If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NPR)   Fifty years later, does Betty Friedan's "Feminine Mystique" still resonate, or has it become too broad?   (npr.org) divider line 158
    More: Followup, Betty Friedan, Gail Collins, Hanna Rosin, discrimination in the workplace, manifestos, World War II America  
•       •       •

4616 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Feb 2013 at 1:02 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



158 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-10 03:13:08 PM  

dersk: Shakespeare's Sister: dersk: Shakespeare's Sister: To teach my students about argument, I use this: Women should or should not be required to register for selective service. Once I explain what it is, most of my female students argue yes, they should, and my male students argue no, they should not. I have been using this example for 10 years, and the answers almost always mirror this. I have yet to understand.

I read the book. It was awful.

There is a big difference between feminist and feminazi.

I do admit, I like having doors opened for me, help on with my coat, and chairs pulled out. There is something about that old fashioned behavior that makes me willing to put out. The entire time my fiance and I have been together I have not opened my own door, put on my coat without help, pulled out my own chair, or had to lift anything heavy. However, I do pay for dates. I have no problem with that at all. I joke with him that I paid, so he has to put out. He smiles and agrees.

Oh, apparently YOU'RE the one who's bitter because someone called you fat in a bar once. I can just sense the rage seeping between the lines of your post.

I am not bitter, and there was no rage in the post. I do not know where you got either of those ideas from. Wow. Just wow. Did we skip our meds this morning?

No, no, no - someone posted about how all the feminists, including someone in the thread, only care about equal rights and stuff like that because they were once insulted. When I challenged the poster to say who he was talking about, he detumesced.


I see. So you thought it might just be me? I guess that makes sense. I have not been called fat in a bar, but I was called a cock tease. No worries.
 
2013-02-10 03:13:32 PM  

dersk: WhippingBoy: dersk: No, no, no - someone posted about how all the feminists, including someone in the thread, only care about equal rights and stuff like that because they were once insulted. When I challenged the poster to say who he was talking about, he detumesced.

He's talking about me.

Here is what I said:

Actually, I've found this to be true about a number of self-described "feminists": upper-middle class background, highly educated, high-five or six figure income, life of privilege... yet somehow, they're "oppressed" because one guy in a bar once called them "fat".

I most certainly did not claim "all" feminists.

But you did call out someone in the thread and then detumesce when I challenged you.


I don't understand your big words. If you mean that I called someone out in this thread, and then failed to identify her when challenged, then yes, I did do that. It was intellectually(?) dishonest of me to do that; I certainly deserve your scorn.

However, is it really that hard to believe that some people who claim "oppression" aren't nearly as "oppressed" as they'd like you to think?
 
2013-02-10 03:14:12 PM  

dersk: GF named my left testicle thundercles: DamnYankees: Feminism is one of those things which was so successful in completely transforming the way society views itself and its goal was so broadly achieved and became so 'normal' (mostly), that the idea of having a movement for it become a weird thing and therefore garnered a lot of hate.

women working is more the result of industrialization than the feminist movement. Industrialization and the rise of the tertiary sector made it possible for women to work were it was previously physically impossible. i am curious to find out what is going to happen to women in the next 50 years because just like primary and secondary jobs were reduced by industrialization, teriary jobs are being replaced by computerization (think how many people work in retail shops and how those are being replaced by online shops).

Primary and secondary jobs? I've never heard that distinction, but I assume you're talking about manufacturing, distribution and retailing?

Given that most of the open jobs in US manufacturing are for more high-tech manufacturing where you need to control the computer, not the drill press, I doubt it'll be an issue. And I'm not sure what planet you've been living on - women have been working since civilization pretty much started. Hell, brewing and baking were women's work, and it's hard enough that they're called brasseries in French (because it takes so much arm strength).


of course women have worked since forever. part of what i meant in that post was that because of inventions like the washing machine, dishwasher, refrigerator, supermarket, vacuum cleaner, fast food, tv dinners, and all sorts of modern conviences, house keeping became a part time job. which allowed women to goto work outside the home.
 
2013-02-10 03:16:08 PM  

Shakespeare's Sister: dersk: Shakespeare's Sister: dersk: Shakespeare's Sister: To teach my students about argument, I use this: Women should or should not be required to register for selective service. Once I explain what it is, most of my female students argue yes, they should, and my male students argue no, they should not. I have been using this example for 10 years, and the answers almost always mirror this. I have yet to understand.

