Home | Download | Discussion | Help | Site Map | New Posts | Sign in

Latest Site News

Theme Seasons and Celebrations - posted on 1st Oct 2017 at 1:52 PM
Replies: 139 (Who?), Viewed: 39281 times.
Page 1 of 6
Bunned
Original Poster
#1 Old 14th Mar 2015 at 10:27 PM
Default Feminism
Do you agree with it?

I honestly don't know if I could consider myself one or not. On one hand, people (especially on Tumblr) get very carried away with it. On another, it's highly criticized. Why? Because of the people who get carried away with it or have stupid reasons for wanting gender equality. Okay, I've never been "cat-called on the street" either, so I guess I can kind of see where the anti-feminists are coming from. But I'm a girl; wouldn't it be hypocritical for me to not be a feminist? I know there are women out there who consider themselves anti-feminists, but still.

Yes, it gets on my nerves when girls are stereotypically portrayed as "weak". But then I also listen to this, so I really don't know.

This account doesn't exist
Advertisement
Née whiterider
staff: administrator
#2 Old 14th Mar 2015 at 10:46 PM
To be honest, I think it's hypocritical of anyone who's not deliberately a bastard to not be a feminist. For sure there's lots of diversity within feminist thought, and lots of contradictions too; you can't be both an intersectional feminist (hello!) and a trans exterminatory radical feminist (boo!), for example, because the beliefs are mutually exclusive. But that kind of reveals the impossibility of being a good person and not a feminist: there's so much diversity within feminism that there will always be a version of it which fits your views, unless your views are that women, racial minorities, LGBT people and disabled people should all be treated like shit, and men should be held to ridiculous standards of masculinity and punished if they fail by, for example, not liking sports, or being raped. Which, you know, they're not. So hooray! You're probably already a feminist and you just don't know it.


"To be honest, I think it's hypocritical of anyone who's not deliberately a bastard to not be a feminist" - To clarify this, you can act in ways which are not feminist; either by accident or on purpose. But if you do that and then turn around and express opinions which are not bastardy, you're betraying your own opinions, and should work on your behaviour. All yous in this paragraph are general yous.

What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact.
Top Secret Researcher
#3 Old 14th Mar 2015 at 10:56 PM
In this case, I think we need a solid definition of the subject in order to discuss it.

Feminism means a lot of different things to different people. Some people consider it a tool to bring people together to fight for rights. Some people think it's a tool for allowing women to take over the world. (Mainly the anti-feminists.)

But let's make it clear: feminism is a tool. All civil rights movements are tools. You don't ask whether a hammer is good or bad, you ask whether people are using it in a bad way. This certainly happens, but someone bashing a head in with a hammer does not mean that the hammer is inherently violent. Some people use feminism badly, but that does not mean that the core concept is flawed.

That core concept is that women should not be treated as inferior because of our biological differences. Feminism, as a movement, is a way to get people together so they can challenge the idea of inferiority, attract more people to their way of thinking, and provide solid opposition, both legally and socially, to the ideas they disagree with. This is the same idea behind abolitionism and prohibition, so take that as you will.

So the real question is this: do you think women are inferior to men because of their genitals? If not, then you agree with feminism in at least one respect.

Down to specifics, there are a ton of separate movements under the overall umbrella of feminism. Some focus on improving rights for women, some focus on intersections (how multiple stigma interact, like how poor women are worse off than rich, or how transwomen have their own issues), and some work in more radical ways, like trying to change the nature of government itself.
Then there are the nuts, like the people who think it's wrong for people to raise babies because the babies don't get to choose who their parents are, or the people who think that women are inherently superior to men. Or the ones who specifically try to undermine other issues because "feminism is more important". These people are usually ignored by feminism at large until they do something stupid.

Anyway, even the groups that agree on basic issues often work in different ways. For instance, some ecofeminists support PETA and some plant trees.

Point is, feminism is not a big, united group. It's a bunch of groups that sometimes work together because their goals are the same. If you disagree with one branch or some goals, there's probably another to your liking.
Alchemist
#4 Old 15th Mar 2015 at 6:46 AM
All of what hugbug993 said. You're pretty much a feminist already if you believe that women should be treated like people and reject outdated notions about what women "should" or "shouldn't" be. It's entirely possible to be rational and level-headed about a cause without taking away from the importance of the cause or indulging in poo flinging contests.

