Radical Feminism

[Black Dog]

But, let's try this (and we have probably all been remiss at asking you this): as a feminist, what is it that you want?

Loathe as I am to co-opt the term "feminist" or speak for any actual feminists, I'll play the game. How's about we start with some acknowledgement of the existence of sociocultural anti-woman beliefs?

[Live From China]

the existence of sociocultural anti-woman beliefs?

Such as? And I do ask this with all due respect. And what word can we use in place of "feminist"? I am not always up on the latest terminology.

[Live From China]

My axe to grind is that why should a minority or a women get a job just because they are a minority or a woman.

One area where you will see this concept followed is in the field of aviation. No one, I repeat, no one will ever get a job as a pilot unless they have passed all the requirements. As friend of mine once said, "Transport Canada examiners do NOT care one iota about the genitals in the cockpit!" Either you can fly well or you can't. Either you can pass both the flight test and the ground school exam or you can't. The same goes for minorities.

This caveat applies even more strongly in the area of military/combat aviation.

Of course, flying is a highly specialized field, but I guess we can take heart that it is here that only the qualifications truly matter.

[JerrySeinfeld]

I have a question:

If Hillary becomes President, will the "women are oppressed" crowd finally shut up?

[Catchme]

But, let's try this (and we have probably all been remiss at asking you this): as a feminist, what is it that you want?

How's about we start with some acknowledgement of the existence of sociocultural anti-woman beliefs?

Great starting place! No one seems to want to respond though, telling that is!

[Melanie_]

QUOTE

"Most American women subscribe philosophically to the older 'First Wave' kind of feminism whose main goal is equity, especially in politics and education."

I would say this is probably true.

But, let's try this (and we have probably all been remiss at asking you this): as a feminist, what is it that you want?

I'm not interested in quotas or artificial representation in a field. I want gender to become irrelevent in the workplace - that is, a person doing any job is a person, and their gender isn't a consideration. That extends not just to hiring practices, but also to day to day interactions with coworkers, customers/clients, supervisors, etc. Sexist comments like those mentioned earlier in the thread shouldn't be happening in either direction.

Each occupation has its own forms of challenges and risks, and should be paid accordingly. Equal pay for equal work means that an unbiased assessment determines the level of responsibility, training, and specialization a job requires. Jobs can then be compared to other jobs that are equivelent on those terms, and paid accordingly.

[jefferiah]

QUOTE

"Most American women subscribe philosophically to the older 'First Wave' kind of feminism whose main goal is equity, especially in politics and education."

I would say this is probably true.

But, let's try this (and we have probably all been remiss at asking you this): as a feminist, what is it that you want?

I'm not interested in quotas or artificial representation in a field. I want gender to become irrelevent in the workplace - that is, a person doing any job is a person, and their gender isn't a consideration. That extends not just to hiring practices, but also to day to day interactions with coworkers, customers/clients, supervisors, etc. Sexist comments like those mentioned earlier in the thread shouldn't be happening in either direction.

Each occupation has its own forms of challenges and risks, and should be paid accordingly. Equal pay for equal work means that an unbiased assessment determines the level of responsibility, training, and specialization a job requires. Jobs can then be compared to other jobs that are equivelent on those terms, and paid accordingly.

I believe this Melanie. I understand that probably the great majority of women do feel this way. But the Advisory Council on The Status Women which distributes gov funding to feminist groups across the country believes in enforcing gender parity, even in parliament, through an affirmative action quota. They are selective in the women's groups that they fund as well. They only distribute funding to groups which are pro-abortion and pro-affirmative action. There are other feminist groups out there. The advisory council is not elected by a referendum of women.

[jefferiah]

Basically the advisory council opts to distribute Gov funding to groups which share their own agenda and proposed methods of solving women's issues---the socialist path. Other women are not true feminists by their standard.

[Live From China]

Basically the advisory council opts to distribute Gov funding to groups which share their own agenda and proposed methods of solving women's issues---the socialist path. Other women are not true feminists by their standard.

