Feminism, misogyny and misandry.

[Xsyne]

I'm female myself, but I stand away from feminism. The first- and second-wave feminist movements were fantastically necessary, serving to end the discriminatory laws and prejudices in Western society at the time. The third-wave we've seen since the 1990s is less about equality and more gynocentric, to the point it does nothing but hurt the progression of gender equality.
Ever since all this "New Age" post-modern bullshit crept into it, it's been dangerously regressive. Thanks to that, we've had this whole "As a mother" rhetoric, "Men are evil" rhetoric (Hillary Clinton being very guilty of this), and the new age giving this whole "There's something special about being female and males will never know" bull. It's nonsense, all of it. I want gender equality more than anyone, and that's precisely that: gender equality, not female-supremacy.
There's a fair amount of room left for making females more equal with males in the West, that is true, but nobody can deny that there's inequality against males too. It's perfectly okay for me to dress as a guy, and if I decided to be transsexual or lesbian, people will just accept it. But when a guy dresses as a girl, suddenly that's treading untouchable ground. If a guy ends up transsexual or gay, he risks assault and even murder. If I apply for a job with the same qualifications and experience as a guy, I'll be chosen without question because of anti-discrimination laws: if they chose him, I could claim misogyny, but if they choose me, nobody would take his claim of misandry seriously. I hope you get my gist

Reverse discrimination does not end discrimination. Say no to affirmative action. Destroy discrimination through education and collectivity, not through coercion and more discrimination. But maybe I'm just another damned libertarian!

Third-wave feminism is the feminism that actually gives a damn about the LBGT community. People don't "accept" FtM transsexuals, if anything they get the most shit. Actual empirical studies say that women with the same qualifications and experience as a guy do not get chosen over the man.

[The Congregationists]

"Traditional" views of gender roles are harmful to men as well as women...feminists have long said this. That has been ignored however, in favour of claiming that women are only fighting to get rid of gender roles for women, as though this could possibly happen without impacting the gender roles imposed on men.

I don't think "traditional gender roles", in and of themselves, are bad so long as they're freely chosen from amongst alternatives that are given equal consideration. The problem with "gender roles" is that by means of custom or law they become universal and imposed upon the whole of the population whether they want them or not. Put another way, there's nothing inherantly wrong with a woman wanting to be a stay at home mom or a dad working to support his family (and I don't think you're saying that there is Kiskaanak), but the idea that all women must be stay at home moms and all men should be the breadwinners based simply on their biological sex is one that should be done away with.

[OrangeCats]

I see you are just as confused about the goal of gender equity as many other of the people participating in this thread.

"Traditional" views of gender roles are harmful to men as well as women...feminists have long said this. That has been ignored however, in favour of claiming that women are only fighting to get rid of gender roles for women, as though this could possibly happen without impacting the gender roles imposed on men.

False. False and ridiculous. I'm sorry if you do not understand feminism, but please don't put forth your misunderstanding as as definition for it. Particularly when it comes to your claims about gender equity protection (fought for and hard won by feminists) which do in fact protect men from sexual harassment and discrimination.

She's not confused just for not seeing things like you do

[Ketrily]

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.

I am irritated, and I do agree.

I fail to see the point you were trying to get accross, however.

[OrangeCats]

I am irritated, and I do agree.

I fail to see your point, however.

That it's what happens when feminism goes too far.

Not that Everybody Loves Raymond is a feminist show... just that a theme like that exists BECAUSE feminism went too far and people are so afraid of being called sexist that they end up getting used to it.

[Dakini]

I am irritated, and I do agree.

I fail to see your point, however.

That it's what happens when feminism goes too far.

Not that Everybody Loves Raymond is a feminist show... just that a theme like that exists BECAUSE feminism went too far and people are so afraid of being called sexist that they end up getting used to it.

No, it has a theme like that to reassure women that their place is in the home and to tell them that it's ok to henpeck your husband to death because you're inevitably right (when you're at home) and to reassure men that no, they don't have to lift a finger at home.

