Feminism
_
Posts: 6,651
What does it mean to you and, if you're not a feminist, does your view matter anyway? Meaning, if you're not part of a group, is it your place or within your power to represent/define that group and what they stand for?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
And yes those who don't consider themselves as such still have things we can learn from them.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
in honor of feminism, i'd like to honor the declaration of sentiments from the seneca falls convention, 1848:
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one portion of the family of man to assume among the people of the earth a position different from that which they have hitherto occupied, but one to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes that impel them to such a course.
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of those who suffer from it to refuse allegiance to it, and to insist upon the institution of a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer. while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their duty to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of the women under this government, and such is now the necessity which constrains them to demand the equal station to which they are entitled. The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.
The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyrranny over her. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has never permitted her to exercise her inalienable right to the elective franchise.
He has compelled her to submit to laws, in the formation of which she had no voice.
He has withheld from her rights which are given to the most ignorant and degraded men--both natives and foreigners.
Having deprived her of this first right of a citizedn, the elective franchise, thereby leaving her without representation in the halls of legislation, he has oppressed her on all sides.
He has made her, if married, in the eye of the law, civilly dead.
He has taken from her all right in property, even to the wages she earns.
He has made her, morally, an irresponsible being, as she can commit many crimes with impunity, provided they be done in the presence of her husband. In the covenant of marriage, she is compelled to promise obedience to her husband, he becoming, to all intents and purposes, her master--the law giving him power to deprive her of her liberty, and to administer chastisement.
He has so framed the laws of divorce, as to what shall be the proper causes, and in case of separation, to whom the guardianship of the children shall be given, as to be wholly regardles of the happiness of women--the law, in all cases, going upon a flase supposition of the supremacy of man, and giving all power into his hands.
After depriving her of all rights as a married woman, if single, and the owner of property, he has taxed her to support a government which recognizes her only when her property can be made profitable to it.
He has monopolized nearly all the profitable employments, and from those she is permitted to follow, she receives but a scanty remuneration. He closes against her all the avenues to wealth and distinction which he considers most homorable to himself. As a teacher of theoloy, medicine, or law, she is not known.
He has denied her the facilities for obtaining a thorough education, all colleges being closed against her.
He allows her in church, as well as state, but a suborinate position, claiming apostolic authority for her exclusion from the ministry, and, with some exceptions, from any public participation in the affairs of the church.
He has created a false public sentiment by giving to the world a different code of morals for men and women, by which moral delinquencies which exclude women from society, are not only tolerated, but deemed of little account in man.
He has usurped the prerogative of Jehovah himself, claiming it as his right to assign for her a sphere of action, when that belongs to her conscience and to her God.
He has endeavored, in every way that he could, to destroy her conficence in her own powers, to lessen her self-respect, and to make her willing to lead a dependent and abject life.
Now, in view of this entire disfranchisement of one-half the people of this country, their social and religious degradation--in view of the unjust laws above mentioned, and because women do feel themselves aggrieved, oppressed, and fraudulently deprived of their most sacred rights, we insist that they have immediate admission to all the rights and privileges which belong to them as citizens of the United States.
cross the river to the eastside
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
I'm a little confused. What do you mean by 'group', do you mean women or feminists?
naděje umírá poslední
In any system, individuals must be able to step out of their system in order to see the system "objectively". For such purposes, views from outside the system are necessary, valid, and part of a realistic appraisal of any system. Sometimes those who base their identity on the school of thought (ie: I'm a such-and-such) , cannot effectively get outside that system in order to be objective because they see themselves as that system and therefore the ego sees not-that-system as "other", and wrong. On the other hand, when one sees themselves as an open human being appraising and seeking out all truth around them, it's a very different perspective, and therefore outcome.
As I said earlier in another thread, any general system of thought is lacking. This is because thought is merely an aspect of life. It cannot represent a whole view or even a whole perception or whole awareness of something. It is general, and therefore within the system alone, one cannot fully and effectively discern all the nuances involved.
I don't define myself by any group or system of thought. There is a psychological happening within the human brain, whereupon humans are driven to be consistent. When humans define themselves a certain way, they experience cognitive dissonance to go against such definitions, and then in order to resolve that natural dissonance inside, will tend to compromise growth.
I absolutely identify with many, many views, understandings and stances within feminism. I can generalize and say I support all feministic views that are about empowering individuals, and that don't do so at the expense of others. Like in all systems, I take what I resonate to and use that as a tool alongside my inner truths.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Feminists
Do you have to be a woman to be a feminist?
