Author Topic: Poor Folks are Victims  (Read 99338 times)

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #250 on: January 09, 2015, 11:04:41 PM »
Modern feminism seems to deny women's agency as a standard procedure, so no problem!

Choose to not pursue a career and focus on family? Brainwashed by the patriarchy!

Choose to become a nurse rather than an engineer? Societal pressures decided that for you!

Choose to do more than half the housework or child care in your relationship? Societal expectations of women, oh, and this is a Really Serious Problem that Society Needs to Fix!

Then of course there's demands for affirmative action, quotas on boards, women-only scholarships, etc.

And my personal favourite: Choose not to identify as a feminist? You clearly have no understanding of what feminism is, and would call yourself a feminist if only you were educated! In other words, the only correct conclusion a person can come to is to agree with feminism - anything else is a socially-pressured choice caused by the patriarchy and internalized misogyny.

You misunderstood me. When I said "is there an example," I meant an example of a self-described feminist actually saying these things, like in a book or article. Without actual quotes from actual feminists, your argument that "feminism treats women like incompetent children" remains unproven.
This article on the Jezebel site seems to tick many of the boxes mentioned above.  http://jezebel.com/5991343/the-feminist-housewife-is-such-bullshit

Here's another: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/06/1-wives-are-helping-kill-feminism-and-make-the-war-on-women-possible/258431/

Or this one: http://gawker.com/kaley-cuoco-im-not-a-feminist-and-i-love-feeling-like-1676352429

On the Jezebel piece: This article is written by a feminist. However, it does not treat women like incompetent children. Instead, it argues that, even though a particular woman might enjoy being a housewife, it is not helpful to spew gender stereotypes about which gender is better at housework.

On the Atlantic piece: This article is written by a feminist. However, it does not treat women like incompetent children. Instead, it argues that American society values paid work over housework, and that this is a particular problem because housework is so heavily gendered at present. It also argues that this is a particularly pernicious problem because nonworking wives are disproportionately wealthy, meaning that wealthy and powerful men are accustomed to having nonworking wives and therefore tend to believe that women as a class are unworthy (see “American society values paid work over housework,” above). The author suggests that part of the solution would be for women to stop “staying at home,” but she does ignore the fact that the other part of the solution would be for men to “stay home” in equal numbers.

On the Gawker piece: This article appears to be irrelevant to the point under discussion.

Look. I probed for further clarification from Zikoris because it makes me unhappy to see people claim that feminism is bad for women. Without feminism, women wouldn't be able to vote, employers could fire pregnant women, and job listings would be segregated by gender. Does anyone really want to go back to that? If not, stop shitting all over feminism. Feminism isn't perfect. Like most liberal causes, it's terrible at messaging and falls all over itself trying to get people to like it. But that doesn't mean it's not a good ideology at bottom.

davisgang90

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1212
  • Location: Roanoke, VA
    • Photography by Rich Davis
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #251 on: January 10, 2015, 05:31:49 AM »
Obviously nobody on this forum wants to go back to women not having the vote or being able to work.  The point is that sometimes feminism's piss poor messaging leaves women with the impression they should delay their family (even if they don't want to) otherwise it diminishes the "cause" of feminism.  Women should be free to have a full career, part of a career around having children or the sole career of raising a family and running a household if her finances permit.

Feminism tends to discount and shun the second and third options and feminism's record with regard to demonizing the male of the species is well known.  You say it is bad messaging.  I think there is more to it than that and their are elements of the movement that spend the majority of their time railing against the "patriarchy" and hating men.  Obviously a movement as large and amorphous as feminism doesn't necessarily speak with one voice.  Those holding the microphone today aren't doing the rest of you any favors.

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #252 on: January 10, 2015, 03:27:23 PM »
Obviously nobody on this forum wants to go back to women not having the vote or being able to work.  The point is that sometimes feminism's piss poor messaging leaves women with the impression they should delay their family (even if they don't want to) otherwise it diminishes the "cause" of feminism.  Women should be free to have a full career, part of a career around having children or the sole career of raising a family and running a household if her finances permit.

Feminism tends to discount and shun the second and third options and feminism's record with regard to demonizing the male of the species is well known.  You say it is bad messaging.  I think there is more to it than that and their are elements of the movement that spend the majority of their time railing against the "patriarchy" and hating men.  Obviously a movement as large and amorphous as feminism doesn't necessarily speak with one voice.  Those holding the microphone today aren't doing the rest of you any favors.

I don't agree with most of what you just wrote, but I'm not going to argue about it. When I said that feminism is bad at messaging, I meant that they're utterly unable to sell their product, a fact made painfully clear by the reluctance to adopt the label among the general public. Feminism took care of most of the easy stuff (the vote etc.), most of which involves women entering traditionally male spheres. The next step is obviously to work toward men entering traditionally female spheres, because we won't have achieved equality as a society until people don't even think in terms of "male" and "female" spheres anymore. But there's no organized move toward this, which baffles me.

Peacefulwarrior

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 132
  • Location: Europe
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #253 on: January 10, 2015, 04:12:03 PM »
What--there are no white people in poverty?!  Would you like to ban mcdonalds and force everyone to eat lentils?  The poor are poor for a reason--unintelligent and lazy.  They CHOOSE to eat at mcdonalds b/c they like the way it tastes and is "easier" than cooking.  They arent smart enough to realize "hey gee, eating this is making me both fatter and poorer at the same time...maybe I should eat some fucking vegetables!"  There is no "cure" for poverty.  Quit making excuses for people and labeling them a "victim."  It is up to people to be more intelligent and own up to their poor decisions.

It's definitely possible to go from an abusive, poor, non-loving, non-educative upbringing to the life of your dreams by being intelligent and working hard. No doubt about it. But it's much much harder than it is for people who was brought up in the opposite end of the spectrum, and thus much rarer. Your mindset is everything, and if you were brought up to believe that you were not worth a whole lot your mindset is most likely not in the best condition. It's still possible to turn everything upside down, but please remember that not everybody comes from the same background, and show them some respect.

davisgang90

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1212
  • Location: Roanoke, VA
    • Photography by Rich Davis
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #254 on: January 10, 2015, 05:19:16 PM »
Obviously nobody on this forum wants to go back to women not having the vote or being able to work.  The point is that sometimes feminism's piss poor messaging leaves women with the impression they should delay their family (even if they don't want to) otherwise it diminishes the "cause" of feminism.  Women should be free to have a full career, part of a career around having children or the sole career of raising a family and running a household if her finances permit.