I read the book. It was awful.

There is a big difference between feminist and feminazi.

I do admit, I like having doors opened for me, help on with my coat, and chairs pulled out. There is something about that old fashioned behavior that makes me willing to put out. The entire time my fiance and I have been together I have not opened my own door, put on my coat without help, pulled out my own chair, or had to lift anything heavy. However, I do pay for dates. I have no problem with that at all. I joke with him that I paid, so he has to put out. He smiles and agrees.

Oh, apparently YOU'RE the one who's bitter because someone called you fat in a bar once. I can just sense the rage seeping between the lines of your post.

I am not bitter, and there was no rage in the post. I do not know where you got either of those ideas from. Wow. Just wow. Did we skip our meds this morning?

No, no, no - someone posted about how all the feminists, including someone in the thread, only care about equal rights and stuff like that because they were once insulted. When I challenged the poster to say who he was talking about, he detumesced.

I see. So you thought it might just be me? I guess that makes sense. I have not been called fat in a bar, but I was called a cock tease. No worries.


Never taunt male fowl. Always leads to trouble.
 
2013-02-10 03:23:19 PM  

dersk: By the way, using the phrase 'a number of' or 'some say' or other words like that is really weak beer. Perhaps you were intending to troll, but I usually read that as 'Here's what I think, and I have no evidence or specific examples, but...'...


Fair enough. I wasn't attempting to troll, and I was trying to be as honest as possible. Feminism, like every other movement, has its share of self-serving individuals who are only seeking personal gain and have no interest in justice or equality. There seems to be a disturbing trend to decry or label a "minsogynst" anyone who expresses scepticism of any aspect of the feminist movement, or expresses an opinion that differs from "the party line". This strikes me as intellectually dishonest (not to mention highly suspicious). I'm trying to provide an alternate voice (admittedly, sometimes exaggerated or extreme) in order to force the discussion and keep people "honest".

Merely my opinion, of course; at this time I have no evidence or specific examples...
 
2013-02-10 03:24:39 PM  

Bondith: Well, let's be honest.  A masculine Mystique wouldn't look quite as alluring painted blue and kicking Hugh Jackman's ass.


Are you kidding me, The Masculine Mystique IS Hugh Jackman's sexy ass.

/hey ladies
//I have a mystery ass here
///it's the same as Hugh Jackman's
////come look at it
//what
 
2013-02-10 03:28:21 PM  

GF named my left testicle thundercles: MadAzza: GF named my left testicle thundercles: [i1172.photobucket.com image 724x390]

"The only job for men is sludge digger; women smile constantly while doing housework."

one of the largest problems with feminism in general is the fact that they always look at the top of society, find that there are mostly men there, and then declare that society is set up to benefit men. The problem is that feminists will look up and see CEOs, presidents, nobles, generals, and whatever but they do not also look down at the bottom of society. if you do look down, you will find mostly men there too. about 80% of the homeless are men, almost all of combat deaths are men, almost all of uncomfortable and dangerous jobs are done by men, etc. feminists talk about the glass ceiling but they never ever talk about the glass floor. Its a major criticism because there are way more homeless people and prisoners and men in the army than there are CEOs and presidents. the entire idea that society benefits men came from looking at maybe the top 10% of society, and that is not a representative sample.

anyway here is a link to some really good ideas about that. http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm


Something else that they ignore is suicide rates. If men are so privileged, and life is great for them, why do they commit suicide at a rate nearly four times larger than women, and why does almost no one seem to care?
 
2013-02-10 03:28:47 PM  

MadAzza: Shakespeare's Sister: dersk: 
Oh, apparently YOU'RE the one who's bitter because someone called you fat in a bar once. I can just sense the rage seeping between the lines of your post.

I am not bitter, and there was no rage in the post. I do not know where you got either of those ideas from. Wow. Just wow. Did we skip our meds this morning?

dersk was playing off of something another poster said, not attacking you.


I know. He already explained it to me. No worries.
 
2013-02-10 03:29:51 PM  

WhippingBoy: dersk: WhippingBoy: dersk: No, no, no - someone posted about how all the feminists, including someone in the thread, only care about equal rights and stuff like that because they were once insulted. When I challenged the poster to say who he was talking about, he detumesced.