"The more you know, the sadder you get."~ Stephen Colbert
"Science literacy is a vaccine against the charlatans of the world that would exploit your ignorance."~ Neil DeGrasse Tyson
"I'm not going to censor myself to comfort your ignorance." ~ Jon Stewart
Banned
#5 Old 15th Mar 2015 at 7:38 AM
I mean, quoting from my tutor, you don't hire a woman because of the feminist movement over a man who has the skills to do better than the woman.
Happy International Mother's Week, ladies. 24 hours, and it's back to normal.
Lab Assistant
#6 Old 15th Mar 2015 at 7:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hugbug993
In this case, I think we need a solid definition of the subject in order to discuss it.

Feminism means a lot of different things to different people. Some people consider it a tool to bring people together to fight for rights. Some people think it's a tool for allowing women to take over the world. (Mainly the anti-feminists.)

But let's make it clear: feminism is a tool. All civil rights movements are tools. You don't ask whether a hammer is good or bad, you ask whether people are using it in a bad way. This certainly happens, but someone bashing a head in with a hammer does not mean that the hammer is inherently violent. Some people use feminism badly, but that does not mean that the core concept is flawed.


I like your approach to this, in that if we're going to discuss, first we need to define it and see what it looks like. I did a lot of that in my Psychology and Philosophy classes; it's amazing to see the differences between what one group of people thinks about a certain word/subject compared with another group of people.These are the definitions of "feminist" from Merriam-Webster's online dictionary: (1) the theory of the political, economic, and social quality of the sexes; (2) organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests.

My own personal belief is that women and men should be able to have the same opportunities, but should be held to the same standards. For example, right now in our military, the Physical Training (PT) standards are different between men and women. Women don't have to do as many situps/pushups as men do to be able to pass their physical tests. After being in the military myself, and seeing that women are just as capable as men, and in some cases even more competent than men in these areas, I would like to see one standard for men and women to pass, not differences in what is considered passing based on your gender. I do actually appreciate the more pronounced differences between genders, but I don't think that either gender should have things "easier" than the other.
As far as finances go, women and men should be getting paid the same for whatever job they're doing. I know its statistically proven that men make more money than women do, I'm not sure the reasons why that still is that way, so if anyone knows more about that I would be interested to hear what you have to say.
In terms of mental capabilities, men are better at math and women are better at writing/reading. I think the obvious reasons for that is that women are typically more social and men are typically more logical and use their reasoning abilities more. I do find that particular stereotype to be true for me, I'm a female and suck at math, but man can I write an awesome paper, lol. I also know some people that this is backwards for as well. Some men are better at writing and some women are better at math.
I think that when it comes down to it, there are things that men/women seem to be on average better at, but I still think it's wrong to exclude one gender over another in something just because "typically" men/women are better at it than the other gender. I know that when someone tells me I probably couldn't do something just because I'm a women really pisses me off. On the flip side I also find myself getting upset when men are told they can't do something as well because of their gender too. Well, really I don't like when anyone's told they can't do something that they can do.
In social terms, I think it's okay for men to have more feminine qualities and women to have more masculine qualities. People should just be able to be who they are and not have to worry about being a girl doing something "boyish" or being a guy doing something "girlish". I think men are just as capable as women at raising children (not all of course, but you know what? some women aren't so great at raising kids either. For myself, being bisexual, I'm able to say what I personally find attractive in both sexes. For men and women I like for there to be a balance between feminine and masculine traits. I like someone who can help me open a jar of pickles and have someone that isn't embarrased of their emotional side. Typically speaking, and this is based off my own personal experiences, men are less catty than girls are and tend to not get involved in drama as much, which is something I value a lot, so I have more friends that are guys than friends that are girls. I also appreciate what my smaller circle of girlfriends brings to the table, most of them don't mind opening up to each other and talking about their experiences/emotions. However, again in my own experience, girls seem more two-faced than guys. To me, girls do seem better at reading social cues than guys, meaning girls seem to have a better sense of when the right time to do/say things is compared with men. I feel like it's easier to have a serious conversation with a female, I feel like men don't take things as seriously, in conversation anyways. They may take things more seriously than it seems, but even if they do, they don't seem to really engage in "serious" conversations as much, which is actually nice sometimes too. Another key to attractiveness is confidence. Even if someone, male or female, isn't typically what I think of as an ideal mate, if they're confident in the way they talk, act, dress, think, etc. I find that person more attractive even when our interests don't align.
I think we should look past physical differences and just share/teach others the things that we're good atand be willing to learn from each other, instead of putting up barriers between groups of people.
Top Secret Researcher
#7 Old 15th Mar 2015 at 9:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by steph1417897
In terms of mental capabilities, men are better at math and women are better at writing/reading. I think the obvious reasons for that is that women are typically more social and men are typically more logical and use their reasoning abilities more. I do find that particular stereotype to be true for me, I'm a female and suck at math, but man can I write an awesome paper, lol. I also know some people that this is backwards for as well. Some men are better at writing and some women are better at math.