Feminism tends to discount and shun the second and third options and feminism's record with regard to demonizing the male of the species is well known.  You say it is bad messaging.  I think there is more to it than that and their are elements of the movement that spend the majority of their time railing against the "patriarchy" and hating men.  Obviously a movement as large and amorphous as feminism doesn't necessarily speak with one voice.  Those holding the microphone today aren't doing the rest of you any favors.

I don't agree with most of what you just wrote, but I'm not going to argue about it. When I said that feminism is bad at messaging, I meant that they're utterly unable to sell their product, a fact made painfully clear by the reluctance to adopt the label among the general public. Feminism took care of most of the easy stuff (the vote etc.), most of which involves women entering traditionally male spheres. The next step is obviously to work toward men entering traditionally female spheres, because we won't have achieved equality as a society until people don't even think in terms of "male" and "female" spheres anymore. But there's no organized move toward this, which baffles me.
What are these female spheres?  Nurse? Teacher? Homemaker? That has already happened.  Not sure what other sphere you mean.

Peacefulwarrior

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 132
  • Location: Europe
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #255 on: January 10, 2015, 05:23:09 PM »
Obviously nobody on this forum wants to go back to women not having the vote or being able to work.  The point is that sometimes feminism's piss poor messaging leaves women with the impression they should delay their family (even if they don't want to) otherwise it diminishes the "cause" of feminism.  Women should be free to have a full career, part of a career around having children or the sole career of raising a family and running a household if her finances permit.

Feminism tends to discount and shun the second and third options and feminism's record with regard to demonizing the male of the species is well known.  You say it is bad messaging.  I think there is more to it than that and their are elements of the movement that spend the majority of their time railing against the "patriarchy" and hating men.  Obviously a movement as large and amorphous as feminism doesn't necessarily speak with one voice.  Those holding the microphone today aren't doing the rest of you any favors.

I don't agree with most of what you just wrote, but I'm not going to argue about it. When I said that feminism is bad at messaging, I meant that they're utterly unable to sell their product, a fact made painfully clear by the reluctance to adopt the label among the general public. Feminism took care of most of the easy stuff (the vote etc.), most of which involves women entering traditionally male spheres. The next step is obviously to work toward men entering traditionally female spheres, because we won't have achieved equality as a society until people don't even think in terms of "male" and "female" spheres anymore. But there's no organized move toward this, which baffles me.
What are these female spheres?  Nurse? Teacher? Homemaker? That has already happened.  Not sure what other sphere you mean.

Deep down I'm sure she's talking about giving birth ;-)

Celda

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 94
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #256 on: January 10, 2015, 05:45:34 PM »
Quote
Look. I probed for further clarification from Zikoris because it makes me unhappy to see people claim that feminism is bad for women. Without feminism, women wouldn't be able to vote, employers could fire pregnant women, and job listings would be segregated by gender. Does anyone really want to go back to that? If not, stop shitting all over feminism. Feminism isn't perfect. Like most liberal causes, it's terrible at messaging and falls all over itself trying to get people to like it. But that doesn't mean it's not a good ideology at bottom.

This is a logically fallacious argument.

The United States government abolished slavery under a Republican president. By your logic, that means that black people should not oppose the modern Republican party - after all, does anyone want to go back to slavery?

It is irrelevant what feminism has done in the past. It is only relevant what feminists are doing now, and what positions are being put forward now.

And it turns out that a lot of people - men and women - disagree with mainstream feminist positions. For instance, it is a mainstream feminist position that the reason why women are a minority of STEM workers is because of discrimination. Never mind the fact that women in these fields get explicit preference and advantages.

What if you think that women - like men - have enough agency to make their own free choices? Then you come into conflict with feminist positions.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2015, 05:59:53 PM by Celda »

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #257 on: January 10, 2015, 05:55:54 PM »
Obviously nobody on this forum wants to go back to women not having the vote or being able to work.  The point is that sometimes feminism's piss poor messaging leaves women with the impression they should delay their family (even if they don't want to) otherwise it diminishes the "cause" of feminism.  Women should be free to have a full career, part of a career around having children or the sole career of raising a family and running a household if her finances permit.

Feminism tends to discount and shun the second and third options and feminism's record with regard to demonizing the male of the species is well known.  You say it is bad messaging.  I think there is more to it than that and their are elements of the movement that spend the majority of their time railing against the "patriarchy" and hating men.  Obviously a movement as large and amorphous as feminism doesn't necessarily speak with one voice.  Those holding the microphone today aren't doing the rest of you any favors.

I don't agree with most of what you just wrote, but I'm not going to argue about it. When I said that feminism is bad at messaging, I meant that they're utterly unable to sell their product, a fact made painfully clear by the reluctance to adopt the label among the general public. Feminism took care of most of the easy stuff (the vote etc.), most of which involves women entering traditionally male spheres. The next step is obviously to work toward men entering traditionally female spheres, because we won't have achieved equality as a society until people don't even think in terms of "male" and "female" spheres anymore. But there's no organized move toward this, which baffles me.
What are these female spheres?  Nurse? Teacher? Homemaker? That has already happened.  Not sure what other sphere you mean.

No, it hasn't. There's immense societal pressure on men to be the breadwinner. Far, far, far more women than men work part-time or not at all. When there are as many male homemakers as there are female doctors and lawyers, we can talk.

I recognize that men *on this forum* are all trying their hardest to distance themselves from paid work, sort of by definition. But Mustachians are not typical, as we know.

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #258 on: January 10, 2015, 05:58:53 PM »
Quote
Look. I probed for further clarification from Zikoris because it makes me unhappy to see people claim that feminism is bad for women. Without feminism, women wouldn't be able to vote, employers could fire pregnant women, and job listings would be segregated by gender. Does anyone really want to go back to that? If not, stop shitting all over feminism. Feminism isn't perfect. Like most liberal causes, it's terrible at messaging and falls all over itself trying to get people to like it. But that doesn't mean it's not a good ideology at bottom.

This is a logically fallacious argument.

The United States government abolished slavery under a Republican president. By your logic, that means that black people should oppose the modern Republican party - after all, does anyone want to go back to slavery?

It is irrelevant what feminism has done in the past. It is only relevant what feminists are doing now, and what positions are being put forward now.

And it turns out that a lot of people - men and women - disagree with mainstream feminist positions. For instance, it is a mainstream feminist position that the reason why women are a minority of STEM workers is because of discrimination. Never mind the fact that women in these fields get explicit preference and advantages.

What if you think that women - like men - have enough agency to make their own free choices? Then you come into conflict with feminist positions.