He's talking about me.

Here is what I said:

Actually, I've found this to be true about a number of self-described "feminists": upper-middle class background, highly educated, high-five or six figure income, life of privilege... yet somehow, they're "oppressed" because one guy in a bar once called them "fat".

I most certainly did not claim "all" feminists.

But you did call out someone in the thread and then detumesce when I challenged you.

I don't understand your big words. If you mean that I called someone out in this thread, and then failed to identify her when challenged, then yes, I did do that. It was intellectually(?) dishonest of me to do that; I certainly deserve your scorn.

However, is it really that hard to believe that some people who claim "oppression" aren't nearly as "oppressed" as they'd like you to think?


Sorry: detumsesce = go limp. Just a great word, and I thought it appropriate. And yeah, that's exactly what I was referring to. To be maybe brutally honest, it doesn't make me scorn you, but it does make me dismiss that particular argument, to take other arguments from you less seriously, and generally to think you're incrementally more full of crap.

It's not hard to believe that there's a woman somewhere who self-identifies as a feminist because she was insulted once. But it doesn't jibe with my experience. Every person I know who self-identifies as a feminist just thinks that women should be treated fairly and men shouldn't collectively be assholes. And I suspect that's where the vast majority are coming from.
 
2013-02-10 03:31:21 PM  

dersk: Shakespeare's Sister: dersk: Shakespeare's Sister: dersk: Shakespeare's Sister: To teach my students about argument, I use this: Women should or should not be required to register for selective service. Once I explain what it is, most of my female students argue yes, they should, and my male students argue no, they should not. I have been using this example for 10 years, and the answers almost always mirror this. I have yet to understand.

I read the book. It was awful.

There is a big difference between feminist and feminazi.

I do admit, I like having doors opened for me, help on with my coat, and chairs pulled out. There is something about that old fashioned behavior that makes me willing to put out. The entire time my fiance and I have been together I have not opened my own door, put on my coat without help, pulled out my own chair, or had to lift anything heavy. However, I do pay for dates. I have no problem with that at all. I joke with him that I paid, so he has to put out. He smiles and agrees.

Oh, apparently YOU'RE the one who's bitter because someone called you fat in a bar once. I can just sense the rage seeping between the lines of your post.

I am not bitter, and there was no rage in the post. I do not know where you got either of those ideas from. Wow. Just wow. Did we skip our meds this morning?

No, no, no - someone posted about how all the feminists, including someone in the thread, only care about equal rights and stuff like that because they were once insulted. When I challenged the poster to say who he was talking about, he detumesced.

I see. So you thought it might just be me? I guess that makes sense. I have not been called fat in a bar, but I was called a cock tease. No worries.

Never taunt male fowl. Always leads to trouble.


You see, that's the thing. I was not being a cock tease. I simply told the guy I was not interested and that I was there with my fiance. He was in the back playing poker and I was watching a basketball game on the tv. I wasn't taunting. I am too old to play those kind of games.
 
2013-02-10 03:38:25 PM  

dersk: It's not hard to believe that there's a woman somewhere who self-identifies as a feminist because she was insulted once. But it doesn't jibe with my experience. Every person I know who self-identifies as a feminist just thinks that women should be treated fairly and men shouldn't collectively be assholes. And I suspect that's where the vast majority are coming from.


I completely understand and respect that. However, in my experience, women are treated fairly and the vast majority of men are not assholes. Perhaps I'm seeing the world through rose-coloured glasses, or am willfully ignorant, I don't know. I just find it offensive, for example, when some "feminist" gets on his or her soapbox and tells me to "stop sexually assaulting women" when the very concept is abhorrent and utterly and completely repulsive to me. When you constantly hear about how "bad" the menz are, you tend to go on the defensive a bit.
 
2013-02-10 03:41:39 PM  

WhippingBoy: dersk: WhippingBoy: dersk:
I don't understand your big words. If you mean that I called someone out in this thread, and then failed to identify her when challenged, then yes, I did do that. It was intellectually(?) dishonest of me to do that; I certainly deserve your scorn.


That's because it's an unrelated medical term that he's trying to shoehorn into a sentence it doesn't fit in.  Someone is trying to sound a bit more intelligent than they are and doing a poor job of it.
 