You make a sexist statement as if it is fact, then admit it is a stereotype and then concede that it isn't true. What a waste of words.

I wouldn't put a lot of effort into getting it transported.
Top Secret Researcher
#8 Old 15th Mar 2015 at 10:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by steph1417897
...it's amazing to see the differences between what one group of people thinks about a certain word/subject compared with another group of people.These are the definitions of "feminist" from Merriam-Webster's online dictionary: (1) the theory of the political, economic, and social [e]quality of the sexes; (2) organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests.


I'm pleased if someone calls me a feminist, because my view of the definition fits the above quote.

My problem is more radical: I am bothered by the very existence of a term for that purpose.

Now I feel OK coming back around to the original question. I can say:
"Yes, I'm pleased to be called a feminist, because that is what we nowadays call people who oppose sexism."

And if the next question happens to be: "but don't feminists believe thus-and-so?" --
I guess my reply would be,
"You ought to go ask them. There are many millions and it may take a while. Let me know what you find out! BYeeeee."

Quote:
I think we should look past physical differences and just share/teach others the things that we're good at and be willing to learn from each other, instead of putting up barriers between groups of people.

May it be so! We can make pretty good partners sometimes.

Ronnie de Noube - Comic and Blog; Sim National Laboratories and our Protein Folding Team.
@)->-----
Lab Assistant
#9 Old 15th Mar 2015 at 10:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by simbalena
You make a sexist statement as if it is fact, then admit it is a stereotype and then concede that it isn't true. What a waste of words.


Well, actually, it is statistically accurate that men are better at math and women are better at writing (at least in my neck of the woods- not saying thats true everywhere, but in NYS boys score better on math and girls better on writing). There are some differences that come into play when you're looking between math in a classroom setting, test setting, and math sub-categories. Furthermore, whether girls or boys are better at math vary between cultures. In cultures where there is more gender equality there are smaller differences in gender ability. Where I live there is not much emphasis on math for girls because most of the jobs that rely on math, for example engineering, are largely marketed to boys. I was not saying that there is something biologically that makes girls/boys better/worse, but the dynamics of gender roles in the north eastern U.S. push boys into math and girls into writing. How many times in the U.S. have you seen Journals and Diaries marketed towards boys? It happens but I'm pretty sure any given local store is over-populated with girly journals. Recently in the U.S., national campaigns have been started to get girls more involved with math and the sciences.... I'm pretty sure that no one would feel a need to start a national initiative to get girls more engaged and performing better at these things, unless the majority of them weren't already. Just sayin.

It is also a stereotype because, it's not true for everyone, the definition of stereotype being "a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing".

I did make sure that I added in that I recognize that what I said about boys being better at math is not always true. And nothing any one says is a waste of words, I like to say "take what you like and leave the rest".

Is there anything you would like to add/bring to the conversation? I'm not offended if you disagree with me, but saying that my comment was a "waste of words" is not at all appropriate. If you're experiences are different I would be delighted if you shared (I do hope that doesn't sound sarcastic, thats not my intention). Also if you have sound/valid sources that disagree with what I have said, please include those as well, I would genuinely be interested in other evidence.

Good day to you

Edit: I do agree that I could have better stated the part you had quoted, I hope the text above clarifies anything that wasn't clear from that post.
Née whiterider
staff: administrator
#10 Old 15th Mar 2015 at 11:32 AM
For the future, I'd suggest phrasing such as "x gender are encouraged to learn y subject more than other gender", because when you say "men/women are better/worse at x than women/men", it does sound like you're talking about an inherent or biological predisposition.


I think your point is very interesting r_deNoube. I can definitely see where you're coming from, but I think it's positive that there is a term for feminism, because it creates a good framework for more detailed and in-depth development of anti-sexist views. That doesn't work so well if you rely on the dictionary definition of feminism, but if you look into feminist politics, feminist legal studies, feminist history, feminist science, feminist social science and so on... you start finding that there's been a lot of very impressive, powerful work on understanding the sexist bias in how we understand, observe and shape the world. I don't think that kind of work would have been so succesful if it didn't have the opportunity to be placed under the very credible aegis of feminism.

I think this is also why intersectional feminism is so important: obviously, intersectional feminism didn't invent, for example, race scholarship (which is anti-racist in much the same way that feminism is anti-sexist, in case that wasn't clear); but having a term or movement like feminism which race scholarship can position itself within helps it become more mainstream.