I was talking about feminism (the ideology), not feminists (the people). I did not defend the latter in my comments. So my argument was not fallacious.

Celda

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 94
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #259 on: January 10, 2015, 06:01:56 PM »
Quote
I was talking about feminism (the ideology), not feminists (the people). I did not defend the latter in my comments. So my argument was not fallacious.

It is still fallacious.

It makes no sense to claim that one must support feminist ideology now, simply because they support feminist positions of the past.

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #260 on: January 10, 2015, 06:45:35 PM »
Quote
I was talking about feminism (the ideology), not feminists (the people). I did not defend the latter in my comments. So my argument was not fallacious.

It is still fallacious.

It makes no sense to claim that one must support feminist ideology now, simply because they support feminist positions of the past.

I see where the confusion is. The feminist ideology, at bottom, is simply that men and women should be treated equally. That has not changed since women were first trying to get the vote. So again, my argument was not fallacious, since "men and women should not be treated equally" is not a defensible position. Rather, your argument is the incoherent one, because its premise is that feminist ideology has changed over time. It hasn't.


Celda

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 94
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #261 on: January 10, 2015, 07:07:00 PM »
Quote
I see where the confusion is. The feminist ideology, at bottom, is simply that men and women should be treated equally. That has not changed since women were first trying to get the vote. So again, my argument was not fallacious, since "men and women should not be treated equally" is not a defensible position. Rather, your argument is the incoherent one, because its premise is that feminist ideology has changed over time. It hasn't.

It is outrageously incorrect to claim that feminist ideology consists of the belief that men and women should be treated equally, therefore if one holds that belief, one must support feminism.

If that claim is reflective of your arguments, then I see no further point in discussion.

pbkmaine

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8130
  • Age: 62
  • Location: The Villages, Florida
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #262 on: January 10, 2015, 07:24:43 PM »
OK. I'm confused. Here I've been calling myself a feminist for the past oh, 45 years or so, and it turns out I may have no idea what it actually is. So, if it's not equal pay for equal work, then what is it?

Zikoris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3314
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Vancouver, BC
  • Vancouverstachian
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #263 on: January 10, 2015, 09:04:14 PM »
OK. I'm confused. Here I've been calling myself a feminist for the past oh, 45 years or so, and it turns out I may have no idea what it actually is. So, if it's not equal pay for equal work, then what is it?

Good luck getting feminists to ever hammer out an actual definition - it turns to jello so fast it makes your head spin when you try to nail down specifics.

I would think that two beliefs are pretty critical to be a feminist:
1. Women are currently disadvantaged/oppressed
2. #1 above should be corrected

If you think #1 is bullshit like I do (obviously exempting third world countries, war zones, etc), it's a bit of a stretch to call yourself feminist.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2015, 09:34:43 PM by Zikoris »

pbkmaine

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8130
  • Age: 62
  • Location: The Villages, Florida
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #264 on: January 10, 2015, 09:27:29 PM »
Well, I'm a capitalist, not a socialist. In fact, I worked on Wall Street for many years. But I am also a feminist. I believe in equal pay for equal work. It still does not exist in many places. Things are much better in the United States than they were 45 years ago, when I took my first job at the age of 13, but equality? Not when the first thing they mention about a female CEO is what she's wearing.

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #265 on: January 10, 2015, 10:38:06 PM »
Quote
I see where the confusion is. The feminist ideology, at bottom, is simply that men and women should be treated equally. That has not changed since women were first trying to get the vote. So again, my argument was not fallacious, since "men and women should not be treated equally" is not a defensible position. Rather, your argument is the incoherent one, because its premise is that feminist ideology has changed over time. It hasn't.

It is outrageously incorrect to claim that feminist ideology consists of the belief that men and women should be treated equally, therefore if one holds that belief, one must support feminism.

What part is incorrect? That feminist ideology is the belief that men and women should be treated equally, or that one shouldn't support that belief?

Zikoris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3314
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Vancouver, BC
  • Vancouverstachian
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #266 on: January 10, 2015, 11:00:34 PM »
Quote
I see where the confusion is. The feminist ideology, at bottom, is simply that men and women should be treated equally. That has not changed since women were first trying to get the vote. So again, my argument was not fallacious, since "men and women should not be treated equally" is not a defensible position. Rather, your argument is the incoherent one, because its premise is that feminist ideology has changed over time. It hasn't.

It is outrageously incorrect to claim that feminist ideology consists of the belief that men and women should be treated equally, therefore if one holds that belief, one must support feminism.

What part is incorrect? That feminist ideology is the belief that men and women should be treated equally, or that one shouldn't support that belief?

The problem is feminism claiming a monopoly on the concept of equality. Individual groups don't get to claim ownership of moral principles - just like supporting animal rights doesn't make you a PETA supporter, or believing in "do unto others" doesn't make you a Christian. You can believe in the concept of equality without being a feminist - you could consider yourself egalitarian, for example. It's simply false to say that believing in principle X = mandatory identification with group Y.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2015, 11:22:25 PM by Zikoris »

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #267 on: January 10, 2015, 11:25:02 PM »
Quote
I see where the confusion is. The feminist ideology, at bottom, is simply that men and women should be treated equally. That has not changed since women were first trying to get the vote. So again, my argument was not fallacious, since "men and women should not be treated equally" is not a defensible position. Rather, your argument is the incoherent one, because its premise is that feminist ideology has changed over time. It hasn't.

It is outrageously incorrect to claim that feminist ideology consists of the belief that men and women should be treated equally, therefore if one holds that belief, one must support feminism.

What part is incorrect? That feminist ideology is the belief that men and women should be treated equally, or that one shouldn't support that belief?

The problem is feminism claiming a monopoly on the concept of equality. Individual groups don't get to claim ownership of oral principles - just like supporting animal rights doesn't make you a PETA supporter, or believing in "do unto others" doesn't make you a Christian. You can believe in the concept of equality without being a feminist - you could consider yourself egalitarian, for example. It's simply false to say that believing in principle X = mandatory identification with group Y.

Hey, if we're agreeing that men and women should be treated equally, I'm not going to argue. I'm just not sure who out there is defending and prioritizing this position that you agree with ... apart from feminists. Just saying.

Celda

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 94
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #268 on: January 10, 2015, 11:29:02 PM »
What part is incorrect? That feminist ideology is the belief that men and women should be treated equally, or that one shouldn't support that belief?[/quote]

It seems that you are deliberately misinterpreting people's statements.