2013-02-10 03:44:21 PM  

Spaced Cowboy: WhippingBoy: dersk: WhippingBoy: dersk:
I don't understand your big words. If you mean that I called someone out in this thread, and then failed to identify her when challenged, then yes, I did do that. It was intellectually(?) dishonest of me to do that; I certainly deserve your scorn.

That's because it's an unrelated medical term that he's trying to shoehorn into a sentence it doesn't fit in.  Someone is trying to sound a bit more intelligent than they are and doing a poor job of it.


Heh... that makes sense. I looked up the term, and for the life of me couldn't figure out what was going on. I assumed he was insulting my manhood, but even so, that didn't make sense in context.
 
2013-02-10 03:45:11 PM  

GF named my left testicle thundercles: dersk: GF named my left testicle thundercles: DamnYankees: Feminism is one of those things which was so successful in completely transforming the way society views itself and its goal was so broadly achieved and became so 'normal' (mostly), that the idea of having a movement for it become a weird thing and therefore garnered a lot of hate.

women working is more the result of industrialization than the feminist movement. Industrialization and the rise of the tertiary sector made it possible for women to work were it was previously physically impossible. i am curious to find out what is going to happen to women in the next 50 years because just like primary and secondary jobs were reduced by industrialization, teriary jobs are being replaced by computerization (think how many people work in retail shops and how those are being replaced by online shops).

Primary and secondary jobs? I've never heard that distinction, but I assume you're talking about manufacturing, distribution and retailing?

Given that most of the open jobs in US manufacturing are for more high-tech manufacturing where you need to control the computer, not the drill press, I doubt it'll be an issue. And I'm not sure what planet you've been living on - women have been working since civilization pretty much started. Hell, brewing and baking were women's work, and it's hard enough that they're called brasseries in French (because it takes so much arm strength).

of course women have worked since forever. part of what i meant in that post was that because of inventions like the washing machine, dishwasher, refrigerator, supermarket, vacuum cleaner, fast food, tv dinners, and all sorts of modern conviences, house keeping became a part time job. which allowed women to goto work outside the home.


Thank World War 2. Men went off to die in Africa, Europe, and Southeast Asia. Women went into the factories. My late grandmother test-fired cannon rounds at a munitions plant, and her sister worked on the production line of the same facility. For $0.65/hour.
 
2013-02-10 04:01:18 PM  

WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: I didn't misidentify her; those were meant to be two separate examples (one general and one specific) of privileged individuals who claim that they're oppressed.

It is quite possible to be privileged in some aspects and oppressed in others.

Of course it is. But it's as applicable to men as it is to women.


Surely you're not suggesting that any oppression enacted on men is equivalent to that enacted on women.
 
2013-02-10 04:05:42 PM  

austerity101: WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: I didn't misidentify her; those were meant to be two separate examples (one general and one specific) of privileged individuals who claim that they're oppressed.

It is quite possible to be privileged in some aspects and oppressed in others.

Of course it is. But it's as applicable to men as it is to women.

Surely you're not suggesting that any oppression enacted on men is equivalent to that enacted on women.


It all depends on what men or what women you're talking about.
 
2013-02-10 04:25:46 PM  

WhippingBoy: Spaced Cowboy: WhippingBoy: dersk: WhippingBoy: dersk:
I don't understand your big words. If you mean that I called someone out in this thread, and then failed to identify her when challenged, then yes, I did do that. It was intellectually(?) dishonest of me to do that; I certainly deserve your scorn.

That's because it's an unrelated medical term that he's trying to shoehorn into a sentence it doesn't fit in.  Someone is trying to sound a bit more intelligent than they are and doing a poor job of it.

Heh... that makes sense. I looked up the term, and for the life of me couldn't figure out what was going on. I assumed he was insulting my manhood, but even so, that didn't make sense in context.


It made sense to me, but I'm also an ivory-tower elitist, so...
 
2013-02-10 04:26:32 PM  

WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: I didn't misidentify her; those were meant to be two separate examples (one general and one specific) of privileged individuals who claim that they're oppressed.

It is quite possible to be privileged in some aspects and oppressed in others.

Of course it is. But it's as applicable to men as it is to women.

Surely you're not suggesting that any oppression enacted on men is equivalent to that enacted on women.

It all depends on what men or what women you're talking about.


We're talking about them en masse.
 
