Christian sense.
Certainly as far as I know there has always been some inherent prejudice against women in most societies, but I don't think they were all three of these specific ones, which relate primarily to the idea of Eve and original sin.

Actually this is my understanding of it.

In the Middle Ages, there are damsels in distress, but it's different. In actual medieval epics or tales, women have a household role and are generally either wives in the background, holy women, enchantresses or princesses/queens in need of rescue. Even with the rescuing though there's often a follow up. One good example is Sir Lancelot's relationship with Elaine of Astolat, which results in her pregnancy with the boy who would become Sir Galahad. There's also the curious example of Dame Ragnell, freed from an enchantment through her own choice as to what curse she will have (which is sorta referenced in "Shrek") and marries Sir Gawaine.

However you can't forget that men get rescued too. for instance when Queen Guenevere is rescued by Sir Lancelot from Sir Meliagrance, several courtiers including Arthur's step brother sir Kay are rescued along with her. At one point Sir Lancelot rescues Sir Gawaine from being given a double flogging by two villainous knights in one of those odd medieval S&M scenes.

I think what is being referred to is that in the Victorian era women began to be depicted as more delicate, genteel and sweet, as though they had no lewdness or bodily functions in them. I think the differences between men and women began to be depicted differently due to the Industrial Revolution and was a middle and upper class phenomenon. After all in the factories and mines women often did work alongside men and children of both sexes. So I think that the differences between men and women began to be increasingly more imagined than real because labour was changing. This is similar to how medieval stories and fables today are often modernized (Shrek again, or Frozen, or even movies like Braveheart) where individualistic values and acceptance of relationships and behaviours that would never have been tolerated in a real feudal society are depicted as easy to achieve with good heartedness.

[Jello Biafra]

So this and this don't exist?

I'm not saying they don't exist, but they are in the minority, not the norm. And because some individuals may do that, that does not give you the right to throw around tropes and legitimize them in the manner that you have been doing.

Ads where men specifically request female roommates only are rare, but of those ads the types I posted are fairly common, on Craigslist. I'd stop short of claiming they're the majority, but they very well could be.

[Costa Fierro]

I'm not saying they don't exist, but they are in the minority, not the norm. And because some individuals may do that, that does not give you the right to throw around tropes and legitimize them in the manner that you have been doing.

Ads where men specifically request female roommates only are rare, but of those ads the types I posted are fairly common, on Craigslist. I'd stop short of claiming they're the majority, but they very well could be.

Well the solution is simple. Stay away from Craigslist.

[Jello Biafra]

Ads where men specifically request female roommates only are rare, but of those ads the types I posted are fairly common, on Craigslist. I'd stop short of claiming they're the majority, but they very well could be.

Well the solution is simple. Stay away from Craigslist.

I used Craiglist simply because it's the only place where I've seen ads where people ask for tenants of a specific gender. It's illegal to do that here, so it doesn't happen often.
I have no issues with believing that Craigslist is unrepresentative of the attitudes of most men.

[The Grene Knyght]

There absolutely was a trope of damsel in distress in medieval literature. I've read a fair amount of it personally. It certainly was not a Victorian invention (especally since, iirc, the notion was actually revived 10 or 20 years before the victorian period).
well, we were discussing europe. I don't think it was a global phenomenon, especially when I was using 'sin' specifically in the Christian sense.
Certainly as far as I know there has always been some inherent prejudice against women in most societies, but I don't think they were all three of these specific ones, which relate primarily to the idea of Eve and original sin.

Actually this is my understanding of it.

In the Middle Ages, there are damsels in distress, but it's different. In actual medieval epics or tales, women have a household role and are generally either wives in the background, holy women, enchantresses or princesses/queens in need of rescue. Even with the rescuing though there's often a follow up. One good example is Sir Lancelot's relationship with Elaine of Astolat, which results in her pregnancy with the boy who would become Sir Galahad. There's also the curious example of Dame Ragnell, freed from an enchantment through her own choice as to what curse she will have (which is sorta referenced in "Shrek") and marries Sir Gawaine.

However you can't forget that men get rescued too. for instance when Queen Guenevere is rescued by Sir Lancelot from Sir Meliagrance, several courtiers including Arthur's step brother sir Kay are rescued along with her. At one point Sir Lancelot rescues Sir Gawaine from being given a double flogging by two villainous knights in one of those odd medieval S&M scenes.

Which arthurian works are you referring to specifically, out of interest? Is it Thomas Mallory's? And yeah, I'm aware the damsel in distress trope was confined entirely to the romance genre, and even then didn't define every woman. But it was still present. And actually their wasn't usually a follow up. A lot of examples come to mind (Guy of Warwick, Sir Orfeo etc). Arthurian romances tend to be the exception (I'm thinking of Sir Tristrem, and yes, pretty much the majority of Le Morte D'Arthur).

