Feminism, misogyny and misandry.

[Hypparchia]

I've never treated females badly, neither have I ever accepted the notion of them being subservient to males. This said, I should say that I find "Feminism - the constant claims from all directions that women currently suffer under men's rule" as an extremely annoying occurence (much like the "repressed minorities" and the like), as opposed to the general idea of feminism itself.

[St George of England]

Ah, Feminism was a good movement, and it achieved everything that needed to be done.

But it didn't stop.

Now, feminists are often advocating measures that, under the brand of "equality", promote the exact opposite. Women in the West have everything that comes under equality nowadays, equal pay, equal civil rights, the right to vote. They're equals. But feminist movement is now advocating women's rights over men's, pushing out media that belittles and insults men, and claims that all living men are responsible for the atrocities men of former generations invoked on women.

The feminist movement is like a Rock Star that just can't admit that their throat cancer has destroyed their ability to sing- so they croak, instead.

Equal pay? Really?

Women in America earn just 77% of what men earn. In the UK it's 79% In Botswana the % is just 55, despite Botswana, iirc, being the only country which has more women in their legislature than men.

[The Deep Vault]

Aesthetics is sexist now?

Arbitrary differences in treatment based on sex are sexist. The justification someone comes up with for them doesn't change that fact.

Unfavorable arbitrary differences based definitively on biological sex are sexist. Bottle made a decent argument as to why makeup is unfavorable in certain cases, and I'm willing to admit to that.

[Gagatron]

Ah, Feminism was a good movement, and it achieved everything that needed to be done.

But it didn't stop.

Now, feminists are often advocating measures that, under the brand of "equality", promote the exact opposite. Women in the West have everything that comes under equality nowadays, equal pay, equal civil rights, the right to vote. They're equals. But feminist movement is now advocating women's rights over men's, pushing out media that belittles and insults men, and claims that all living men are responsible for the atrocities men of former generations invoked on women.

The feminist movement is like a Rock Star that just can't admit that their throat cancer has destroyed their ability to sing- so they croak, instead.

Equal pay? Really?

Women in America earn just 77% of what men earn. In the UK it's 79% In Botswana the % is just 55, despite Botswana, iirc, being the only country which has more women in their legislature than men.

What the devil? In Suisse, women earn 133% of the pay of men. I am going to go over there and fight for men's rights.

[The Deep Vault]

Ah, Feminism was a good movement, and it achieved everything that needed to be done.

But it didn't stop.

Now, feminists are often advocating measures that, under the brand of "equality", promote the exact opposite. Women in the West have everything that comes under equality nowadays, equal pay, equal civil rights, the right to vote. They're equals. But feminist movement is now advocating women's rights over men's, pushing out media that belittles and insults men, and claims that all living men are responsible for the atrocities men of former generations invoked on women.

The feminist movement is like a Rock Star that just can't admit that their throat cancer has destroyed their ability to sing- so they croak, instead.

Equal pay? Really?

Women in America earn just 77% of what men earn. In the UK it's 79% In Botswana the % is just 55, despite Botswana, iirc, being the only country which has more women in their legislature than men.

Actually, there was a study done on that I'll have to find, but basically results from the simple fact that averages can be flawed.

EDIT: Found it:https://www.achievesolutions.net/achievesolutions/en/tlc/Content.do?contentId=1851o

AND
http://www.marketingvox.com/male-chauvinists-earn-more-than-egalitarian-men-041175/

AND
http://veterinarybusiness.dvm360.com/vetec/Web+Daily/Gender-pay-gap-is-all-in-the-mind--and-very-real/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/560861

(while admittedly the last one is biased towards your argument, it does admit it's all psychology)

[Dempublicents1]

We agree that there shouldn't be these locked in roles like men can't cry and women have to shave their pits. I'm with you.

BUT. I hate the idea that the only meaningful difference between me and a guy is that he has different genitals. That's stupid and it cheapens the value of being female. That's exactly what I'm talking about when I talk about women trying to act like men and trying to get men to be more like women. It's a hidden form of sexism that's accepted because it defies tradition.

It isn't about men acting like women or women acting like men. It's about individuals acting in the manner that feels most comfortable to them without having to worry about whether or not it matches their genitalia or gender.