[The Norwegian Blue]

I'm female myself, but I stand away from feminism. The first- and second-wave feminist movements were fantastically necessary, serving to end the discriminatory laws and prejudices in Western society at the time. The third-wave we've seen since the 1990s is less about equality and more gynocentric, to the point it does nothing but hurt the progression of gender equality.
Ever since all this "New Age" post-modern bullshit crept into it, it's been dangerously regressive. Thanks to that, we've had this whole "As a mother" rhetoric, "Men are evil" rhetoric (Hillary Clinton being very guilty of this), and the new age giving this whole "There's something special about being female and males will never know" bull. It's nonsense, all of it. I want gender equality more than anyone, and that's precisely that: gender equality, not female-supremacy.
There's a fair amount of room left for making females more equal with males in the West, that is true, but nobody can deny that there's inequality against males too.

It's good that nobody has.

Seriously, I'm getting tired of this strawman. Every single person in this thread who has identified as a feminist has said that they support EQUAL rights, which makes sense, since that's what feminism means. We've specified all sort of ways in which traditional gender roles hurt men which we'd like to fix. I had a whole long post enumerating some of these ways, which not one feminist in this thread has disputed. And yet, somehow, new people keep coming in to ignore everyone everyone says and bitch about how feminists just don't care about men. It's really getting old.

It's perfectly okay for me to dress as a guy, and if I decided to be transsexual or lesbian, people will just accept it.

Brandon Teena might beg to differ. As might the many, many victims of "corrective rape." I'm not sure what universe you live in in which lesbians and FTM transsexuals experience no discrimination, but it very definitely isn't this one.

But when a guy dresses as a girl, suddenly that's treading untouchable ground. If a guy ends up transsexual or gay, he risks assault and even murder.

Which is terrible, and something that feminists fight against. And if you perceive it as being so much worse for men to behave in "feminine" ways than for women to behave in "masculine" ways, perhaps you should ask why that might be. Could it possibly be because of a widespread cultural ethos in which being "manly" is something to be aspired to and being "girly" is something to be avoided, in which a woman acting like a man is improving herself and a man acting like a woman is demeaning himself? Gosh, that almost sounds like the sort of attitude feminism is explicitly about combating, doesn't it?

If I apply for a job with the same qualifications and experience as a guy, I'll be chosen without question because of anti-discrimination laws: if they chose him, I could claim misogyny, but if they choose me, nobody would take his claim of misandry seriously. I hope you get my gist

Your gist appears to be "I don't really know how affirmative action works."

[The Norwegian Blue]

I am irritated, and I do agree.

I fail to see your point, however.

That it's what happens when feminism goes too far.

Not that Everybody Loves Raymond is a feminist show... just that a theme like that exists BECAUSE feminism went too far and people are so afraid of being called sexist that they end up getting used to it.

Are you shitting me? The two main characters on Everybody Loves Raymond are a successful sports journalist and his homemaker wife. He is presented as being great at his career but incompetent at household management. She is routinely mocked for being an insufficiently good cook. (Interestingly, for all that all the characters routinely insult her cooking, none of the men ever cook anything for themselves.) And you think this show exists because feminism went too far?

[Dakini]

That it's what happens when feminism goes too far.

Not that Everybody Loves Raymond is a feminist show... just that a theme like that exists BECAUSE feminism went too far and people are so afraid of being called sexist that they end up getting used to it.

Are you shitting me? The two main characters on Everybody Loves Raymond are a successful sports journalist and his homemaker wife. He is presented as being great at his career but incompetent at household management. She is routinely mocked for being an insufficiently good cook. (Interestingly, for all that all the characters routinely insult her cooking, none of the men ever cook anything for themselves.) And you think this show exists because feminism went too far?

Oh! I forgot about the part where she's apparently a terrible cook. Right, and then her mother in law also constantly acts like she's a failure at life because of this.

No, this show clearly promotes the idea of female superiority.