It is incorrect and dishonest to claim that feminist ideology consists of nothing more than the claim that men and women should be treated equally. If that was the extent of feminist positions, then most people would support it (as evidenced by polls where most people support equality between men and women).

But in reality, there is much more to feminist ideology than that, including many positions that are not nearly as popular.

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #269 on: January 10, 2015, 11:37:56 PM »
Quote from: Cressida
What part is incorrect? That feminist ideology is the belief that men and women should be treated equally, or that one shouldn't support that belief?

It seems that you are deliberately misinterpreting people's statements.

It is incorrect and dishonest to claim that feminist ideology consists of nothing more than the claim that men and women should be treated equally. If that was the extent of feminist positions, then most people would support it (as evidenced by polls where most people support equality between men and women).

But in reality, there is much more to feminist ideology than that, including many positions that are not nearly as popular.

I have a feeling this is going to devolve into semantics pretty quickly. But I'll try. Let's start with Wikipedia. Opening statement:

Quote
Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies that share a common stated aim: to define, establish, and defend equal political, economic, cultural, and social rights for women. This includes seeking to establish equal opportunities for women in education and employment. A feminist generally self-defines as advocating for or supporting the rights and equality of women.

What's unpopular here? Spell it out.

Celda

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 94
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #270 on: January 11, 2015, 12:06:26 AM »
Quote
I have a feeling this is going to devolve into semantics pretty quickly. But I'll try. Let's start with Wikipedia. Opening statement:

Semantics have nothing to do with this. There are actual, concrete feminist positions than people disagree with or oppose.

Example: Feminists assert that domestic violence is a gendered phenomenon, with men as perpetrators and women as victims. And if women do commit domestic violence, it is not as bad as when men do. E.g. The Duluth Model: www.theduluthmodel.org/about/faqs.html

Many people disagree with this claim, since there are literally hundreds of studies that show that domestic violence is equally committed by men and women: http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

Feminists assert that it is the responsibility of all men, whether they commit violence or not, to end domestic violence against women. E.g. White Ribbon: http://www.whiteribbon.ca/

Many people disagree with this claim, as non-violent men have no responsibility for the actions of other men. Just as law-abiding women have no responsibility for the actions of other women who commit false rape claims.

Example: Feminists assert that the fact that most politicians and CEOs in America are male, proves that men are privileged and women are oppressed.

Many people disagree with this claim, as the first fact does nothing to prove the second claim. Just as the fact that most prisoners, suicides, workplace deaths, and educational drop-outs are male does not prove that men are oppressed and women are privileged.

Example: Feminists at a university opposed the creation of a men's centre, despite the existence of a women's centre (common in most schools), with flimsy arguments: http://www.macleans.ca/education/uniandcollege/long-live-the-mens-centre/

Many people disagree with this opposition. There are plenty more examples where that came from, including feminist groups protesting talks about men's issues, via immoral actions such as physically blocking entrances to buildings, and illegally pulling fire alarms to shut down events (which was a crime in the city in question).

I could go on for a long time, but the bottom line is that there are many, many feminist positions and aspects of ideology that are unpopular - for good reason.

So it is incredibly dishonest to claim that "if a person believes men and women should be treated equally, then they are, or should be, a feminist."


Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #271 on: January 11, 2015, 12:44:24 AM »
Quote
I have a feeling this is going to devolve into semantics pretty quickly. But I'll try. Let's start with Wikipedia. Opening statement:

Semantics have nothing to do with this. There are actual, concrete feminist positions than people disagree with or oppose.

Example: Feminists assert that domestic violence is a gendered phenomenon, with men as perpetrators and women as victims. And if women do commit domestic violence, it is not as bad as when men do. E.g. The Duluth Model: www.theduluthmodel.org/about/faqs.html

Many people disagree with this claim, since there are literally hundreds of studies that show that domestic violence is equally committed by men and women: http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

Feminists assert that it is the responsibility of all men, whether they commit violence or not, to end domestic violence against women. E.g. White Ribbon: http://www.whiteribbon.ca/

Many people disagree with this claim, as non-violent men have no responsibility for the actions of other men. Just as law-abiding women have no responsibility for the actions of other women who commit false rape claims.

Example: Feminists assert that the fact that most politicians and CEOs in America are male, proves that men are privileged and women are oppressed.

Many people disagree with this claim, as the first fact does nothing to prove the second claim. Just as the fact that most prisoners, suicides, workplace deaths, and educational drop-outs are male does not prove that men are oppressed and women are privileged.

Example: Feminists at a university opposed the creation of a men's centre, despite the existence of a women's centre (common in most schools), with flimsy arguments: http://www.macleans.ca/education/uniandcollege/long-live-the-mens-centre/

Many people disagree with this opposition. There are plenty more examples where that came from, including feminist groups protesting talks about men's issues, via immoral actions such as physically blocking entrances to buildings, and illegally pulling fire alarms to shut down events (which was a crime in the city in question).

I could go on for a long time, but the bottom line is that there are many, many feminist positions and aspects of ideology that are unpopular - for good reason.

So it is incredibly dishonest to claim that "if a person believes men and women should be treated equally, then they are, or should be, a feminist."

None of your links reference feminism or feminists. Try again.

LennStar

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1238
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #272 on: January 11, 2015, 02:29:34 AM »
None of your links reference feminism or feminists. Try again.
These are examples of things self-proclaimed feminists groups state as truth.
If there are no actual people mentioned in the links (I didnt read) that doesnt change the fact.
I can confirm that f. groups exists who claim that above or do similar things.

I personally had a not-so-nice run in with 2 of them trying to convince me that I am somehow reponsible for rapes because... including the beloved "distance yourself from people you never even heard about" mantra. Which basically means the 2 called me an asshole+ and they got aggressive when I just turned away after a while of trying to friendly end the "conversation".
These extremist groups give the majority (we want equality) a bad name - like burn down building to "protect animals".


And since I do not want to be an aggressive atheist I wont mention how much this reminds me of religious missionaries - the same "we have the truth you just have to learn it" stance that makes them so hard to tolerate ;)
« Last Edit: January 11, 2015, 02:31:05 AM by LennStar »

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #273 on: January 11, 2015, 02:37:31 AM »
None of your links reference feminism or feminists. Try again.
I can confirm that f. groups exists who claim that above or do similar things.