I agree. I guess that's we are asked the question, "Who stole feminism?".

Switch topic: I wonder about the concept of oppression. When you are oppressed, you have no access to power. Especially the power to complain and then act upon those complaints. Throughout history we have seen what happens to the oppressed when they speak out.

[Drea]

ALL women alive today are feminists.

If a woman has ever driven a car -- she is a feminist

If a woman has ever voted - she is a feminist

If a woman has ever held a job - she is a feminist

If a woman has ever engaged in conversation with a male other than her husband, father or brother - she is a feminist.

If a woman has ever initiated sex - she is a feminist

If a woman has ever made a purchasing decision for her family - she is a feminist

If a woman has ever gone braless in public - she is a feminist

Every single thing we women do that we did not do one hundred years ago is "feminist".

We should have a special day honouring women who have gone before us to fight for the levels of equality we enjoy today.

[jefferiah]

ALL women alive today are feminists.

If a woman has ever driven a car -- she is a feminist

If a woman has ever voted - she is a feminist

If a woman has ever held a job - she is a feminist

If a woman has ever engaged in conversation with a male other than her husband, father or brother - she is a feminist.

If a woman has ever initiated sex - she is a feminist

If a woman has ever made a purchasing decision for her family - she is a feminist

If a woman has ever gone braless in public - she is a feminist

Every single thing we women do that we did not do one hundred years ago is "feminist".

We should have a special day honouring women who have gone before us to fight for the levels of equality we enjoy today.

I dont know if thats true Drea, you are speaking for other women. Though I understand what you mean.

[Melanie_]

Amen, Drea!

[Drea]

oops double post

[Drea]

Thanks Melanie!

I advocate that February 28 be a special day off honouring the women who fought for us -- from sufferagettes in the early part of last century to the women of the 70's who burned their bras to the women of the 1980's and 90's who continued to try to break through the glass ceiling.

They (and women today who continue the "fight") deserve to be honoured as the heroes that they are.

[Black Dog]

Such as? And I do ask this with all due respect.

Well, I'll start with one we already touched on: the crime of rape and its underlying causes. But then, according to your previous tsatements, rape is not a women's issue because not all women have been raped.

I would argue, based on the fact that rape is overwhelmingly perpetuated by men against women, and in contexts quite unlike those of other criminal acts (young males, the most likely victims of physical violence, are usually victimized in adversarial situations-ie. fights- where as the the typical rapist is an acquaintance, or intimate of the victim.)

Switch topic: I wonder about the concept of oppression. When you are oppressed, you have no access to power. Especially the power to complain and then act upon those complaints. Throughout history we have seen what happens to the oppressed when they speak out.

Generally speakling, I think oppression can be defined as arbitrarily enforced inequality. Thus standards of what constitute oppression can vary tremendously from society to society. Institutional or social barriers western women face pale in comparison to the life and death struggles of those in other parts of the world, but I think they can still be regarded as a form of oppression.

[cybercoma]

I advocate equal rights for men on television/film and subsequently in real life. I think it's time men stood up for their rights and raised consciousness about the abuse they suffer from women. Constantly, we are bombarded by images of women slapping and otherwise physically abusing men, we're also subjected to imagery of them berating and being verbally abusive towards men as well. The standards in society has shifted. If a woman slaps a cheating husband, it's perfectly acceptable. If a man were to slap his cheating wife, it'd be abuse. If a woman is insulting towards her husband, she's strong. If a man insults his wife, he's abusive.

It's time we raised our consciousness on this and spoke out against any form of abuse against anyone. Women do not have the right to slap or verbally abuse men anymore than men have that right over women. It's despicable and it's creating a world where girls and women are learning that they can get away with anything they want because the men's hands are tied.

When talking equalty we need to teach people about equal respect. Women should respect men, just as men should respect women.

[Catchme]

Here is a really good example of systemic anti-woman rhetoric alive and well on TV.

Last night while watching CSI Las Vegas, the CSI were trying to do a reverse trumped up murder scene, and were trying to decide who to get involved, or not.