What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact.
Lab Assistant
#11 Old 15th Mar 2015 at 12:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nysha
For the future, I'd suggest phrasing such as "x gender are encouraged to learn y subject more than other gender", because when you say "men/women are better/worse at x than women/men", it does sound like you're talking about an inherent or biological predisposition.


Thanks for the suggestion, I concur :D
Top Secret Researcher
#12 Old 15th Mar 2015 at 7:35 PM
To "Disagree" with the above post? I can't understand what that would even mean.

Nysha, thank you for your post (the one with which Steph concurred) as well.

Ronnie de Noube - Comic and Blog; Sim National Laboratories and our Protein Folding Team.
@)->-----
Lab Assistant
#13 Old 15th Mar 2015 at 11:52 PM
I would like you all to know that according to most definitions of feminism, I am a strong supporter of it. However, some definitions exclude me because although I believe in the equality of men and women and I agree with the first and second waves of feminism, I disagree with many of the divergent hodge-podge of different opinions of various feminists on the internet, also known as Third Wave Feminism. Also because I am a man, many vocal self-proclaimed feminists say I cannot be a feminist and that I am always wrong no matter what.

I might as well break down my opinions. If anyone disagrees with any of them, please explain, don't be a coward and just click the disagree button without replying.

I think that women should be encouraged to pursue more lucrative careers and be taught to be ambitious. The majority of the wage gap between employed men and women in the USA is because women work in lower paid fields. Women have a natural biological tendency towards nurturing and socializing but women with these strong feelings can still work high paying jobs in several fields (the medical fields should encourage more women to join and there is a severe shortage of doctors and nurses thanks to the aging baby boomers and recent legal changes).

I am a moderately progressive libertarian and I believe that governments should be small and only do things that result in a net positive effect on society. The government of many countries have a net negative effect on society. I believe that utilitarianism is a good way to determine the ethics of anything. This means that all major actions by large entities (such as governments, corporations, and organizations) should have a net positive effect on everyone affected. Some entities are extremely selfish and want to improve their lives at the expense of others. The majority of the civil rights movements including feminism has resulted in a net positive impact.

I think that human life is special and that humans should take care of each-other. I also find it immoral and unethical for healthy children to be aborted if the pregnancy is low-risk. People who decide to abort perfectly healthy children should be encouraged to put their children up for adoption instead. Women with high risk pregnancies should never have the option of abortion taken away from them. There was an appalling case in Ireland where a woman had a high risk pregnancy and both she and her unborn child died at the hands of the doctors "following regulations." I am also opposed to fertility treatment if it increases the chance of unhealthy babies being born, especially if the fertilized eggs are discarded instead of used for stem cell research and the like.

I think that everyone should be encouraged to be comfortable with the bodies they were born in. I am opposed to cosmetic plastic surgery of all kinds. The extreme growth of these dangerous procedures are mostly due to the decadent culture spread by Hollywood. Women who do not look like the idealized image of the women we see on the screens should not be ashamed of who they are. The same goes for men. One should not feel the need to undergo surgery, get injections, or take various hormones (such as anabolic steroids) to look the way they want. Health should be celebrated and encouraged but the impossible standards for beauty in most of the world are dangerous.

--Ocram

Always do your best.
Top Secret Researcher
#14 Old 16th Mar 2015 at 12:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzemOcram
Women have a natural biological tendency towards nurturing and socializing...


Heh heh heh. Want to see my natural biological tendencies? *raises axe*

Quote:
Originally Posted by AzemOcram
I also find it immoral and unethical for healthy children to be aborted if the pregnancy is low-risk. People who decide to abort perfectly healthy children should be encouraged to put their children up for adoption instead.


Here's a better idea: men who want to discourage abortion can have artificial wombs implanted in their bodies. Then, if a women doesn't want to undergo childbirth - which can cause depression, permanently disfigure the body (my mom had to have surgery to correct issues from having me), or even cause death - you can have the baby for them. Does that sound like a good idea to you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AzemOcram
I think that everyone should be encouraged to be comfortable with the bodies they were born in. I am opposed to cosmetic plastic surgery of all kinds.


So a woman survives breast cancer through a double masectomy, then it's wrong for her to get breast implants to make her body closer to the body she was born with?
Née whiterider
staff: administrator
#15 Old 16th Mar 2015 at 1:13 AM
Responding to mostly the same points from a different approach:

Quote:
Originally Posted by AzemOcram
Women have a natural biological tendency towards nurturing and socializing
Where's the evidence for this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AzemOcram
I also find it immoral and unethical for healthy children to be aborted...
That's okay in terms of feminism. The important point is that whatever you think of the morality of abortion - and whatever decision you might make for yourself - you respect and protect the right of other people to decide for themselves, including deciding in a way that you don't agree with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AzemOcram
I disagree with many of the divergent hodge-podge of different opinions of various feminists on the internet, also known as Third Wave Feminism.
You're not giving third wave feminism enough credit here, and you're giving first and second wave feminism too much. First and second wave feminism included just as much diversity of opinion as third wave feminism; and there are some views within all three that I find reprehensible. The difference is that the internet makes communication easier, and thus we see more of the marginalised opinions. That's good, because once upon a time all feminism was marginalised, and we have to be exposed to marginal views in order to pick out the ones we want to support. But it does also mean we see views expressed which we pretty much couldn't disagree with more.