Can you? So do so. I'm waiting.

davisgang90

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1212
  • Location: Roanoke, VA
    • Photography by Rich Davis
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #274 on: January 11, 2015, 04:55:32 AM »
Obviously nobody on this forum wants to go back to women not having the vote or being able to work.  The point is that sometimes feminism's piss poor messaging leaves women with the impression they should delay their family (even if they don't want to) otherwise it diminishes the "cause" of feminism.  Women should be free to have a full career, part of a career around having children or the sole career of raising a family and running a household if her finances permit.

Feminism tends to discount and shun the second and third options and feminism's record with regard to demonizing the male of the species is well known.  You say it is bad messaging.  I think there is more to it than that and their are elements of the movement that spend the majority of their time railing against the "patriarchy" and hating men.  Obviously a movement as large and amorphous as feminism doesn't necessarily speak with one voice.  Those holding the microphone today aren't doing the rest of you any favors.

I don't agree with most of what you just wrote, but I'm not going to argue about it. When I said that feminism is bad at messaging, I meant that they're utterly unable to sell their product, a fact made painfully clear by the reluctance to adopt the label among the general public. Feminism took care of most of the easy stuff (the vote etc.), most of which involves women entering traditionally male spheres. The next step is obviously to work toward men entering traditionally female spheres, because we won't have achieved equality as a society until people don't even think in terms of "male" and "female" spheres anymore. But there's no organized move toward this, which baffles me.
What are these female spheres?  Nurse? Teacher? Homemaker? That has already happened.  Not sure what other sphere you mean.

No, it hasn't. There's immense societal pressure on men to be the breadwinner. Far, far, far more women than men work part-time or not at all. When there are as many male homemakers as there are female doctors and lawyers, we can talk.

I recognize that men *on this forum* are all trying their hardest to distance themselves from paid work, sort of by definition. But Mustachians are not typical, as we know.
Here we reach the root of the disagreement.  Feminism doesn't want women to be treated equally as men but that the two sexes should be viewed as the same.  They aren't.  You can ignore the realities of biology in both sexes if you want, but good luck legislating biology, maternal and paternal instincts out of our species.  As I said earlier, I'm all for a woman being able to make her own decisions about career and family, but that doesn't align with feminist philosophy which says until we have as many stay at home dads as stay at home moms, women are still oppressed. 

Celda

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 94
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #275 on: January 11, 2015, 01:18:55 PM »
Quote
None of your links reference feminism or feminists. Try again.

The Duluth Model was created by feminists based on feminist theory.

The White Ribbon organization is a feminist group.

I personally have seen hundreds of self-identified feminists claim that the fact that most politicians and CEOs in America are male, proves that men are privileged and women are oppressed.

The SFU Women's Centre is a feminist group.

It appears that you are just trolling now.

davisgang90

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1212
  • Location: Roanoke, VA
    • Photography by Rich Davis
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #276 on: January 11, 2015, 02:09:40 PM »
It's the No True Scotsman defense.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

NumberJohnny5

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 626
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #277 on: January 11, 2015, 02:12:16 PM »
None of your links reference feminism or feminists. Try again.
I can confirm that f. groups exists who claim that above or do similar things.

Can you? So do so. I'm waiting.

What are you waiting for exactly? Do you want links where people talk about feminist groups doing such things? Ok, here you go:

http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/off-topic/poor-folks-are-victims

That must be what you want, since first-person reports aren't good enough.

Perhaps being a feminist used to mean what you state. If so, then it's definitely changed. It'll be unfortunate if we have to use yet another term to mean what feminism used to mean, but that seems to happen with the English language quite often. Just see MMM's attempts to redefine "retirement" to mean "financial independence".

I'm a stay at home dad. When asked for my job, I put down "homemaker". I can only think of one male who spoke ill against that (my father, so not sure if that should count). I have had multiple women say something about it, ranging from "Giving mom a break today?" to "One day your wife will realize how you're taking advantage of her and leave your lazy ass." I can recall ONE time that a woman (younger aged, early 20s maybe?) who made a statement supporting my homemaker status. My daughter had a button that was about to come off, and the lady said "your dad's going to have to sew that to keep it from falling off." I remember that statement because it's so rare.

I know, this is just one stay at home dad's experience. By itself it doesn't mean that much. Get enough of these types of stories together, and a pattern emerges.

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #278 on: January 11, 2015, 03:29:50 PM »
What are these female spheres?  Nurse? Teacher? Homemaker? That has already happened.  Not sure what other sphere you mean.
No, it hasn't. There's immense societal pressure on men to be the breadwinner. Far, far, far more women than men work part-time or not at all. When there are as many male homemakers as there are female doctors and lawyers, we can talk.

I recognize that men *on this forum* are all trying their hardest to distance themselves from paid work, sort of by definition. But Mustachians are not typical, as we know.
Here we reach the root of the disagreement.  Feminism doesn't want women to be treated equally as men but that the two sexes should be viewed as the same.  They aren't.  You can ignore the realities of biology in both sexes if you want, but good luck legislating biology, maternal and paternal instincts out of our species.  As I said earlier, I'm all for a woman being able to make her own decisions about career and family, but that doesn't align with feminist philosophy which says until we have as many stay at home dads as stay at home moms, women are still oppressed.

You're assuming that there are inherent differences between male and female brains, differences that have biological causes rather than social ones. But this has never been proven.

Anyway, even if they had, what exactly is your argument here? That men and women are hopelessly different, therefore we shouldn't care that men aren't equally represented in the domestic sphere? That position is as oppressive to men as it is to women.

davisgang90

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1212
  • Location: Roanoke, VA
    • Photography by Rich Davis
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #279 on: January 11, 2015, 05:20:29 PM »
I'm saying that it is a ridiculous metric to say women remain oppressed until 50% or greater of stay at home parents are male.

Hard to take a movement seriously that holds such ridiculous views.   

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #280 on: January 11, 2015, 06:24:00 PM »
Quote
None of your links reference feminism or feminists. Try again.
The Duluth Model was created by feminists based on feminist theory.

The White Ribbon organization is a feminist group.

I personally have seen hundreds of self-identified feminists claim that the fact that most politicians and CEOs in America are male, proves that men are privileged and women are oppressed.

The SFU Women's Centre is a feminist group.

It appears that you are just trolling now.

Fine, let's say you're right. Let's use your first point as an example. I think you're saying that this Duluth Model (1) is backed by "feminism" and (2) claims that men commit more domestic violence than women, which is untrue; therefore (3) feminism should not be supported because it makes this bad argument.

First of all, the claim that men and women commit domestic violence equally is nonsense, and you know it's nonsense (so who's the troll here? hmmmm). So we can dismiss that part.