They would not go to the DA and get "her" to help because she was a strictly by the book "bitch". And yes, they used the word bitch.

1. It showed Catherine as being actually weak willed, or nicely complianent for going along with such BS

2. Showed those women who stand firm in what they believe is correct as being "bitches"

Men would never be so labelled on TV for being firm in their stance. Shows one how far there is to go yet.

[Drea]

In 90% of the cases, if a woman goes "physical" on a man he can simply hold her arms. Threat thwarted.

If I slap you chances are you will have a red mark for a day.

If you slap me chances are I will end up with a black eye or broken jaw.

If your woman is insulting or slapping you -- leave. It's not like you are financially dependant on her.

It is much more difficult for a woman to leave an abusive relationship because she is more-than-likely financially dependant.

My sister would have left her asshole many years ago, but she cannot afford to live on her own -- $1500 a month is not enough to live on. So she stays, she is miserable. And no, he does not hit her, he simply called her a loser for the past 16 years.

Dirty rotten little sob will get an earful from me one of these days. :angry:

[Black Dog]

It's time we raised our consciousness on this and spoke out against any form of abuse against anyone. Women do not have the right to slap or verbally abuse men anymore than men have that right over women. It's despicable and it's creating a world where girls and women are learning that they can get away with anything they want because the men's hands are tied.

When talking equalty we need to teach people about equal respect. Women should respect men, just as men should respect women.

I don't know that anyone would argue that a woman has any more right to hit a man than he does to hit a woman. So right there, it's a bit of a strawman. The other thing is that these attempts always seem to be attempts to draw equivilance between violence against women and violence against men by women, despite the much greater prevelance and severity of the former compared to the latter. I can support the basic (if facile) conclusion that everyone's persons should be respected regardless of their gender, but I believe that this construct creates a false equivilancy that actually minimizes the much bigger problem of institutionalized violence against women.

[margrace]

Thanks Melanie!

I advocate that February 28 be a special day off honouring the women who fought for us -- from sufferagettes in the early part of last century to the women of the 70's who burned their bras to the women of the 1980's and 90's who continued to try to break through the glass ceiling.

They (and women today who continue the "fight") deserve to be honoured as the heroes that they are.

Yes Drea when I hear of young women not bothering to vote it makes me angry. Our mothers fought for the right and they discount it.

[cybercoma]

It's time we raised our consciousness on this and spoke out against any form of abuse against anyone. Women do not have the right to slap or verbally abuse men anymore than men have that right over women. It's despicable and it's creating a world where girls and women are learning that they can get away with anything they want because the men's hands are tied.

When talking equalty we need to teach people about equal respect. Women should respect men, just as men should respect women.

I don't know that anyone would argue that a woman has any more right to hit a man than he does to hit a woman. So right there, it's a bit of a strawman. The other thing is that these attempts always seem to be attempts to draw equivilance between violence against women and violence against men by women, despite the much greater prevelance and severity of the former compared to the latter. I can support the basic (if facile) conclusion that everyone's persons should be respected regardless of their gender, but I believe that this construct creates a false equivilancy that actually minimizes the much bigger problem of institutionalized violence against women.

I just find it appalling that there is a double-standard set and accepted to the point that most people don't seem to notice it.

If a woman slaps a man, I find it no different than if a man were to slap a woman. Drea even raises the point that if a woman slaps a man, it may only leave a red mark for a day. This somehow makes it acceptable? So, if I were to slap my wife/gf but only with enough force to leave a red mark for a day, is that ok?

This behaviour of women being able to slap men and use disparaging remarks towards them, serves no purpose other than to perpetuate the idea that women are the weaker sex because men can handle their abuse. The social acceptance of this behaviour does more damage to equality than most people think.

Institutionalized violence against women is the bigger problem, but to change that people's awareness needs to be raised. By allowing it to be acceptable for women to abuse men, people automatically take a leap and determine that it's ok because men can handle it. Men are stronger. Women are weak and their assault and abuse is ineffective.