What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact.
Mad Poster
#16 Old 16th Mar 2015 at 1:25 AM Last edited by simmer22 : 16th Mar 2015 at 2:42 AM.
I think that men and women should have equal rights as far as that's possible, and that also goes with jobs.

It's true that women tend to lean toward the thypical lower-paid fields like healthcare and similar. And it's not only in the top jobs women often draw the shortest straw. There are several examples of jobs that have the equal amount of school years with differences in pay rate, even at the middle range. Take the bachelor degrees of nursing and engineering, for instance. The Bachelor degree for each (here, anyway) is 3 years, but engineering jobs often have much higher starting pay rates, and most of the students and those who end up working in engineering are male. Fresh nurses have lower pay rates, often longer days, more stress, and most of them happen to be female. That's just one example, out of probably a whole lot more.

Sure, it would be great with more ambitious women in top jobs and all that, but that doesn't help if there aren't any people on the floor to do the work for them. We need people in the middle-range jobs, both male and female. It would also be nice with more men in the jobs dominated by women, and vice versa. Maybe that's the way to go to even out the pay and the rights.

As for abortion, I'm a bit split. I don't think that taking away the option of abortion is any way to go, and considering how many orphaned kids there already are, putting all of those non-aborted but unwanted kids up for adoption might not be the best option for anyone (there are a LOT of abortions done every year). You would be forcing a nine month pregnancy on a woman who does not want a baby at all, and even if it's a low risk pregnancy, things can still go wrong. However, there should be certain regulations in place. Setting limits for weeks of pregnancy before an abortion, for instance. I can only imagine how horrible it would be for healthcare personnel to have to dispose of a fetus that would be viable in just a couple of weeks' time - while they use every single resource to save a baby that's only 2-3 weeks older. Also, the woman needs info and someome to talk with who isn't biased against one option. You can't talk everyone out of an abortion, but maybe some women just need a bit of guidance before they decide. As for making abortion illegal even in high-risk pregnancies, that's just crazy. If you suddenly find yourself in the situation where the only option is abortion to save the woman's life - then that is the only option, end of discussion. Besides, if abortion is made illegal, some women will go to extreme lengths to abort the baby, and that is much more dangerous than doing it in a controlled hospital environment. Legal and optional, but with certain restrictions in place, plus a healthcare system that takes care of the woman in a good way is the way to go. I think it's a whole lot immoral for a grown-up person to not give a woman the right to decide over her own body. It's natural for partly-developed fetuses to not be viable and just give up, ending in a miscarriage. It's how nature works. And every single time the woman has her period, she loses one or more eggs, straight down the toilet. Should we put every resource available into saving those? Like already said, fertilized eggs are even used for research. Some might argue that the fetus/baby has rights, from the moment of conception, or from a later point. But until babies are viable, and until they're out of their mother's womb, we don't really see them as a separate entity from their mom in a legal way, and they don't really have any rights. You're only considered a citizen when you're actually born. There might also be other things to consider. Some women who want to abort were raped - and would rather not have the baby than be reminded of something bad every time they look their own child in the face. Like I said, I'm split. I see both the pros and the cons from each side of the argument. I still stand by that the woman should have a say in whether or not she wants to carry around a baby in her womb for nine months - and whether she can and will take care of the kid 18+ years from there on, and she's got the right to her life if things do go wrong in the pregnancy. Also, until the baby is out, the baby is a part of the mother, so whether or not the father should have a say - whether or not there is a father involved at all - If you don't want a kid, use protection, whether you're a man or a woman. Two-way protection is the safest, anyhow. And if you're still unlucky, it's first and foremost the woman's right to decide what to do with her own body and her own life. Until we figure out a way men can have babies, they don't really have much of a say in that. Men have the right to decide over their own bodies and lives, too. Some people either don't want to, or aren't fit to become parents, and sometimes it's better they don't become parents at all. It's more selfish for a man or a woman to leave their kids after the kids are born.