Why don't we find an ostensibly neutral source about this Duluth Method? Wikipedia says, "It is based in feminist theory positing that 'domestic violence is the result of patriarchal ideology in which men are encouraged and expected to control their partners.'" It also says that the method "is intended to help batterers work to change their attitudes and personal behavior so they would learn to be nonviolent in any relationship."

In other words: When men batter, it's because they've grown up in a culture that associates maleness with power and violence. Is that actually true? I have no idea; I'm not a domestic violence expert.

But if it *were* true, I should point out that "associating maleness with power and violence" is an example of "treating men and women differently." It all comes back to this. If our society didn't treat men and women differently by propagating stereotypes, then that influence would disappear as a cause of domestic violence.

As I said, I'm not saying that this explanation for domestic violence is accurate. What I'm saying is that Celda's citation is just another example of the fact that the underlying ideology of feminism is that men and women should be treated equally. Period. That's it. If you're going to argue against the fundamental ideology of feminism, that is what you're arguing against.

Celda

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 94
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #281 on: January 11, 2015, 06:45:22 PM »
Quote
First of all, the claim that men and women commit domestic violence equally is nonsense, and you know it's nonsense (so who's the troll here? hmmmm).

Are you reading what I am saying? I already linked to this in my first post: http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

SUMMARY:  This bibliography examines 286 scholarly investigations: 221 empirical studies and 65 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners.  The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 371,600.

Quote
As I said, I'm not saying that this explanation for domestic violence is accurate. What I'm saying is that Celda's citation is just another example of the fact that the underlying ideology of feminism is that men and women should be treated equally. Period. That's it. If you're going to argue against the fundamental ideology of feminism, that is what you're arguing against.

You are not making any sense.

I provided some concrete examples of feminist positions and claims. Which are quite different than "men and women should be treated equally". And needless to say, many of these feminist positions and claims are a lot less popular than the position that men and women should be treated equally.

And that is why it makes sense for people to believe men and women should be treated equally, but also not support feminism.

If you don't understand that simple point, then there is no point in continuing a discussion.

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #282 on: January 11, 2015, 06:49:49 PM »
I'm saying that it is a ridiculous metric to say women remain oppressed until 50% or greater of stay at home parents are male.

Hard to take a movement seriously that holds such ridiculous views.   

jesus this is getting boring.

You're strawmanning my position in two ways. First, the goal is for the domestic sphere to no longer be coded as female. If there is some other indication that that goal has been met, there's no need for the numbers to be exactly equal. Second, "women are oppressed" is a misrepresentation of the problem. Treating men and women differently hurts both men and women.

davisgang90

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1212
  • Location: Roanoke, VA
    • Photography by Rich Davis
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #283 on: January 12, 2015, 04:21:39 AM »
I'm saying that it is a ridiculous metric to say women remain oppressed until 50% or greater of stay at home parents are male.

Hard to take a movement seriously that holds such ridiculous views.   

jesus this is getting boring.

You're strawmanning my position in two ways. First, the goal is for the domestic sphere to no longer be coded as female. If there is some other indication that that goal has been met, there's no need for the numbers to be exactly equal. Second, "women are oppressed" is a misrepresentation of the problem. Treating men and women differently hurts both men and women.

To be more accurate, I'm not straw-manning your position I'm applying Reductio ad absurdum to it, although not much is required in this case.

You brought up the numbers being equal a couple times.

Quote
but she does ignore the fact that the other part of the solution would be for men to “stay home” in equal numbers
Quote
Anyway, even if they had, what exactly is your argument here? That men and women are hopelessly different, therefore we shouldn't care that men aren't equally represented in the domestic sphere? That position is as oppressive to men as it is to women.

Until they figure out how men can have the babies, the domestic sphere will remain "coded" as female.  It is changing and I would love to be a stay at home dad (and will when I retire) but this is just pure silliness.  This is why modern feminism isn't taken seriously.  Men and women are treated differently because they are different.  They should be treated equally, but can't be treated the same.  They should have the same opportunities and we should continue to encourage that, but basic biology can't be re-coded.

Is it your contention that when a woman has a child and desires to stay home and raise that child that feeling is completely dictated by a culture that demands women be the homemakers?  Because I'd bet a lot of stay-at-home moms would disagree with that contention. 

Left

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1159
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #284 on: January 12, 2015, 05:30:54 AM »
saw this post above
Quote
NOT condemning all women who make traditional choices while exalting those who follow a "traditionally male" life path.
and with the feminism posts, just wonder why aren't the anti-feminist guys considering becoming more "feminine" instead of holding onto an "outdated?" ideal of masculinity? Feminism to me came around during WWII when the men were off at war, the women worked the factories and other "male" professions and pushed for why they should keep the jobs after the war. With modern technology "working" the factory jobs, more and more jobs that were traditionally female jobs like office work/service jobs/healthcare (outside of doctors) are now jobs that everyone wants. So fields that were women dominated now have men flooding the markets. My question to anti-feminist ideas is why should the women just step aside and let the men in any more than how the men step aside and let the women into the factories in past generations? The second part is these jobs were seen to suit women because they were "feminine" and could handle social situations better (?) so why don't men learn from this and do the same instead of trying to be "masculine/macho/bravado"? In population dense Japan, a lot in the west would say the men aren't as "masculine". Just pointing out an example of where a men still dominated work force don't necessarily act masculine (to the West). Though people could point that many females also step out of the work force once they are married too, but that happens here as well. Even male dominated STEM jobs (engineers/programmers/etc) don't exactly strike up the "masculine" male image. So what role does claiming gender roles in workplace hold these days? Should be a free for all which feminism pushed for imo.