2013-02-10 04:52:05 PM  

Shakespeare's Sister: MadAzza: Shakespeare's Sister: dersk: 
Oh, apparently YOU'RE the one who's bitter because someone called you fat in a bar once. I can just sense the rage seeping between the lines of your post.

I am not bitter, and there was no rage in the post. I do not know where you got either of those ideas from. Wow. Just wow. Did we skip our meds this morning?

dersk was playing off of something another poster said, not attacking you.

I know. He already explained it to me. No worries.


Yeah, I failed to read ahead again.
 
2013-02-10 04:56:58 PM  

rustypouch: GF named my left testicle thundercles: MadAzza: GF named my left testicle thundercles: [i1172.photobucket.com image 724x390]

"The only job for men is sludge digger; women smile constantly while doing housework."

one of the largest problems with feminism in general is the fact that they always look at the top of society, find that there are mostly men there, and then declare that society is set up to benefit men. The problem is that feminists will look up and see CEOs, presidents, nobles, generals, and whatever but they do not also look down at the bottom of society. if you do look down, you will find mostly men there too. about 80% of the homeless are men, almost all of combat deaths are men, almost all of uncomfortable and dangerous jobs are done by men, etc. feminists talk about the glass ceiling but they never ever talk about the glass floor. Its a major criticism because there are way more homeless people and prisoners and men in the army than there are CEOs and presidents. the entire idea that society benefits men came from looking at maybe the top 10% of society, and that is not a representative sample.

anyway here is a link to some really good ideas about that. http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm

Something else that they ignore is suicide rates. If men are so privileged, and life is great for them, why do they commit suicide at a rate nearly four times larger than women, and why does almost no one seem to care?


Men SUCCEED in their suicide attempts more often than women because men *tend* to use direct, violent methods, such as handguns. Women tend to use passive methods, such as pills, which have a higher failure rate (the woman doesn't take enough, she's found before she expires, etc.).

Again, sex roles and socialization determine the outcome.

I don't think anyone is saying "life is so great for men." That's a gross oversimplification. Equality, by definition, goes both ways.
 
2013-02-10 04:57:17 PM  

austerity101: WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: I didn't misidentify her; those were meant to be two separate examples (one general and one specific) of privileged individuals who claim that they're oppressed.

It is quite possible to be privileged in some aspects and oppressed in others.

Of course it is. But it's as applicable to men as it is to women.

Surely you're not suggesting that any oppression enacted on men is equivalent to that enacted on women.

It all depends on what men or what women you're talking about.

We're talking about them en masse.


I can't honestly answer that question without some parameters. For example, is being (historically) expected to fight and die in war a form of oppression or privilege?
 
2013-02-10 05:03:10 PM  

DS1970: Generation_D: First wave feminism.

Wrecking relationships since 1963.

Feminism not only diminishes women's choices but denigrates the very gender it is supposed to protect.

The roll of "full-time mom" is both a "career choice" that is more unavailable to women and is a career-choice that is denigrated by the "feminist" movement.

Note also that by denigrating the idea of a "full-time dad" or "house-dad", feminism is also saying that a homemaker role is one to be looked down upon.

In the end, there are no favors for women in feminism.


Are you trolling or is today "backwards day"?
 
2013-02-10 05:06:19 PM  

incendi: DS1970: In the end, there are no favors for women in feminism.

I thought it was about equality, not doing one side favors.


I think either DS1970 never read Hark, a Vagrant! or misunderstood it, badly.
 
2013-02-10 05:08:29 PM  

MadAzza: Shakespeare's Sister: MadAzza: Shakespeare's Sister: dersk: 
Oh, apparently YOU'RE the one who's bitter because someone called you fat in a bar once. I can just sense the rage seeping between the lines of your post.

I am not bitter, and there was no rage in the post. I do not know where you got either of those ideas from. Wow. Just wow. Did we skip our meds this morning?

dersk was playing off of something another poster said, not attacking you.

I know. He already explained it to me. No worries.

Yeah, I failed to read ahead again.


No worries. I do that sometimes myself.
 
2013-02-10 05:11:23 PM  

Ross E. Krushan: Why is there never any discussion about masculinists?


Oh, there is.  But they call it the Men's Rights Movement ("MRM" for short).

There's also the "Pick-up Artist Community" (PUA) and for the truly depraved, "Men Going Their Own Way"  (MGTOW), which, alas, does not have its own Wikipedia artcle yet.
 
