Feminism and Gender

[AvalonXQ]

That doesn't mean that there isn't still a bias towards perceiving men as leaders.

Good point!

 

[TragicMonkey]

Well, at least as I understand them, the modern definition of traditional gender roles are the man is the leader/breadwinner of the household and the woman is the mother and house cleaner. Men are leaders in the workplace, women are secretaries, men are soldiers and women are nurses, etc.

And in such traditions, it's the women who raise the children...to have those traditional roles. How much time do kids spend with women as opposed to men? Most stay-at-home parents are women. Most daycare providers are women. Most teachers are women. Where do the "traditional gender roles" come from? Who passes this knowledge on how they're supposed to behave to children? It's either done by women, or in spite of women.

 

[A Laughing Baby]

Ah, so the "men are leaders" component of that generalizes to "patriarchal".
That's reasonable. My opposition has been that modern application of these roles has mostly eviscerated that element, so the idea of men running things is not usually part of the gender roles I see actively enforced.

I think there's a bit of a disconnect though in concept and enforcement. It's my opinion that the fact that the idea remains is a damaging fact. If a woman rises to a position of power, it's not seen as a rejection of patriarchy, or an example of patriarchy not existing. It's still seen as a Power Woman or whatever.

Basically what I'm trying to say is that I don't think patriarchy necessarily necessitates misogyny. Misogyny is a symptom of patriarchy, but all men not being powerful (and all women not being powerless) is not a sign of being post-patriarchal.

And in such traditions, it's the women who raise the children...to have those traditional roles. How much time do kids spend with women as opposed to men? Most stay-at-home parents are women. Most daycare providers are women. Most teachers are women. Where do the "traditional gender roles" come from? Who passes this knowledge on how they're supposed to behave to children? It's either done by women, or in spite of women.

This is correct, but I would say that being a part of a system doesn't mean that the system doesn't exist (or that it's not actively dominating you). I'm really actively fighting my typical urge to be extra wordy, so please let me know if I didn't put that well.

 

[mijopaalmc]

I never stated that.

Please go back and read my actual posts, rather than what your prejudices believe they should say.

Take your own advice there, bucko.

 

[Mycroft]

Which feminists hate TGs?

Again, I'm not denying that some feminists deride TGs or that the conceptual structure of some feminisms dehumanize TGs, but it didn't take long at all for people who are opposed to some aspects of some feminisms to present their least favorite feminism as representative of some monolithic feminism.

I'm not making any claims of it being representative of monolithic feminism. If you read it that way, too bad. As for providing evidence, I'm much more interested in Luchog's input than in trying to get your validation that my observations are correct.

 

[mediocrity511]

The victimization thing I have noticed as well, and it really bothers me.

The other thing that really bothers me is downplaying issues affecting men. Often these issues are trivialized, ignored, or outright mocked. Sometimes when they are acknowledged, it's because they have a negative affect on women.

However, "what about the men?!" certainly exists. Most domestic violence victims are women, that isn't in dispute. Yet when newspapers publish articles about the closure of women's refuges and the like in the comments you always get men bringing up the fact that men can be victims of domestic violence as well. The same happens in discussion of rape. For me when that happens, it often seems to be an attempt to minimise what are fairly large injustices perpetrated on females because a minority of victims are male. That doesn't mean that male domestic violence and rape are not serious issues, they most certainly are, but because of gender they are different. It would be inappropriate to have men in a women's refuge, but that doesn't mean that men don't need their own refuges, but there are going to be vastly fewer of them than women's refuges because of the disparity in victim numbers.

 

[A Laughing Baby]

The traditional gender roles thing brings up what I think is a very good point--a culturally-enforced norm doesn't necessarily mean a bad norm. Being a mother is an objectively good thing. So is being a nurse, and so on. At least on a superficial level (and most definitely beyond that). The implicit control of the man isn't seen as a negative in that case, or even considered. But it's still there, no?

 

[TragicMonkey]

This is correct, but I would say that being a part of a system doesn't mean that the system doesn't exist (or that it's not actively dominating you). I'm really actively fighting my typical urge to be extra wordy, so please let me know if I didn't put that well.

I was just pointing out that sexist gender roles are created, perpetuated, and enforced by women just as much as men.

 

[GreyArea]

The terminology is itself sexist and inaccurate. In some cultures, including the one I grew up in, it is primarily the matriarchs that perpetuate and enforce gender stereotypes. There is nothing particularly "patriarchal" in a society that universally degrades any actions by men or women that buck traditional gender roles.

Sometimes women will defend a patriarchal arrangement because they get a small measure of status within that arrangement. The rules weren't invented to benefit them, but they are afforded a niche. Also, some women cannot imagine what bucking the rules would even look like, or is even possible, or they're to scared to. It's better to play along, and even better to buy into it.

 

[A Laughing Baby]

I was just pointing out that sexist gender roles are created, perpetuated, and enforced by women just as much as men.

Not in contention, at least on my part. For a (not complete or extensive) analog, there are racist stereotypes actively perpetuated and enforced by the minority groups they affect.

 

[bookitty]

Cultural immunity from casual public violence is a woman's privilege. Men have a cultural expectation to accept this violence; refusing to do so has negative social implications.

Did you see the episode of What Would You Do where they filmed actors pretending to be a couple, with one member of the couple hitting the other?

When women saw the man hitting the woman, they called the police.

When women saw the woman hitting the man, they cheered her on.

EDIT: Found it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFAd4YdQks

Cultural immunity from casual public sexual assault is a man's privilege. Women have a cultural expectation to accept this violence; refusing to do so has negative social implications.