If a man being able to be a lot like you, only with a penis, "cheapens the value of being female" for you, that's your problem, not his.

[The Norwegian Blue]

Really? I blame sexist people a lot more than I blame feminists.

I don't think that anything like this really should differentiate a male from a female. Men should be allowed to show emotion and be sensitive, to diet, to care about how they look, to wear dresses et c without being looked at as "less" of a man. Women should be allowed to be tough, (physically) strong and athletic, not shave their legs, go into maths et c without being "less" of a woman.

The only thing that "should" differentiate men from women is that men have penises and women have vaginas (along with all the other secondary sex characteristics and the point where women can get pregnant and men can't).

We agree that there shouldn't be these locked in roles like men can't cry and women have to shave their pits. I'm with you.

BUT. I hate the idea that the only meaningful difference between me and a guy is that he has different genitals.

Of course that's not the only difference between you and "a guy." "A guy" has a name. He has a height and a weight and a hair color. He has clothes he likes and clothes he doesn't, music he likes and music he doesn't, movies he likes and movies he doesn't. He may or may not like anchovies on pizza. He may or may not enjoy watching "The Simpsons." He may or may not like big cars better than small ones, and prefer chocolate and mint together to chocolate and peanut butter - and it's overwhelmingly likely that in many of these ways, our randomly selected guy is different than you, because he's an individual person, not because he's a MAN and MEN all intrinsically like chocolate mint.

That's the point. "Male" and "female" should not be proscriptive categories in which one must meet some list of criteria to qualify. I am not female in spite of being good at math and science or because I'm good with kids. I am a female who happens to have both of those qualities. I don't doubt the world would be simpler to deal with if we presumed that there was a list of "meaningful differences" between the sexes such that we could fit every man neatly into the "man" box and every woman neatly into the "woman" box and not have to interact with each one as an individual, but there just isn't. A lesbian construction worker who loves monster truck rallies and wouldn't be caught dead in a skirt is still as much a woman as any other. A man who wears satin and lace and watches romantic movies and bawls like a baby into his carton of cookie dough ice cream when Rose tells Jack she'll never let go is just as much a man as any other. Neither are "pretending to be something they're not" - they're simply being themselves rather than deciding that they must do X, Y, or Z because of their gender.

That's stupid and it cheapens the value of being female. That's exactly what I'm talking about when I talk about women trying to act like men and trying to get men to be more like women. It's a hidden form of sexism that's accepted because it defies tradition.

Not really, no. The point is not "women shouldn't like pink frilly skirts and babies," the point is, "liking pink frilly skirts and babies is something anyone can do, regardless of their gender." I have no interest in "making men more like women" or in "making men more like men." I have an interest in everyone being able to do what they want without anyone bitching at them because members of their gender aren't "supposed" to do that.

I'm not saying we should enforce stereotypes. Please don't get me wrong. What I'm saying is that if women are, on average, physically less able than men to lift 100lbs, then so what? If men, on average, keep their emotions themselves more than the average woman does, so what? It's not like society is the source of this. It's in the genes.

...I would really love to see a source on men showing less emotion publicly being "in the genes," rather than a product of societal pressure, since that contradicts absolutely every piece of evidence I have ever seen on the subject, not to mention the personal experience of every guy I've ever talked to about it. Boys are told from a very young age that "boys don't cry," that crying is something that is weak and girly and for "pussies," and you are honestly asserting that none of this has any influence whatsoever, because men, without exception, are just born with a "don't cry in public" gene?

It's a consequence of having different sets of chromosomes. I'm perfectly fine with it.

My mom and dad raised me to love and accept who I am but also encouraged me to explore my options. I hate wearing skirts and dresses so I don't. At the same time, I love to watch romantic movies ("chick flicks") and I don't get offended when my male friends tease me about it. I don't resent guys for being bigger than me and I don't expect them to pretend to be anything they're not, just like I won't.

Great. So perhaps you shouldn't expect them to have some laundry list of "meaningful differences" from you solely on account of having a penis, then, since some guys quite unambiguously don't.

[Dempublicents1]

Arbitrary differences in treatment based on sex are sexist. The justification someone comes up with for them doesn't change that fact.

The problem is people call too much of it arbitrary when it isn't.

Unless it is based on actual biological differences, it is arbitrary.