2013-02-10 05:20:00 PM  

DamnYankees: WhippingBoy: How about any PhD level professor of "Gender Studies" working at a major university?

Why did you put Gender Studies in quote marks. Are you quoting someone?


Ahh, scare quotes.  A brilliant debating tactic.
 
2013-02-10 05:26:19 PM  

ciberido: DamnYankees: WhippingBoy: How about any PhD level professor of "Gender Studies" working at a major university?

Why did you put Gender Studies in quote marks. Are you quoting someone?

Ahh, scare quotes.  A brilliant debating tactic.


I already explained why I did that.
 
2013-02-10 05:26:36 PM  
 Better than a chick tract?
 
2013-02-10 05:27:23 PM  

WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: I didn't misidentify her; those were meant to be two separate examples (one general and one specific) of privileged individuals who claim that they're oppressed.

It is quite possible to be privileged in some aspects and oppressed in others.

Of course it is. But it's as applicable to men as it is to women.

Surely you're not suggesting that any oppression enacted on men is equivalent to that enacted on women.

It all depends on what men or what women you're talking about.

We're talking about them en masse.

I can't honestly answer that question without some parameters. For example, is being (historically) expected to fight and die in war a form of oppression or privilege?


Does that ambiguous example somehow even out all of the far less ambiguous forms of privilege and oppression present in history and in the present?
 
2013-02-10 05:27:53 PM  

GF named my left testicle thundercles: [i1172.photobucket.com image 724x390]


images.t-nation.com
 
2013-02-10 05:28:20 PM  

DS1970: Generation_D: First wave feminism.

Wrecking relationships since 1963.

Feminism not only diminishes women's choices but denigrates the very gender it is supposed to protect.

The roll of "full-time mom" is both a "career choice" that is more unavailable to women and is a career-choice that is denigrated by the "feminist" movement.

Note also that by denigrating the idea of a "full-time dad" or "house-dad", feminism is also saying that a homemaker role is one to be looked down upon.

In the end, there are no favors for women in feminism.


Oh, look, you have never read anything a feminist ever posted--but that ragaholic misandrist MUST be a feminist, she said so on the internet!

Idiot.
 
2013-02-10 05:30:26 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: WhippingBoy: bighairyguy: What's Corporate America paying for a Women's Studies graduate these days?

What they're worth, I suspect.

It's really bizarre how concerned you are with what somebody somewhere chooses to study.


WhippingBoy is a very angry boy.  I guess it's all that whipping.

There's a LOT of butthurt in this thread.  Delicious, delicious butthurt.
 
2013-02-10 05:34:42 PM  

austerity101: WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: I didn't misidentify her; those were meant to be two separate examples (one general and one specific) of privileged individuals who claim that they're oppressed.

It is quite possible to be privileged in some aspects and oppressed in others.

Of course it is. But it's as applicable to men as it is to women.

Surely you're not suggesting that any oppression enacted on men is equivalent to that enacted on women.

It all depends on what men or what women you're talking about.

We're talking about them en masse.

I can't honestly answer that question without some parameters. For example, is being (historically) expected to fight and die in war a form of oppression or privilege?

Does that ambiguous example somehow even out all of the far less ambiguous forms of privilege and oppression present in history and in the present?


I don't know. I honestly don't. You obviously expect me to say that men have been more "oppressed" so you can jump down my throat and show me how "wrong" I am. It just seems to me that throughout history (including the present day) people in general have had it pretty rough for different and varying reasons.

In any case, these constant "us vs them", "men vs women", "feminists vs the ignorant masses" have only left me weary and depressed. I give up. You win.
 
2013-02-10 05:43:30 PM  

rustypouch: Something else that they ignore is suicide rates. If men are so privileged, and life is great for them, why do they commit suicide at a rate nearly four times larger than women, and why does almost no one seem to care?


I'm not sure who you think "they" are, or who constitutes " almost no one," but in fact books have been written on the time.  It is being studied.

In fact, one of the books mentioned in the article, The End of Men, discusses the problem at length.

As has already been pointed out in this thread, the goal of feminism is to create equality, not to subjugate men or create a matriarchy.  So, yes, concern about how these changes will affect men is part of feminism, and feminists are aware of and concerned about them.
 