As for being confident abotut who you are and so forth - in the animal kingdom, males are usually the ones to do all the effort dressing up and donning their 'makeup'. Most males do anything to impress the females, so they can 'get some'. The females often don't even care enough to look good, and sometimes you can even mistake them for two different species - the male colorful and vibrant, the female in drab colors without much in the way of 'makeup'. Sure, we do have a bit of the male impressing the female in human culture too, but maybe we all should learn something here. Looks isn't always everything for us females, and maybe we don't always need to be perfect.

I agree that people shouldn't feel ashamed to look the way they look. Surgeries to fix superficial things shouldn't be needed. It's another thing if the person has complexes for the way they look, and can feel more confident if they remove that birthmark, even out or reduce their boob size so they can find bras, or fix eyelids so that they don't look tired all the time, or reduce their weight so they can get up of that chair and live their life, or fix a birth defect like a missing ear. But trying to perfect something that's already as close to perfect as you can get - using bigger boobs or lips or steroid-pumped muscles just to impress? Or thinking that fixing up your body gives a solid boost to the confidence - even if there's nothing that actually needs fixing? No thanks. That's just not right.

I consider myself a feminist, but not one of those who go completely berserk and hates men, and all those other 'bad' stickers people put on feminists. I'm a woman, I'll fight for my rights as a woman, and I want those things that we can do something about (pay, rights, jobs, etc.) to be as equal as possible between the genders. For the rest, we'll just have to share it as best as we can between the genders, and come to agreements wherever that's needed. There will probably always be a certain level of gender difference, but the least we can do is to make sure neither women nor men come out as losers in their choices when compared to the other gender. At the same time we can help even out the differences, and try being a society that doesn't find it weird with gender switches between traditional roles, like working mothers and stay-at-home dads, women being top leaders and plumbers, while tough men work in day cares and nursing homes. We should also embrace it when people want to go into the more traditional roles. Most women seem to want to be in traditional female roles, and most men seem to want to be in traditional male roles. There's no harm in that, as long as they're treated equally and with respect.

As for me, I don't think I'd much like to be in a leader role. I like to be somewhere in the middle, where I can sometimes boss myself and other people around a bit, while at the same time get directions from above for those things I'd much rather not have to decide. I've chosen health care, which might be seen as thypically female (and is - nurse studies seem to have a 1/10 rate of boys) - but that's my choice, and one I think I can do some good in, both for myself and for others. That's most important to me. As for the thing about engineers - those have more of a 8-9/10 rate of boys, and they usually do get a higher pay, even if their education is the same length as nursing studies. Isn't that unfair? I sure think so...
Scholar
DELETED POST
16th Mar 2015 at 1:51 AM
This message has been deleted by TigerAnne.
Top Secret Researcher
#17 Old 16th Mar 2015 at 2:16 AM
Although I think I'd line up more often with hugbug, in terms of whether we'd drink in the same bars etc. -- I believe we have some common ground with Mr. Ocram. Body-shaming does drive a lot of money into surgeries and, for that matter, a lot of other goods and services that aren't necessarily good for one's physical health.

However, I do not agree that either abortion or gender reassignment are undertaken on the basis of any general societal pressure or to conform to some sort of ideal. I think we differ in our perceptions of what's going on in the minds, and in the lives, of people who seek -- to use two examples from the above posts -- to end a pregnancy or to change their gender. Nobody does those things for a lark; something has already gone wrong, and they're trying to fix it or at least limit the harm.


Of people seeking abortions, would any less than 100% of them rather have not got pregnant in the first place? "Well then why didn't they just do thus-and-so" is the usual retort, but as I hear it, the thing we want them to "just" have done is either harder, or they perceive it as harder, than we think it is.

Likewise, I absolutely agree that everyone should have the opportunity and as much social support as they need towards the goal of being comfortable in the body they were born with, including its gender. Where we differ is this: since nearly everyone does keep their birth gender, I doubt that the fraction of transsexuals who have lacked that opportunity and support is very much less than 100%.

In short, I think we'd both love it if measures like abortion and gender reassignment weren't necessary. We might disagree as to what makes them necessary.

Ronnie de Noube - Comic and Blog; Sim National Laboratories and our Protein Folding Team.
@)->-----
Spice Pony
#18 Old 16th Mar 2015 at 5:08 PM
The way I see it, feminism, in a broad sense, is just the belief in sex/gender equality. I mean, yes, the philosophical movement known as feminism has many different schools of thought, but the basic dictionary definition is just someone who supports equality between the sexes. I am a feminist. I am also a masculist, because those things are synonymous by definition. Are there nutjobs who like to co-opt both terms? Sure. Are the terms really ideal for what they describe? Probably not. But I refuse to identify as an "egalitarian", or an "equalist". Not because they're inaccurate, but because I am a nutcase with strong opinions about language, and I don't like the cultural implications of switching terminology. Language changes, sure. I understand that. But I'm of the opinion that if we see language changing in a way that doesn't make sense, we should oppose it, and try to repair any damage we don't stop in time.