Arbitrary differences in treatment based on sex are sexist. The justification someone comes up with for them doesn't change that fact.

Unfavorable arbitrary differences based definitively on biological sex are sexist. Bottle made a decent argument as to why makeup is unfavorable in certain cases, and I'm willing to admit to that.

The question of whether or not you find it to be unfavorable is irrelevant to the question of whether or not it is sexist.

[The Deep Vault]

The problem is people call too much of it arbitrary when it isn't.

Unless it is based on actual biological differences, it is arbitrary.

Unfavorable arbitrary differences based definitively on biological sex are sexist. Bottle made a decent argument as to why makeup is unfavorable in certain cases, and I'm willing to admit to that.

The question of whether or not you find it to be unfavorable is irrelevant to the question of whether or not it is sexist

Okay then, badly sexist. Either way...

[St George of England]

Equal pay? Really?

Women in America earn just 77% of what men earn. In the UK it's 79% In Botswana the % is just 55, despite Botswana, iirc, being the only country which has more women in their legislature than men.

Actually, there was a study done on that I'll have to find, but basically results from the simple fact that averages can be flawed.

EDIT: Found it:https://www.achievesolutions.net/achievesolutions/en/tlc/Content.do?contentId=1851o

AND
http://www.marketingvox.com/male-chauvinists-earn-more-than-egalitarian-men-041175/

AND
http://veterinarybusiness.dvm360.com/vetec/Web+Daily/Gender-pay-gap-is-all-in-the-mind--and-very-real/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/560861

(while admittedly the last one is biased towards your argument, it does admit it's all psychology)

First link: Broken.
Second Link: Neither graph disproves the gender pay gap....
Third Link: Well, you said it.

[UCUMAY]

Equal pay? Really?

Women in America earn just 77% of what men earn. In the UK it's 79% In Botswana the % is just 55, despite Botswana, iirc, being the only country which has more women in their legislature than men.

What the devil? In Suisse, women earn 133% of the pay of men. I am going to go over there and fight for men's rights.

Please do. Everyone deserves to not be discriminated against based on what's between their legs.

[Esternial]

What the devil? In Suisse, women earn 133% of the pay of men. I am going to go over there and fight for men's rights.

Please do. Everyone deserves to not be discriminated against based on what's between their legs.

Seems like a habit people bred throughout the ages.

Humanity needs therapy.

[The People of Belfast]

Ah, Feminism was a good movement, and it achieved everything that needed to be done.

But it didn't stop.

Now, feminists are often advocating measures that, under the brand of "equality", promote the exact opposite. Women in the West have everything that comes under equality nowadays, equal pay, equal civil rights, the right to vote. They're equals. But feminist movement is now advocating women's rights over men's, pushing out media that belittles and insults men, and claims that all living men are responsible for the atrocities men of former generations invoked on women.

The feminist movement is like a Rock Star that just can't admit that their throat cancer has destroyed their ability to sing- so they croak, instead.

Equal pay? Really?

Women in America earn just 77% of what men earn. In the UK it's 79% In Botswana the % is just 55, despite Botswana, iirc, being the only country which has more women in their legislature than men.

So I get a job in an office and I get a £10 per hour I work. Does the woman hired on the same day, for the same job, in the same office, with the same qualifications and skills, only get £7.90 per hour?

[St George of England]

Equal pay? Really?

Women in America earn just 77% of what men earn. In the UK it's 79% In Botswana the % is just 55, despite Botswana, iirc, being the only country which has more women in their legislature than men.

So I get a job in an office and I get a £10 per hour I work. Does the woman hired on the same day, for the same job, in the same office, with the same qualifications and skills, only get £7.90 per hour?

According to that survey, yes.

[The People of Belfast]

So I get a job in an office and I get a £10 per hour I work. Does the woman hired on the same day, for the same job, in the same office, with the same qualifications and skills, only get £7.90 per hour?

According to that survey, yes.

That isn't what the survey says though. It takes all the money men earn in the UK, whether they be working behind the counter in McDonalds up to the richest men in the UK, and all the money women earn in the UK, whether they be working behind the counter in McDonalds up to the richest women in the UK, and compare. Men as an overall make more money than women. But two people, a man and a woman, with the same qualifications, experience, etc etc etc in the same job will get the same wages. Equal pay for equal work already exists.