[Desperate Measures]

I'm female myself, but I stand away from feminism. The first- and second-wave feminist movements were fantastically necessary, serving to end the discriminatory laws and prejudices in Western society at the time. The third-wave we've seen since the 1990s is less about equality and more gynocentric, to the point it does nothing but hurt the progression of gender equality.
Ever since all this "New Age" post-modern bullshit crept into it, it's been dangerously regressive. Thanks to that, we've had this whole "As a mother" rhetoric, "Men are evil" rhetoric (Hillary Clinton being very guilty of this), and the new age giving this whole "There's something special about being female and males will never know" bull. It's nonsense, all of it. I want gender equality more than anyone, and that's precisely that: gender equality, not female-supremacy.
There's a fair amount of room left for making females more equal with males in the West, that is true, but nobody can deny that there's inequality against males too.

It's good that nobody has.

Seriously, I'm getting tired of this strawman. Every single person in this thread who has identified as a feminist has said that they support EQUAL rights, which makes sense, since that's what feminism means. We've specified all sort of ways in which traditional gender roles hurt men which we'd like to fix. I had a whole long post enumerating some of these ways, which not one feminist in this thread has disputed. And yet, somehow, new people keep coming in to ignore everyone everyone says and bitch about how feminists just don't care about men. It's really getting old.

It's perfectly okay for me to dress as a guy, and if I decided to be transsexual or lesbian, people will just accept it.

Brandon Teena might beg to differ. As might the many, many victims of "corrective rape." I'm not sure what universe you live in in which lesbians and FTM transsexuals experience no discrimination, but it very definitely isn't this one.

But when a guy dresses as a girl, suddenly that's treading untouchable ground. If a guy ends up transsexual or gay, he risks assault and even murder.

Which is terrible, and something that feminists fight against. And if you perceive it as being so much worse for men to behave in "feminine" ways than for women to behave in "masculine" ways, perhaps you should ask why that might be. Could it possibly be because of a widespread cultural ethos in which being "manly" is something to be aspired to and being "girly" is something to be avoided, in which a woman acting like a man is improving herself and a man acting like a woman is demeaning himself? Gosh, that almost sounds like the sort of attitude feminism is explicitly about combating, doesn't it?

If I apply for a job with the same qualifications and experience as a guy, I'll be chosen without question because of anti-discrimination laws: if they chose him, I could claim misogyny, but if they choose me, nobody would take his claim of misandry seriously. I hope you get my gist

Your gist appears to be "I don't really know how affirmative action works."

Thank you for caring about me.

[GeneralHaNor]

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.

Funny, it's not like that were I work
People get paid based on experience, (and total hours)

[St George of England]

According to that survey, yes.

Funny, it's not like that were I work
People get paid based on experience, (and total hours)

Good2know. And entirely irrelevant, unless you can back that up with some evidence.

[Horsefish]

Funny, it's not like that were I work
People get paid based on experience, (and total hours)

Good2know. And entirely irrelevant, unless you can back that up with some evidence.

No because he's world is the only relevant one to him.

[Dempublicents1]

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.

Do you know who pushes that stereotype? Anti-feminists. Especially male anti-feminists, who can use "but I'm a man, I don't know any better!" for all sorts of bad behavior.

"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.

I know men who wear the same type of makeup as me. I haven't really seen "male" eyeliner, for instance, at the grocery store. It's just eyeliner. And there's no biological difference between my eyes and theirs that would necessitate a different product. They wear it for the same reasons that I do. In fact, some of them have given me tips on how best to apply it for various reasons. However, they won't necessarily mention that they wear it in just any company - because they would catch hell for it while no one would be the least bit surprised if I mentioned doing so.

[Dakini]

According to that survey, yes.

Funny, it's not like that were I work
People get paid based on experience, (and total hours)

And in my chosen line of work, reference letters are heavily relied upon to get one's foot in the door and even the most well-intentioned letters are likely costing women jobs.