Trying to spin this out of the domestic sphere and into work sphere? Wondering how I posted this in a victim thread since it's so off topic, but still intriguing to see where it heads

Though myself, I would like to see a political push to get rid of ALL social "nets" food stamps/section 8/social security/minimum wage etc related to income and have a flat "basic" income for everyone. This I assume would put at least everyone on a very mustachian lifestyle. Then if they want more, they have to work for it. With no minimum wage, the companies would be forced to pay enough as incentive to get people off their couches since their basic living is already covered. Not sure if people would decide to work for $1/hr just to get out of the house and not be bored, but hey if they want to, why should I get in the way? And if people wanted to not be "mustachian" in retirement, they would be encouraged to save their "working" income since they can live on the "basic" one for life, or spend it along the way.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2015, 05:43:57 AM by eyem »

davisgang90

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1212
  • Location: Roanoke, VA
    • Photography by Rich Davis
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #285 on: January 12, 2015, 05:38:59 AM »
saw this post above
Quote
NOT condemning all women who make traditional choices while exalting those who follow a "traditionally male" life path.
and with the feminism posts, just wonder why aren't the anti-feminist guys considering becoming more "feminine" instead of holding onto an "outdated?" ideal of masculinity? Feminism to me came around during WWII when the men were off at war, the women worked the factories and other "male" professions and pushed for why they should keep the jobs after the war. With modern technology "working" the factory jobs, more and more jobs that were traditionally female jobs like office work/service jobs/healthcare (outside of doctors) are now jobs that everyone wants. So fields that were women dominated now have men flooding the markets. My question to anti-feminist ideas is why should the women just step aside and let the men in any more than how the men step aside and let the women into the factories in past generations? The second part is these jobs were seen to suit women because they were "feminine" and could handle social situations better (?) so why don't men learn from this and do the same instead of trying to be "masculine/macho/bravado"? In population dense Japan, a lot in the west would say the men aren't as "masculine". Just pointing out an example of where a men still dominated work force don't necessarily act masculine (to the West). Though people could point that many females also step out of the work force once they are married too, but that happens here as well. Even male dominated STEM jobs (engineers/programmers/etc) don't exactly strike up the "masculine" male image. So what role does claiming gender roles in workplace hold these days? Should be a free for all which feminism pushed for imo.

Trying to spin this out of the domestic sphere and into work sphere? Wondering how I posted this in a victim thread since it's so off topic, but still intriguing to see where it heads
Not sure what this word salad actually says.  Huh?

Left

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1159
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #286 on: January 12, 2015, 05:44:29 AM »
Not sure what this word salad actually says.  Huh?
no idea myself :) I've been up all night lol

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #287 on: January 12, 2015, 11:58:07 AM »
You brought up the numbers being equal a couple times.

Now you're just wilfully misunderstanding me. Equality is a concept. It doesn't have to mean "50.00% at all times." I'm sure you're aware of this, but I guess you just like to argue.

Until they figure out how men can have the babies, the domestic sphere will remain "coded" as female.  It is changing and I would love to be a stay at home dad (and will when I retire) but this is just pure silliness.  This is why modern feminism isn't taken seriously.  Men and women are treated differently because they are different.  They should be treated equally, but can't be treated the same.  They should have the same opportunities and we should continue to encourage that, but basic biology can't be re-coded.

I don't know why you would say this. Pregnancy takes nine months. The domestic sphere exists in perpetuity. Men and women can certainly be treated the same outside of the short span of pregnancy.

Is it your contention that when a woman has a child and desires to stay home and raise that child that feeling is completely dictated by a culture that demands women be the homemakers?  Because I'd bet a lot of stay-at-home moms would disagree with that contention.

No, but at least you asked this time instead of going for the straw man immediately.

Culture doesn't "demand that women be homemakers." It's far more complicated than that. There's a pervasive idea in our society that breadwinning is male and homemaking is female. In the past decades, women have started participating in breadwinning in large numbers, but men have not started participating in homemaking in large numbers. This is largely because femaleness has historically been valued lower than maleness, so it's OK for females to act male but not OK for males to act female. As a result of men's lack of participation in homemaking, many women have found it easier to prioritize homemaking over breadwinning, because if they don't, the homemaking doesn't get done.

Sure, there are some women who enjoy homemaking. But there are also some women who hate it but continue to do it because of the influences described above. That's what needs to go away. And it won't go away until domestic work is no longer viewed as female, because it's self-reinforcing. Men won't do the homemaking, so women pick up the slack and do the homemaking, so a majority of homemaking is done by women, so it's seen as women's work, so men won't do the homemaking, repeat.

davisgang90

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1212
  • Location: Roanoke, VA
    • Photography by Rich Davis
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #288 on: January 12, 2015, 12:05:23 PM »
Great news!  The homemaking sphere has been recoded in my household!  For the last decade I've handled 95% of the cooking and most of the cleaning as well.

Alert Gloria Steinam.  Down with the patriarchy!

Zikoris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3314
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Vancouver, BC
  • Vancouverstachian
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #289 on: January 12, 2015, 12:18:02 PM »

Culture doesn't "demand that women be homemakers." It's far more complicated than that. There's a pervasive idea in our society that breadwinning is male and homemaking is female. In the past decades, women have started participating in breadwinning in large numbers, but men have not started participating in homemaking in large numbers. This is largely because femaleness has historically been valued lower than maleness, so it's OK for females to act male but not OK for males to act female. As a result of men's lack of participation in homemaking, many women have found it easier to prioritize homemaking over breadwinning, because if they don't, the homemaking doesn't get done.

Sure, there are some women who enjoy homemaking. But there are also some women who hate it but continue to do it because of the influences described above. That's what needs to go away. And it won't go away until domestic work is no longer viewed as female, because it's self-reinforcing. Men won't do the homemaking, so women pick up the slack and do the homemaking, so a majority of homemaking is done by women, so it's seen as women's work, so men won't do the homemaking, repeat.

I think this is a really good example of why most people don't see feminism as being relevant in today's society - women choosing to do more housework than their partners is considered an actual serious issue in your movement, rather than the trivial bs the non-feminist majority considers it.

davisgang90

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1212
  • Location: Roanoke, VA
    • Photography by Rich Davis
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #290 on: January 12, 2015, 12:39:24 PM »

Culture doesn't "demand that women be homemakers." It's far more complicated than that. There's a pervasive idea in our society that breadwinning is male and homemaking is female. In the past decades, women have started participating in breadwinning in large numbers, but men have not started participating in homemaking in large numbers. This is largely because femaleness has historically been valued lower than maleness, so it's OK for females to act male but not OK for males to act female. As a result of men's lack of participation in homemaking, many women have found it easier to prioritize homemaking over breadwinning, because if they don't, the homemaking doesn't get done.

Sure, there are some women who enjoy homemaking. But there are also some women who hate it but continue to do it because of the influences described above. That's what needs to go away. And it won't go away until domestic work is no longer viewed as female, because it's self-reinforcing. Men won't do the homemaking, so women pick up the slack and do the homemaking, so a majority of homemaking is done by women, so it's seen as women's work, so men won't do the homemaking, repeat.

I think this is a really good example of why most people don't see feminism as being relevant in today's society - women choosing to do more housework than their partners is considered an actual serious issue in your movement, rather than the trivial bs the non-feminist majority considers it.
It is an outrageous outrage!!!