[The Soviet Technocracy]

We agree that there shouldn't be these locked in roles like men can't cry and women have to shave their pits. I'm with you.

BUT. I hate the idea that the only meaningful difference between me and a guy is that he has different genitals. That's stupid and it cheapens the value of being female. That's exactly what I'm talking about when I talk about women trying to act like men and trying to get men to be more like women. It's a hidden form of sexism that's accepted because it defies tradition.

lol @ everything here

Clearly women should get back in the kitchen, and men must be RAWR FIGHT all the time, as those are the traditional "meaningful differences" between the sexes.

[Dakini]

Like I said, I'm biologically female as well as self-identifying as female. Also, why should gender be about certain roles in society? How is that not sexist? Even if it was about certain roles, we're not talking about everyone who has this role (/job) being required to wear make up, we're only talking about the women who have these roles being required to wear make up. How is that not sexist?


Like shave? Because women don't shave. Certainly not. We definitely don't shave large portions of our bodies.
How is it that my male colleagues are attractive enough to face their job without make up, but I'm not? How is this idea not sexist?

Cause we want women to look good?

Women only look good when they're painted up? I was entirely unaware of this. Would you like to inform my bf that I'm usually unattractive?

[Dempublicents1]

Women in America earn just 77% of what men earn. In the UK it's 79% In Botswana the % is just 55, despite Botswana, iirc, being the only country which has more women in their legislature than men.

Probably not to that extent, but she very well may get less. According to some of the studies on wiki, when these studies are controlled for profession and such, the pay gap is reduced to about an 11% difference, but it is still there. You are even more likely to get a higher starting wage if you negotiate for it - as women who try to negotiate for a higher wage tend to be negatively impacted, while men are not.

(This is the US, but the same general societal trends seem to hold in the UK).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male%E2%80 ... ted_States

[UCUMAY]

Cause we want women to look good?

Women only look good when they're painted up? I was entirely unaware of this. Would you like to inform my bf that I'm usually unattractive?

My bf actually hates make up. Maybe because his entire family is normally covered in paint?

[Dakini]

Also, why should gender be about certain roles in society? How is that not sexist?

It's funny because you're being sexist without realizing it. That's the entire reason I brought up the gender/sex distinction. And this coming from a feminist, too.

Not really. My gender and my sex are female, but I don't think I should have to assume certain roles in society because of this.

we're only talking about the women who have these roles being required to wear make up. How is that not sexist?

Because a job is the only way in which someone interacts with society.

So? Why should someone have to assume and conform to a specific gender role at work? Why can't they just work?

Like shave? Because women don't shave. Certainly not. We definitely don't shave large portions of our bodies

Because I could only have meant shaving. And nothing else.

Fine, then what is it that men generally have to do in terms of hygiene/appearance practices that women don't.

How is it that my male colleagues are attractive enough to face their job without make up, but I'm not? How is this idea not sexist?

Aesthetics is sexist now?

When you say that the only way for a woman to be attractive is for her to wear make up, yes. It's incredibly sexist.

[Dakini]

Arbitrary differences in treatment based on sex are sexist. The justification someone comes up with for them doesn't change that fact.

The problem is people call too much of it arbitrary when it isn't.

"Women should wear make up" is arbitrary. "Men should not wear make up" is arbitrary.

[Dempublicents1]

"Women should wear make up" is arbitrary. "Men should not wear make up" is arbitrary.

Precisely. Well, unless someone can point me to the biological difference that requires women to wear it and men not to.....

[OrangeCats]

Ah, Feminism was a good movement, and it achieved everything that needed to be done.

But it didn't stop.

Now, feminists are often advocating measures that, under the brand of "equality", promote the exact opposite. Women in the West have everything that comes under equality nowadays, equal pay, equal civil rights, the right to vote. They're equals. But feminist movement is now advocating women's rights over men's, pushing out media that belittles and insults men, and claims that all living men are responsible for the atrocities men of former generations invoked on women.

The feminist movement is like a Rock Star that just can't admit that their throat cancer has destroyed their ability to sing- so they croak, instead.

EDIT: Just for clarification, I'm referring here to Economic-Political feminism- you know, the front that lobbies Government all the godamn time. And some authors; they know who they are.