Funded by the National Science Foundation, Rice University professors Michelle Hebl and Randi Martin and graduate student Juan Madera, now an assistant professor at the University of Houston, reviewed 624 letters of recommendation for 194 applicants for eight junior faculty positions at a U.S. university. They found that letter writers conformed to traditional gender schemas when describing candidates. Female candidates were described in more communal (social or emotive) terms and male candidates in more agentic (active or assertive) terms.

A further aspect of the study involved rating the strength of the letters, or the likelihood the candidate would be hired based on the letter. The research team removed names and personal pronouns from the letters and asked faculty members to evaluate them. The researchers controlled for such variables as the number of years candidates were in graduate school, the number papers they had published, the number of publications on which they were the lead author, the number of honors they received, the number of years of postdoctoral education, the position applied for and the number of courses taught.

"We found that being communal is not valued in academia," said Martin, the Elma Schneider Professor of Psychology at Rice. "The more communal characteristics mentioned, the lower the evaluation of the candidate."

For example: If Alice and Bob had the same supervisor who thought of them both very highly (equally highly even). Let's also say they both have the same number of first author papers (which are cited in about the same numbers), both took initiative, showed creative thinking in their graduate work and did their research equally well. Alice would be less likely to get a recommendation letter that would land her a job, even though her supervisor would not necessarily intend to write her a worse letter.

[GeneralHaNor]

Funny, it's not like that were I work
People get paid based on experience, (and total hours)

Good2know. And entirely irrelevant, unless you can back that up with some evidence.

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Emp ... ourly_Rate

I see nothing on their about getting paid more for having a penis
Nor have I ever seen it.

[Bottle]

I am irritated, and I do agree.

I fail to see your point, however.

That it's what happens when feminism goes too far.

Not that Everybody Loves Raymond is a feminist show... just that a theme like that exists BECAUSE feminism went too far and people are so afraid of being called sexist that they end up getting used to it.

Everybody Love Raymond isn't just not-feminist...it's ANTI-feminist. It is what happens when feminism doesn't WORK, or is ignored, or isn't accepted. It's what happens when there is not ENOUGH feminism, not when there is "too much" feminism.

[Bottle]

That it's what happens when feminism goes too far.

Not that Everybody Loves Raymond is a feminist show... just that a theme like that exists BECAUSE feminism went too far and people are so afraid of being called sexist that they end up getting used to it.

Are you shitting me? The two main characters on Everybody Loves Raymond are a successful sports journalist and his homemaker wife. He is presented as being great at his career but incompetent at household management. She is routinely mocked for being an insufficiently good cook. (Interestingly, for all that all the characters routinely insult her cooking, none of the men ever cook anything for themselves.) And you think this show exists because feminism went too far?

You said it better, and first. YOU WIN THIS ROUND!

[GeneralHaNor]

That it's what happens when feminism goes too far.

Not that Everybody Loves Raymond is a feminist show... just that a theme like that exists BECAUSE feminism went too far and people are so afraid of being called sexist that they end up getting used to it.

Everybody Love Raymond isn't just not-feminist...it's ANTI-feminist. It is what happens when feminism doesn't WORK, or is ignored, or isn't accepted. It's what happens when there is not ENOUGH feminism, not when there is "too much" feminism.

Boy you sure showed him
It's nice when someone comes along who's opinions are facts by virtue of them being feminist

[Kiskaanak]

I see you are just as confused about the goal of gender equity as many other of the people participating in this thread.

"Traditional" views of gender roles are harmful to men as well as women...feminists have long said this. That has been ignored however, in favour of claiming that women are only fighting to get rid of gender roles for women, as though this could possibly happen without impacting the gender roles imposed on men.

False. False and ridiculous. I'm sorry if you do not understand feminism, but please don't put forth your misunderstanding as as definition for it. Particularly when it comes to your claims about gender equity protection (fought for and hard won by feminists) which do in fact protect men from sexual harassment and discrimination.

She's not confused just for not seeing things like you do

No, she's confused for the reasons I clearly explained.