2013-02-10 05:47:40 PM  

WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: austerity101: WhippingBoy: I didn't misidentify her; those were meant to be two separate examples (one general and one specific) of privileged individuals who claim that they're oppressed.

It is quite possible to be privileged in some aspects and oppressed in others.

Of course it is. But it's as applicable to men as it is to women.

Surely you're not suggesting that any oppression enacted on men is equivalent to that enacted on women.

It all depends on what men or what women you're talking about.

We're talking about them en masse.

I can't honestly answer that question without some parameters. For example, is being (historically) expected to fight and die in war a form of oppression or privilege?

Does that ambiguous example somehow even out all of the far less ambiguous forms of privilege and oppression present in history and in the present?

I don't know. I honestly don't. You obviously expect me to say that men have been more "oppressed" so you can jump down my throat and show me how "wrong" I am. It just seems to me that throughout history (including the present day) people in general have had it pretty rough for different and varying reasons.

In any case, these constant "us vs them", "men vs women", "feminists vs the ignorant masses" have only left me weary and depressed. I give up. You win.


I don't expect that at all; you just seem willing to be quite skeptical about the oppression that women experience, but you haven't offered anything to justify that skepticism.  There's mountains of evidence of this oppression and inequality.

You are correct that people have indeed had it pretty rough for different and varying reasons.  One of those reasons has been being a woman, and it continues to this day, though.
 
2013-02-10 05:49:56 PM  

WhippingBoy: Theaetetus: WhippingBoy: dersk: WhippingBoy: dersk: WhippingBoy: douchebag/hater: The Betty Friedan who came from a well-off family and went to private schools all her life then married 'wealthy' and had maids cleaning her houses and basically had the world by the tail then wrote a book biatching how tough it is to be a woman?That Betty Friedan?

Bullshiat is bullshiat especially from a hypocrite.

Actually, I've found this to be true about a number of self-described "feminists": upper-middle class background, highly educated, high-five or six figure income, life of privilege... yet somehow, they're "oppressed" because one guy in a bar once called them "fat".

Name one.

One has posted in this thread.

And that would be...?

I'd rather not get banned.

Translation: "Uh, crap. I got called on it, and I can't actually name anyone who has posted in the thread who meets that condition. I better give a weak excuse, and then name some vague strawman that no one can directly quote to show me wrong."

How about any PhD level professor of "Gender Studies" working at a major university?

Fair enough.

Here's one:  http://www.feministe.us/blog/about-this-website/about-jill/


Ah, so no one in this thread who is here to refute your baseless allegation? No one who can actually respond and say "no, I didn't say that, and stop putting words in my mouth, you farkwit"? Well, you sure are a courageous little troll, aren't you?
 
2013-02-10 05:51:21 PM  
Jeebus H Christ there are a lot of feminist shaming tactics being used in this thread. However, I'm surprised I haven't seen more penis insults and "little boy" comments.
 
2013-02-10 05:53:26 PM  

PsiChick: Oh, look, you have never read anything a feminist ever posted--but that ragaholic misandrist MUST be a feminist, she said so on the internet!


So would you say that there is a problem of people peddling vile bigotry under the guise of feminism?
 
2013-02-10 05:59:51 PM  

Quinsisdos: PsiChick: Oh, look, you have never read anything a feminist ever posted--but that ragaholic misandrist MUST be a feminist, she said so on the internet!

So would you say that there is a problem of people peddling vile bigotry under the guise of feminism?


Absolutely. Just look at WhippingBoy. Why, in another thread yesterday, he said:

WhippingBoy: The statue [of the kissing sailor] is merely a glorification of rape-culture perpetrated by the oppressive hegemonic patriarchy.

and

WhippingBoy: In fact, if you even look at a woman the wrong way, and she feels violated, it's prison for you.


So, yeah, there's a problem there. Mind you, it's not due to feminists.
 
2013-02-10 06:01:53 PM  

LewDux: [oi48.tinypic.com image 496x287]


That would be funny if it were true.

Human sex ratio
 
2013-02-10 06:30:41 PM  

Theaetetus: Quinsisdos: PsiChick: Oh, look, you have never read anything a feminist ever posted--but that ragaholic misandrist MUST be a feminist, she said so on the internet!

So would you say that there is a problem of people peddling vile bigotry under the guise of feminism?