If a woman is walking down the street she may be cat-called, pinched, blocked from going forward or be followed by a car. At a bar she may be groped or fondled with impunity. Even if "Men have a cultural expectation to accept this violence" it is not enough to dissuade them from casual public sexual harassment and assault.

The important thing is how far we have come. In the 50's, this type of sexual harassment was common and accepted in the workplace. Now we have sexual harassment laws which protect people and act as a deterrent. While there is still social harassment, there are networks which track and report offenders. Some of them have even been arrested.

As we grow as a culture, we will (hopefully) start to respect each other a bit more, or strengthen the laws that will dissuade this sort of aggression. Women who hit men should be arrested for assault as should men who grope women on the subway.

 

[Tatyana]

What?!

I don't know of any obvious cultural factors that would make a person think that. I'd want to know what happened to your wife before she met you that makes her that fearful of abuse.

I think it is old black and white gangster films, it was a common gesture for someone to crack their knuckles as a 'warm up' before punching.

I am fairly positive it has been used a lot in American television and films.


http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/KnuckleCracking

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/SelfDemonstrating/KnuckleCracking

 

[A Laughing Baby]

I think it is old black and white gangster films, it was a common gesture for someone to crack their knuckles as a 'warm up' before punching.

I am fairly positive it has been used a lot in American television and films.

This is specifically what she cited. She said she didn't think I was going to hit her, but it kind of brought out the feeling you get when you think someone wants to fight you. Just as a reflexive thing.

edit:

Does anyone else find it interesting that AvalonXQ's signature translates as "Cry, all (you) virgins"?

That's my signature. It's a quote from a requiem, if I remember right!


second edit:

It's from an oratorio that my beautiful wife sang a part in during her vocal training:

Plorate filii Israel, plorate omnes virgines, et filiam Jephte unigenitam in carmine doloris lamentamini

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I read once that there isn't feminism, but feminisms. I like thinking this way because different groups have different ideals and goals, and different definitions to make themselves "true feminists". People can still debate if men can be feminists.

The ones who irk me the most are the gender essentialist feminists, the ones who embrace gender prescriptions like "passive" and claim gendered ownership of various domains. The crazy examples from the 70s about how science is male and whatever just make me laugh, though.

And though I wouldn't say I actively dislike it, I find it a bit odd that abortion is often claimed under women's rights. I think there is enough reasonable debate on both legal/moral grounds and on where to exactly draw the lines, especially among women themselves, that saying such a thing is unhelpful. This is also true for the sex work debate.

I dislike the "privilege" talk, but that is in common with most social justice movements now (I started a thread on it a little bit ago).

The most annoying thing from non/antifeminists is when they dramatically state "Men and women are different" as if they are expounding some novel and convincing thought.

For me, feminism is the counteragent to the male dominance our society and culture has had for some time, and the greatest Good is the freedom from social and cultural coercion to any and all gender roles and constraints. If we lived under a different gender system, then I would support the appropriate counter just the same.

 

[mijopaalmc]

This is specifically what she cited. She said she didn't think I was going to hit her, but it kind of brought out the feeling you get when you think someone wants to fight you. Just as a reflexive thing.

edit:



That's my signature. It's a quote from a requiem, if I remember right!


second edit:

It's from an oratorio that my beautiful wife sang a part in during her vocal training:

Yeah, that was my mistake and an inappropriate and indirect attack on AvalonXQ.

I apologize.

 

[AvalonXQ]

Cultural immunity from casual public sexual assault is a man's privilege. Women have a cultural expectation to accept this violence; refusing to do so has negative social implications.

I disagree. Men also are groped in public and receive catcalls and other similar assaults. In fact, in many situations where this behavior is expected to make women uncomfortable, men are still expected to welcome it.

 

[truethat]

I disagree. Men also are groped in public and receive catcalls and other similar assaults. In fact, in many situations where this behavior is expected to make women uncomfortable, men are still expected to welcome it.

In addition women are sexualized constantly and often play into the role by walking seductively and actually enjoying attention. They are not always victims and men are not always perpetrators.

 

[elipse]

For example a woman can break down crying without a general cultural concern about losing the esteem of her peers due to perceived weakness or irrationality; a man cannot.

I think you're missing the subtlety of privilege in this context, however. Yes, a woman can break down crying, and it will be tolerated, but she WILL be perceived as weak for doing so by most of the men around her; the difference is that she will be perceived as weak, like all women, while a man crying will be perceived as weak as compared to other men.

I once had a man boast to me that he liked it when his girlfriend cried during an argument; it meant that she had ceded the rational ground, and he knew he was "less emotional" than she and therefore right.

I thought it meant he was a bully and an *******, personally, who didn't understand that tears would be entirely beside the point when questioning the rationality of an argument.

So yes, there is a problem in our society of men not being allowed to show emotion, but I don't think it's a 1 to 1 trade-off of privilege.

 

[mijopaalmc]

In addition women are sexualized constantly and often play into the role by walking seductively and actually enjoying attention. They are not always victims and men are not always perpetrators.

And you lie again.

 

[A Laughing Baby]

In addition women are sexualized constantly and often play into the role by walking seductively and actually enjoying attention. They are not always victims and men are not always perpetrators.

I would argue this by saying that I don't necessarily think that enjoying one's own sexuality/beauty/appearance/self and acting in a confident manner is exactly openly inviting sexual advances, per se.

edit:

I think you're missing the subtlety of privilege in this context, however. Yes, a woman can break down crying, and it will be tolerated, but she WILL be perceived as weak for doing so by most of the men around her; the difference is that she will be perceived as weak, like all women, while a man crying will be perceived as weak as compared to other men.

This is extremely well put and very succint.