What I'm saying, essentially, is that I call myself a feminist not because it's the best term available, but because I utterly despise the idea that a group that represents the exact opposite of everything your group stands for can swoop in and just steal your terminology on a societal level while you're still using it. I mean, if feminism as a movement were to (somehow) die out for a few decades or a century, then it would be acceptable (still stupid, but less infuriating) for crazed misandrists or any other group of nutters to co-opt the terminology. But while the real thing's still around? That's just not cool.
Theorist
#19 Old 16th Mar 2015 at 8:54 PM
In general, I agree with feminism, though I'm sure I may disagree with some beliefs that other self-described feminists may hold.

I don't like when people say, "women are this way and men are that way". Perhaps something may be a statistical fact, but I don't like boxing people into groups and making assumptions on the individual. Individual people are so varied and different, I think it's a real disservice to assume that everyone is going to fit neatly into one category or another. I personally would like to see a society where nobody feels trapped by their gender, thinking they have to be any certain way because they are male or female.

I do believe that women are paid less than men, for the same job. Salary inequity isn't because women are in general preferring lower paid jobs, I think it happens because employers can get away with it. For one thing, in private industry, it's very difficult to know how much your peers are making for the same job. In many companies, it's even forbidden to discuss salary with your coworkers. In most cases that end up in court, I wonder how the woman even discovered she is making so much less than her male coworkers? I can only assume they broke company rules and compared salaries. IMO, salary transparency should be a law. I believe this is already the case with state and federal employees, that you can look up their salaries, but I think it should be the same for private business as well and would eliminate a lot of unfair salary practices. I would support any legislation that requires women to be paid the same amount as men for the same job.

I definitely would like to see women in general, be more interested in STEM fields and careers. I very much believe that the lack of women in STEM fields has nothing to do with ability, and everything to do with societal norms. The influences of society are unavoidable and everywhere. There is casual sexism everywhere. For example, I once read about parents shopping for kid's clothes. The little boys T-shirts had science themes like the solar system, dinosaurs, NASA logos, while little girl's shirts had hearts and rainbows. However, what's important is that a woman should be empowered to make whatever choice for herself that she sees fit. If a woman wants to be a stay-at-home mom, lawyer, doctor, mechanical engineer, teacher, auto mechanic, porn star, or nude model for a magazine, that's her decision and I would respect it.

Abortion, to me should be the woman's choice. In my view, "life" as we know it, starts at consciousness. So I'm perfectly comfortable saying, her body, her choice. No conditions, no ifs, ands, or buts. Her body, her choice, period. Just my opinion.

Cosmetic surgery, I don't want it. I'm no dreamy hunk, but I'm fine with how I look. That said, I believe women and men should be empowered to be able to make this choice for themselves. I do fully agree that it's unfortunate that we can't all be happy with the way we look, and yes, society, Hollywood, and the media certainly put too much pressure on people to look a certain way. However, if a woman wants to look like a human Barbie or a man wants to look like a human Ken, or a woman wants to become a man or vice versa, they should be empowered to make that choice for themselves. Everyone has different motivations and interests, and things they want for themselves. Just because I don't want that for myself, doesn't mean I am in any place to pass judgment.

Resident wet blanket.
Top Secret Researcher
#20 Old 16th Mar 2015 at 9:07 PM
Why do people keep lumping gender-reassignment under cosmetic surgery?
Theorist
#21 Old 16th Mar 2015 at 9:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hugbug993
Why do people keep lumping gender-reassignment under cosmetic surgery?


Sorry, you're right and I probably should not have. It just popped into my head as Azem's statement, "I think that everyone should be encouraged to be comfortable with the bodies they were born in." was ringing around in there.
I was just trying to make the point that if someone isn't comfortable with their body and wants to change it, it should be their choice. If I were good at making points, I'd be a writer or something and not a forum troll.

Resident wet blanket.
Lab Assistant
#22 Old 17th Mar 2015 at 1:55 AM
Since abortion has popped up a couple times since the last time I posted, I'm curious about how any of you feel about abortion for financial reasons? For example, a women wanting a child but doesn't want to follow through with a pregnancy because she lives under the poverty level.

Also, for those living outside the U.S., do you feel that men and women are treated pretty equally in your countries, or less equally, and in what ways?
Lab Assistant
#23 Old 17th Mar 2015 at 2:03 AM
I apologize for not responding earlier. A lightning storm took down our internet, phone, and cable while making the lights flicker so I was unable to post yesterday. I did manage to save exactly what I typed in a text file.