I think what is being referred to is that in the Victorian era women began to be depicted as more delicate, genteel and sweet, as though they had no lewdness or bodily functions in them. I think the differences between men and women began to be depicted differently due to the Industrial Revolution and was a middle and upper class phenomenon. After all in the factories and mines women often did work alongside men and children of both sexes. So I think that the differences between men and women began to be increasingly more imagined than real because labour was changing. This is similar to how medieval stories and fables today are often modernized (Shrek again, or Frozen, or even movies like Braveheart) where individualistic values and acceptance of relationships and behaviours that would never have been tolerated in a real feudal society are depicted as easy to achieve with good heartedness.

Actually, women being depicted as gentle and sweet, as though "they had no lewdness or bodily functions in them," is relatively common. Especially in hagiographical texts (Judith, Æthelthryth), but this was also in romances, and was central to the idea of chivalry and chaste love. Usually when this wasn't used was when the works were satirising the concept (Floris and Blancheflour, Sir Tristrem/Tristan and Isolt, etc)

[New Edom]

Actually this is my understanding of it.

In the Middle Ages, there are damsels in distress, but it's different. In actual medieval epics or tales, women have a household role and are generally either wives in the background, holy women, enchantresses or princesses/queens in need of rescue. Even with the rescuing though there's often a follow up. One good example is Sir Lancelot's relationship with Elaine of Astolat, which results in her pregnancy with the boy who would become Sir Galahad. There's also the curious example of Dame Ragnell, freed from an enchantment through her own choice as to what curse she will have (which is sorta referenced in "Shrek") and marries Sir Gawaine.

However you can't forget that men get rescued too. for instance when Queen Guenevere is rescued by Sir Lancelot from Sir Meliagrance, several courtiers including Arthur's step brother sir Kay are rescued along with her. At one point Sir Lancelot rescues Sir Gawaine from being given a double flogging by two villainous knights in one of those odd medieval S&M scenes.

Which arthurian works are you referring to specifically, out of interest? Is it Thomas Mallory's? And yeah, I'm aware the damsel in distress trope was confined entirely to the romance genre, and even then didn't define every woman. But it was still present. And actually their wasn't usually a follow up. A lot of examples come to mind (Guy of Warwick, Sir Orfeo etc). Arthurian romances tend to be the exception (I'm thinking of Sir Tristrem, and yes, pretty much the majority of Le Morte D'Arthur).

I think what is being referred to is that in the Victorian era women began to be depicted as more delicate, genteel and sweet, as though they had no lewdness or bodily functions in them. I think the differences between men and women began to be depicted differently due to the Industrial Revolution and was a middle and upper class phenomenon. After all in the factories and mines women often did work alongside men and children of both sexes. So I think that the differences between men and women began to be increasingly more imagined than real because labour was changing. This is similar to how medieval stories and fables today are often modernized (Shrek again, or Frozen, or even movies like Braveheart) where individualistic values and acceptance of relationships and behaviours that would never have been tolerated in a real feudal society are depicted as easy to achieve with good heartedness.

Actually, women being depicted as gentle and sweet, as though "they had no lewdness or bodily functions in them," is relatively common. Especially in hagiographical texts (Judith, Æthelthryth), but this was also in romances, and was central to the idea of chivalry and chaste love. Usually when this wasn't used was when the works were satirising the concept (Floris and Blancheflour, Sir Tristrem/Tristan and Isolt, etc)

Hm. Well first, I read Malory, Chretien de Troyes, Wolfram von Esenbach and the Mabinogion for arthurian stories. I had also read Tirant lo Blanc, El Cid, and the Song of Roland. Other than that i read a number of letters and accounts from first hand sources from the Middle Ages including the Chronicles of the Crusades and other such works. So I have a variety of reading about the era.

I found that women were variously temptresses, queens, damsels in distress, courted ladies who promised lands and honour and wealth, seeresses, witches, saints and so on. However to be fair men were always described as extremes as well--that's storytelling drama for you. I agree that stories like Judith are meant to be editfying tales of virtue. However don't you find that for instance in the stories of the martyrs that this is not necessarily about fragility but about steadfast morality?

[New Edom]

Two recent articles i read make my points for me.

1. Emma Watson apparently recommends these five books to read. This appears to be a general mainstream approach to feminism, and these books are generally popular and well known among feminists. So are these books rather definitive or not?

2. An evolutionary biologist presents some information as well as critiques of feminism. Bearing in mind the biologist is apparently a feminist. This in particular stands out to me:

Patriarchy (as defined above) doesn’t just hurt women by treating them as property. In fact, the worst victims of patriarchy are the low-status, unmarriageable men who do the most dirty, dangerous jobs in society for peanuts. Unfortunately, we’ve done a terrible job at understanding and communicating this, to the point that most men in this situation are convinced that feminism, not patriarchy, is actually the root of their problems. So long as middle-class feminists ridicule and demonize them while enjoying relatively pampered lives, these men will continue to hate us. And who can blame them?

I'm dubious about this though. I'm dubious because of the utter contempt or hostility most feminists display on this issue when the men actually have the audacity to complain about how they are treated. I doubt that this will change, but I'm interested in hearing what others think.