Women are not weak and abuse is abuse. Whether women are inflicting it or men. Working in retail for years, I can tell you that some of the most blatantly sexist people on the planet are women. I work for a large home improvement retailer and if I had a dollar for everytime a woman made some sexist remark about women, I'd be rich.

In fact, when there are women working in areas such as tools, building materials, lumber, it is the female customers that more often than not have a problem going to the female employees. And in areas such as, blinds, paint and wallpaper, the women equally discriminate against male employees working in those areas.

Yes, I know... it's anectdotal, but it's interesting to see women perpetuate their own stereotypes.

[Black Dog]

I just find it appalling that there is a double-standard set and accepted to the point that most people don't seem to notice it.

It could be that people don't notice said double standard because it doesn't exist. Again: who says its okay for a woman to hit a man?

If a woman slaps a man, I find it no different than if a man were to slap a woman. Drea even raises the point that if a woman slaps a man, it may only leave a red mark for a day. This somehow makes it acceptable? So, if I were to slap my wife/gf but only with enough force to leave a red mark for a day, is that ok?

The point isn't that its okay, but that a man hitting a woman is, generally speaking, probably going to be a bit more serious than if the scenario were reversed.

This behaviour of women being able to slap men and use disparaging remarks towards them, serves no purpose other than to perpetuate the idea that women are the weaker sex because men can handle their abuse. The social acceptance of this behaviour does more damage to equality than most people think.

i agree. And so would many feminists. Indeed, the socially constructed gender roles which restrict men's emotional development and expression is one of the ways the patriarchy hurts men too.

Institutionalized violence against women is the bigger problem, but to change that people's awareness needs to be raised. By allowing it to be acceptable for women to abuse men, people automatically take a leap and determine that it's ok because men can handle it. Men are stronger. Women are weak and their assault and abuse is ineffective.

I agree with you to a certain extent. The depiction of f on m violence is usually put in a context that shows it's not a serious matter, when the reality is it certainly can be. But I think you'll have a hard time finding any seriou sperson saying that that is okay.

Women are not weak and abuse is abuse. Whether women are inflicting it or men. Working in retail for years, I can tell you that some of the most blatantly sexist people on the planet are women. I work for a large home improvement retailer and if I had a dollar for everytime a woman made some sexist remark about women, I'd be rich.

In fact, when there are women working in areas such as tools, building materials, lumber, it is the female customers that more often than not have a problem going to the female employees. And in areas such as, blinds, paint and wallpaper, the women equally discriminate against male employees working in those areas.

Yes, I know... it's anectdotal, but it's interesting to see women perpetuate their own stereotypes.

Ah, that would be another example of social anti-woman attitudes. So pervasive they are, that even women buy into them.

[Drea]

Ah, that would be another example of social anti-woman attitudes. So pervasive they are, that even women buy into them.

That's for sure, BD.

Our society (indeed the whole world) has been patriachal for so long that some women don't even realize they are "sexist" to their own gender.

[cybercoma]

I understand BD, that you think no one is saying it's ok for women to abuse men, but humor me and try this one time. While watching television, when you notice a woman being physically aggressive, or outright verbally or physically abusive towards a man, imagine the role reversed. It struck me as odd when watching a comedy show it was perfectly ok, in fact humourous, for a woman to abuse a man.

I disagree that there is no double standard. I think there is very much a double-standard and people don't even realize it.

Watch 5 minutes of Jerry Springer. It's mostly evident there, with the scum of the earth they drag in (when it's not actors). You'll see women going all out, slapping, scratching and punching men, and more often than not the men just turn around and run away because it's not at all acceptable for them to strike back. Yet it seems to be fair, although uncouth, for the woman to go all out beating on him.

You'll have to convince me that the double-standard doesn't exist because I think pop-culture constantly shows examples of how it does exist.

[cybercoma]

Thinking about it, I'm not saying there are no anti-women views in society. I guess, my conclusion, would be that sex really doesn't matter. There's anti-men and anti-women and I think they're both prevalent. What I think it comes down to is respect. There's a serious problem with respect for one another.