[Dakini]

Everybody Love Raymond isn't just not-feminist...it's ANTI-feminist. It is what happens when feminism doesn't WORK, or is ignored, or isn't accepted. It's what happens when there is not ENOUGH feminism, not when there is "too much" feminism.

Boy you sure showed him
It's nice when someone comes along who's opinions are facts by virtue of them being feminist

OrangeCats implied female status earlier. Unless she's a he with some serious moobs and thus requires a bra for jogging.

[Dempublicents1]

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.

Wow so are you one of those people who would like to erase femininity and masculinity? Make us all the same but only half of us pee standing up?

Not in the least. What I do say is that we should treat people as individuals, not as personified penises or vulvas. There's nothing "the same" about it. Different individuals like different things. They engage in different behaviors. They dress in different ways. No two individuals are exactly the same, regardless of how they pee. So why should we arbitrarily expect anyone who pees the same way as someone else to like the same things or engage in the same behaviors (beyond the peeing thing)?

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

Still not understanding the difference between that and normal dress codes.

With a normal dress code, every employee is treated equally. The standards are not arbitrarily changed based on the sex, ethnicity, etc. of the employee.

I'm female myself, but I stand away from feminism. The first- and second-wave feminist movements were fantastically necessary, serving to end the discriminatory laws and prejudices in Western society at the time. The third-wave we've seen since the 1990s is less about equality and more gynocentric, to the point it does nothing but hurt the progression of gender equality.

Oh?

Ever since all this "New Age" post-modern bullshit crept into it, it's been dangerously regressive. Thanks to that, we've had this whole "As a mother" rhetoric, "Men are evil" rhetoric (Hillary Clinton being very guilty of this), and the new age giving this whole "There's something special about being female and males will never know" bull. It's nonsense, all of it. I want gender equality more than anyone, and that's precisely that: gender equality, not female-supremacy.

(a) Can you point to Hillary Clinton claiming that men are evil? I don't like the woman, but I know I haven't seen anything of that sort from her.
(b) None of what you describe here has anything to do with feminism.

There's a fair amount of room left for making females more equal with males in the West, that is true, but nobody can deny that there's inequality against males too. It's perfectly okay for me to dress as a guy, and if I decided to be transsexual or lesbian, people will just accept it. But when a guy dresses as a girl, suddenly that's treading untouchable ground. If a guy ends up transsexual or gay, he risks assault and even murder. If I apply for a job with the same qualifications and experience as a guy, I'll be chosen without question because of anti-discrimination laws: if they chose him, I could claim misogyny, but if they choose me, nobody would take his claim of misandry seriously. I hope you get my gist

So.....you sound like a feminist.

Say no to affirmative action.

So we shouldn't actually do anything to address inequality?

Destroy discrimination through education and collectivity,

This is incompatible with saying no to affirmative action.

[Xsyne]

Everybody Love Raymond isn't just not-feminist...it's ANTI-feminist. It is what happens when feminism doesn't WORK, or is ignored, or isn't accepted. It's what happens when there is not ENOUGH feminism, not when there is "too much" feminism.

Boy you sure showed him
It's nice when someone comes along who's opinions are facts by virtue of them being feminist

Yes, someone says that something openly misogynist is not feminist in nature and clearly you're supposed to accept it based on their feminist credentials, not anything like - oh wait you were the guy claiming that words didn't mean things weren't you.

[Bottle]

Everybody Love Raymond isn't just not-feminist...it's ANTI-feminist. It is what happens when feminism doesn't WORK, or is ignored, or isn't accepted. It's what happens when there is not ENOUGH feminism, not when there is "too much" feminism.

Boy you sure showed him
It's nice when someone comes along who's opinions are facts by virtue of them being feminist

Happily, TNB already covered this, so anybody who is actually interested (i.e. not you) will be easily able to read a better post than mine.

[GeneralHaNor]

Boy you sure showed him
It's nice when someone comes along who's opinions are facts by virtue of them being feminist

OrangeCats implied female status earlier. Unless she's a he with some serious moobs and thus requires a bra for jogging.

Stupid internet and it's lack of visual gender identification