Absolutely. Just look at WhippingBoy. Why, in another thread yesterday, he said:
WhippingBoy: The statue [of the kissing sailor] is merely a glorification of rape-culture perpetrated by the oppressive hegemonic patriarchy.
and
WhippingBoy: In fact, if you even look at a woman the wrong way, and she feels violated, it's prison for you.

So, yeah, there's a problem there. Mind you, it's not due to feminists.


So which is it? Am I a troll, or am I a vile bigot peddling my wares under the guise of feminism?
 
2013-02-10 06:38:25 PM  

WhippingBoy: Am I a troll, or am I a vile bigot peddling my wares under the guise of feminism?


... but you repeat yourself.
 
2013-02-10 06:39:34 PM  

Theaetetus: WhippingBoy: Am I a troll, or am I a vile bigot peddling my wares under the guise of feminism?

... but you repeat yourself.


I like you. You're a funny guy.
 
2013-02-10 07:01:20 PM  

Quinsisdos: PsiChick: Oh, look, you have never read anything a feminist ever posted--but that ragaholic misandrist MUST be a feminist, she said so on the internet!

So would you say that there is a problem of people peddling vile bigotry under the guise of feminism?


Oh, stop friend.  It's not as though there is a massive movement bent on convincing everyone that every male is a rapist and that every male thinks of rape a thousand times a day and that every man should be punished as a result of the actions of the vast minority.

Geez, you make it sound as though some scholars have built their entire careers around spreading the gospel that white masculinism is responsible for the gun culture, the rape culture and all of the other ills in the world.
 
2013-02-10 07:25:38 PM  

gimmegimme: It's not as though there is a massive movement bent on convincing everyone that every male is a rapist and that every male thinks of rape a thousand times a day and that every man should be punished as a result of the actions of the vast minority.


Yeah, there isn't.

However, there may be a massive movement bent on convincing rape victims that they're at least partially responsible for being raped (either via act or omission), and a corresponding second massive movement that responsively convinces  potentialrape victims that they should consider every male to be a  potential rapist or at least act that way so as to not be held partially responsible by the first massive movement due to any act or omission on their part.

It's amazing what happens when you remove the hyperbole and add some nuance.
 
2013-02-10 07:25:47 PM  
Well, there's NPR for ya.  Friedan was a goddamn communist, not a housewife. Christ.
 
2013-02-10 07:33:25 PM  

Theaetetus: gimmegimme: It's not as though there is a massive movement bent on convincing everyone that every male is a rapist and that every male thinks of rape a thousand times a day and that every man should be punished as a result of the actions of the vast minority.

Yeah, there isn't.

However, there may be a massive movement bent on convincing rape victims that they're at least partially responsible for being raped (either via act or omission), and a corresponding second massive movement that responsively convinces  potentialrape victims that they should consider every male to be a  potential rapist or at least act that way so as to not be held partially responsible by the first massive movement due to any act or omission on their part.

It's amazing what happens when you remove the hyperbole and add some nuance.


I'll remember that the next time someone explicitly challenges me to admit that my attitudes (whatever they are) resulted in a rape.  (And in all seriousness, I'm very sorry for the young woman and I hope that whoever hurt her is in jail.)

25.media.tumblr.com

I guess you're right; "men," (you know, all of them) are responsible for rape, just as this young lady suggests.  (Again, I hope the issue has never and will never affect her in a personal manner.)

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-02-10 07:41:56 PM  

gimmegimme: I guess you're right; "men," (you know, all of them) are responsible for rape, just as this young lady suggests.


Seriously, are you illiterate? That's the opposite of what I said, and I was explicitly disagreeing with you when you tried to say it the first time.
 
2013-02-10 08:00:38 PM  

ramblinwreck: Jeebus H Christ there are a lot of feminist shaming tactics being used in this thread. However, I'm surprised I haven't seen more penis insults and "little boy" comments.


To be honest, I started to call someone in this thread a "little boy" and edited it to be a little less condescending.  I'm trying to be less angry and more humorous.

/Not sure how well it's working.
 
2013-02-10 08:06:51 PM  

RevMark: LewDux: [oi48.tinypic.com image 496x287]

That would be funny if it were true.

Human sex ratio


Until I read that article, I did not know that gendercide was a word.  That makes me sad.
 
Displayed 50 of 158 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report