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #291 on: January 12, 2015, 01:46:16 PM »
I think this is a really good example of why most people don't see feminism as being relevant in today's society - women choosing to do more housework than their partners is considered an actual serious issue in your movement, rather than the trivial bs the non-feminist majority considers it.

I see what you did there, but it's not a free choice in many cases, and yes, that is a problem.

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #292 on: January 12, 2015, 01:48:40 PM »
Great news!  The homemaking sphere has been recoded in my household!  For the last decade I've handled 95% of the cooking and most of the cleaning as well.

Alert Gloria Steinam.  Down with the patriarchy!

Since you love to cite logical fallacies, try this: "unwarranted extrapolation."

Zikoris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3314
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Vancouver, BC
  • Vancouverstachian
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #293 on: January 12, 2015, 02:20:28 PM »
I think this is a really good example of why most people don't see feminism as being relevant in today's society - women choosing to do more housework than their partners is considered an actual serious issue in your movement, rather than the trivial bs the non-feminist majority considers it.

I see what you did there, but it's not a free choice in many cases, and yes, that is a problem.

If someone's got a gun to your head making you scrub floors, you have a problem. But the problem is that your partner is a criminal and you need to go to the police, not that there's a lack of feminism in society.

davisgang90

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1212
  • Location: Roanoke, VA
    • Photography by Rich Davis
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #294 on: January 12, 2015, 02:23:59 PM »
Great news!  The homemaking sphere has been recoded in my household!  For the last decade I've handled 95% of the cooking and most of the cleaning as well.

Alert Gloria Steinam.  Down with the patriarchy!

Since you love to cite logical fallacies, try this: "unwarranted extrapolation."
So I'm doing my part as the patriarch to ensure a more equitable distribution of work in the homemaking sphere and that's all I get? 

I get the feeling you aren't really serious about feminism at all.  You leave me no choice but to report you to your local Womyns' Center for re-education. 

EDSMedS

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 205
  • Age: 34
  • Location: Washington, DC
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #295 on: January 12, 2015, 03:17:20 PM »
Choice is limited or expanded by gender thanks to unconscious and socially reinforced beliefs. --> http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/2012/09/23/study-shows-gender-bias-in-science-is-real-heres-why-it-matters/ 

Feminism is a reactive position to a sometimes hidden but often blatantly sexist society, just as Welfare is a reactive program to a binary of wealth supported by untethered capitalism.  Neither is ideal but they are both currently necessary.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2015, 03:38:31 PM by EDSMedS »

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #296 on: January 12, 2015, 03:36:48 PM »
I think this is a really good example of why most people don't see feminism as being relevant in today's society - women choosing to do more housework than their partners is considered an actual serious issue in your movement, rather than the trivial bs the non-feminist majority considers it.
I see what you did there, but it's not a free choice in many cases, and yes, that is a problem.
If someone's got a gun to your head making you scrub floors, you have a problem. But the problem is that your partner is a criminal and you need to go to the police, not that there's a lack of feminism in society.

Right. The only thing that can ever constrain behavior is a gun to the head. Sure.

Zikoris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3314
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Vancouver, BC
  • Vancouverstachian
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #297 on: January 12, 2015, 03:51:28 PM »
I think this is a really good example of why most people don't see feminism as being relevant in today's society - women choosing to do more housework than their partners is considered an actual serious issue in your movement, rather than the trivial bs the non-feminist majority considers it.
I see what you did there, but it's not a free choice in many cases, and yes, that is a problem.
If someone's got a gun to your head making you scrub floors, you have a problem. But the problem is that your partner is a criminal and you need to go to the police, not that there's a lack of feminism in society.

Right. The only thing that can ever constrain behavior is a gun to the head. Sure.

Choosing to go through life being a doormat has consequences - namely, that people will treat you like one. Fortunately, you can also choose not to.

Or alternatively, choose not to be in relationships with people who expect you to clean up after them to begin with. Choose relationships based on compatibility and shared values.

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6333
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #298 on: January 12, 2015, 03:53:26 PM »
Obviously nobody on this forum wants to go back to women not having the vote or being able to work.  The point is that sometimes feminism's piss poor messaging leaves women with the impression they should delay their family (even if they don't want to) otherwise it diminishes the "cause" of feminism.  Women should be free to have a full career, part of a career around having children or the sole career of raising a family and running a household if her finances permit.

Feminism tends to discount and shun the second and third options and feminism's record with regard to demonizing the male of the species is well known.  You say it is bad messaging.  I think there is more to it than that and their are elements of the movement that spend the majority of their time railing against the "patriarchy" and hating men.  Obviously a movement as large and amorphous as feminism doesn't necessarily speak with one voice.  Those holding the microphone today aren't doing the rest of you any favors.
You know I keep hearing people talk about what feminism is like this.

But I'm a feminism and it's not like this.  And I've never actually met another feminist like this.

So I'm puzzled as to where all these crazy feminists are.  Oh, maybe they exist and all, I just haven't met them.

davisgang90

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1212
  • Location: Roanoke, VA
    • Photography by Rich Davis
Re: Poor Folks are Victims
« Reply #299 on: January 12, 2015, 04:49:07 PM »
Obviously nobody on this forum wants to go back to women not having the vote or being able to work.  The point is that sometimes feminism's piss poor messaging leaves women with the impression they should delay their family (even if they don't want to) otherwise it diminishes the "cause" of feminism.  Women should be free to have a full career, part of a career around having children or the sole career of raising a family and running a household if her finances permit.

Feminism tends to discount and shun the second and third options and feminism's record with regard to demonizing the male of the species is well known.  You say it is bad messaging.  I think there is more to it than that and their are elements of the movement that spend the majority of their time railing against the "patriarchy" and hating men.  Obviously a movement as large and amorphous as feminism doesn't necessarily speak with one voice.  Those holding the microphone today aren't doing the rest of you any favors.
You know I keep hearing people talk about what feminism is like this.

But I'm a feminism and it's not like this.  And I've never actually met another feminist like this.

So I'm puzzled as to where all these crazy feminists are.  Oh, maybe they exist and all, I just haven't met them.
These are from page 6. 

This article on the Jezebel site seems to tick many of the boxes mentioned above.  http://jezebel.com/5991343/the-feminist-housewife-is-such-bullshit

Here's another: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/06/1-wives-are-helping-kill-feminism-and-make-the-war-on-women-possible/258431/

Or this one: http://gawker.com/kaley-cuoco-im-not-a-feminist-and-i-love-feeling-like-1676352429

And here's a fairly crazy one: http://witchwind.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/piv-is-always-rape-ok/