A couple of years ago my bf and I were watching TV and Everybody Loved Raymond came on, and as we were watching the episode we realized that the entire basis for the humor on that show is basically this guy's wife treating him like dirt. If the dialogue had been reversed and it was the husband talking down at the wife that way, it wouldn't be funny at all and people would be up in arms at the misogyny.

You see that kind of stuff all the time in commercials, TV shows, movies. It's okay to describe guys as dumb, child-like, helpless and in need of mothering by some female in their life. If I were a guy I think I'd be pretty irritated. My bf sure was.

"Women should wear make up" is arbitrary. "Men should not wear make up" is arbitrary.

Ok I guess it's arbitrary but who cares? Both men and women wear makeup... just not the same kind or for the same reasons.

[Dakini]

We agree that there shouldn't be these locked in roles like men can't cry and women have to shave their pits. I'm with you.

BUT. I hate the idea that the only meaningful difference between me and a guy is that he has different genitals.

Of course that's not the only difference between you and "a guy." "A guy" has a name. He has a height and a weight and a hair color. He has clothes he likes and clothes he doesn't, music he likes and music he doesn't, movies he likes and movies he doesn't. He may or may not like anchovies on pizza. He may or may not enjoy watching "The Simpsons." He may or may not like big cars better than small ones, and prefer chocolate and mint together to chocolate and peanut butter - and it's overwhelmingly likely that in many of these ways, our randomly selected guy is different than you, because he's an individual person, not because he's a MAN and MEN all intrinsically like chocolate mint.

That's the point. "Male" and "female" should not be proscriptive categories in which one must meet some list of criteria to qualify. I am not female in spite of being good at math and science or because I'm good with kids. I am a female who happens to have both of those qualities. I don't doubt the world would be simpler to deal with if we presumed that there was a list of "meaningful differences" between the sexes such that we could fit every man neatly into the "man" box and every woman neatly into the "woman" box and not have to interact with each one as an individual, but there just isn't. A lesbian construction worker who loves monster truck rallies and wouldn't be caught dead in a skirt is still as much a woman as any other. A man who wears satin and lace and watches romantic movies and bawls like a baby into his carton of cookie dough ice cream when Rose tells Jack she'll never let go is just as much a man as any other. Neither are "pretending to be something they're not" - they're simply being themselves rather than deciding that they must do X, Y, or Z because of their gender.

That's stupid and it cheapens the value of being female. That's exactly what I'm talking about when I talk about women trying to act like men and trying to get men to be more like women. It's a hidden form of sexism that's accepted because it defies tradition.

Not really, no. The point is not "women shouldn't like pink frilly skirts and babies," the point is, "liking pink frilly skirts and babies is something anyone can do, regardless of their gender." I have no interest in "making men more like women" or in "making men more like men." I have an interest in everyone being able to do what they want without anyone bitching at them because members of their gender aren't "supposed" to do that.

I'm not saying we should enforce stereotypes. Please don't get me wrong. What I'm saying is that if women are, on average, physically less able than men to lift 100lbs, then so what? If men, on average, keep their emotions themselves more than the average woman does, so what? It's not like society is the source of this. It's in the genes.

...I would really love to see a source on men showing less emotion publicly being "in the genes," rather than a product of societal pressure, since that contradicts absolutely every piece of evidence I have ever seen on the subject, not to mention the personal experience of every guy I've ever talked to about it. Boys are told from a very young age that "boys don't cry," that crying is something that is weak and girly and for "pussies," and you are honestly asserting that none of this has any influence whatsoever, because men, without exception, are just born with a "don't cry in public" gene?

It's a consequence of having different sets of chromosomes. I'm perfectly fine with it.

My mom and dad raised me to love and accept who I am but also encouraged me to explore my options. I hate wearing skirts and dresses so I don't. At the same time, I love to watch romantic movies ("chick flicks") and I don't get offended when my male friends tease me about it. I don't resent guys for being bigger than me and I don't expect them to pretend to be anything they're not, just like I won't.

Great. So perhaps you shouldn't expect them to have some laundry list of "meaningful differences" from you solely on account of having a penis, then, since some guys quite unambiguously don't.

^This. Precisely (and better than I could have said).

[Dakini]

nevermind.