Thank you for the responses. I really appreciate this discussion. I like hearing the differing opinions on this subject and I am glad that this has stayed respectable for the most part (and the only parts that were not completely respectable were still funny).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nysha
Responding to mostly the same points from a different approach:
1.
Where's the evidence for this?
2.
That's okay in terms of feminism. The important point is that whatever you think of the morality of abortion - and whatever decision you might make for yourself - you respect and protect the right of other people to decide for themselves, including deciding in a way that you don't agree with.
3.
You're not giving third wave feminism enough credit here, and you're giving first and second wave feminism too much. First and second wave feminism included just as much diversity of opinion as third wave feminism; and there are some views within all three that I find reprehensible. The difference is that the internet makes communication easier, and thus we see more of the marginalised opinions. That's good, because once upon a time all feminism was marginalised, and we have to be exposed to marginal views in order to pick out the ones we want to support. But it does also mean we see views expressed which we pretty much couldn't disagree with more.

@Nysha
1. Do you want biological evidence or statistical? Both exist. Hormones play a role in making women more prone to nurturing and kindness and men more prone to aggression. Women are statistically more likely to fulfill nurturing roles and are proven to be more social on average than men. Statistically speaking, women are far nicer, kinder (and should I say better) people than men.
2. I do not want to deny early or mid term abortions to any woman. I would like it if women who have low-risk pregnancies that have healthy unborn children that could potentially be viable even as a pre-term birth (premature baby AKA "preemie") were encouraged to keep the child to term unless it later becomes dangerous for them. I mentioned that case in Ireland because the regulations there made it so that the doctors pretty much tortured the pregnant woman by trying to "save" the baby that would have died no matter what and their appalling actions (which breaks the Hippocratic Oath) resulted in her death in addition to the inevitable death of her child.
3. I guess you might be right. I only know what I am exposed to and I only know the good that resulted from first and second wave feminism and I see mostly the radical or crazy ideas from the third wave.
4.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hugbug993
So a woman survives breast cancer through a double masectomy, then it's wrong for her to get breast implants to make her body closer to the body she was born with?

@hugbug993 I am not opposed in the least bit to plastic surgery like that or one that improves function and quality of life (such as correcting a deformity). All other cosmetic plastic surgeries should not be covered by mandated health insurance or universal health care, IMO. If one is wealthy and insecure, there are few things that can prevent them from getting what they want anyway.

--Ocram

Always do your best.
Guest
DELETED POST
17th Mar 2015 at 4:12 AM
This message has been deleted by stuart-grey. Reason: Nah. not worth it. Lets be friends instead.
Scholar
#24 Old 17th Mar 2015 at 4:40 AM
I'm a moderate/mainstream feminist. I support equality of the sexes and agree with all of GnatGoSplat's points wholeheartedly. I don't agree with most of the people on tumblr's version of feminism though.

“Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”
bleed-in-ink.tumblr.com
Née whiterider
staff: administrator
#25 Old 17th Mar 2015 at 12:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzemOcram
1. Do you want biological evidence or statistical? Both exist. Hormones play a role in making women more prone to nurturing and kindness and men more prone to aggression. Women are statistically more likely to fulfill nurturing roles and are proven to be more social on average than men. Statistically speaking, women are far nicer, kinder (and should I say better) people than men.

I'd have to look into the hormonal stuff more to talk about that, looking at what indictors they used etc. But the statistical argument is pretty flawed: the fact that women do engage in more caring doesn't mean we are naturally inclined towards that. It means that a variety of factors, one of which could theoretically be natural inclination, leads to us doing more caring work; but given that, as you are excellently demonstrating, society perceives women as more caring and expects women to take on caring roles, relying on statistics of what women actually end up doing tells you nothing about how we "are" naturally. Since everyone, of every gender, is socialised into and out of a variety of roles from a very very young age, I can't imagine any study which could distinguish between socialisation and inclination in that way.

@steph1417897 In terms of whether it should be allowed? Any reason should be acceptable from a legal and medical perspective. As the incredible Dr Robinson says, I believe that women are able to struggle with complex ethical issues for themselves and their families, and come to the right decision; they don't need anyone else coming in to double-check that decision for them. In terms of whether or not it's a reason I personally would get an abortion, absolutely. Poverty is a horrible thing and having (more) children can make it much harder to deal with and much harder to get out of; and if you don't manage to shield your child from the effects of poverty, then it's horrible for them too. Wanting to avoid that makes perfect sense to me.

What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact.
Page 1 of 6
Back to top