So, back to the first part of my questions, what does feminism mean to you?
Or can we only interpret CERTAIN words as we like?
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
It has all kinds of meanings for me.
I've appreciated the self-proclaimed male feminists I've known and the statement they make by being feminists.
I'm all for people owning their feelings of unempowerment, and finding support amongst other like-minded individuals. Solidarity and support can be so empowering!
I value the vast amounts of empowering information that has been put forth in the name of feminism.
I value the politics of feminism in creating empowering structures for women. And in revealing the brilliance of female-based ways and systems.
The feminist underbelly is that it is sometimes used as a way to diminish other groups of people.
Also, in general feminism has an unspoken (or spoken) starting point that says "we are not on the even playing field and we hope to make progress and eke out that even playing field between men and women at a point in the future". This stance is the ongoing creation and perpetuation of women willingly internalizing and identifying with a one-down position in each present moment. By living as one-down, one cannot at the same time live on the even playing field and therefore one is embodying imbalance. The point is that tomorrow never comes, and the only point of power is in the Now, so from this perspective, feminism, itself, is inherently unempowering. For me personally, empowerment can only be found in the now, when we tap into the possibilities and potential of the moment. I cannot tap the possibilities of tomorrow, ever. I've resolved my female pain (and continue to when it arises) and therefore am able to live aligned with life and therefore awake and empowered in the now. Incidentally, this authentic empowerment enables me to see possibilites, opportunities and potential to empower me in whatever nature has endowed me with as my inner visions, in harmony with life. I'm aligned with my inherent power. The only thing that can separate me from this is my own perception, and flawed premises that I identify with and perpetuate. Therefore when I'm coming from this perspective, I see the illusions of unempowerment. I see then that any unempowerment we carry with us, and that we project outward onto others, is an illusion that will bring us into life experiences that are self-fulfilling and ripe with learning experiences. From this perspective, when we project our lack of power onto others, and say they cause it, we give away our power.
When I am operating at this place of awareness (and I'm not there all the time) I embody my power. I am no longer holding myself seperate from it.
This is by no means an exhaustive list of what feminism means to me. Each context is entirely different and my understanding of feminisim in any context can contain mixtures of these views, and contain many other perspectives as well.
It was actually from a feminist author* that I learned of developmental stages and that how in order to grow and be true to ourselves, our views will literally flip-flop as we progress through natural phases. Therefore we won't naturally believe in one consistent view. From her, I also learned that women naturally are more lateral in their thinking, as opposed to typically male linear thinking. It is the linear model that one adheres to in a consistent school of thought, and I sidestep pigeon-holing myself in such a way.
* http://www.amazon.com/Womens-Reality-Emerging-Female-System/dp/0062507702
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
i think that's a good way to put it. and that line may not be as sticky, because if a man is advocating feminist principles then he should generally be safe. to try and control a woman's body or rights would not be very feminist in the first place. i know some men who identify as feminists which is awesome, but i don't see a lot of male feminist theorists. sometimes i'm confused by the amount of people who don't see themselves as feminists (male or female) because if it's basically equality, who doesn't want that?
cross the river to the eastside
great quote.
i don't necessarily call myself a feminist, but i don't really place labels on myself, period. thing is, 'feminists' has been quite maligned as of late, almost a dirty word...and that's a shame. i think the ideals of feminism are good and true, and i think men and women alike can be feminists and it's important to value ALL, and expect equality for all. until that actually exists across the board....the existance of 'feminists' is necessary in my mind, just as any other group working for the rights and equalities of such. if i had to identify myself, i would say i am a feminist because i will always believe support and fight for the rights of women, as i would anyone who is not in an equal position as they should be.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
This is why I always align with a humanitarian stance...to me, it embraces and goes beyond a feminism stance. As well, the humanitarianism stance does not tolerate degrading others in thought/word/deed in the pursuit of human rights, for any reason.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
The catch is that it's obvious when a feminist is not also a humanist. It's obvious when gender comes before humanity. By this I refer to the human flaws that give the ideal of feminism a bad name, whereupon seeking women's rights, the rights and dignity of men and others are degraded, and doing so is falsely justified.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
of course. i think therein lies where the 'bad name' may've arisen early on, and never fully dissipated. not that i think early feminists weren't also humanists, but given how new and uncharted it all was.....were so driven by their desires that being a humanitarian may've come second to being a feminist. not saying rightly or wrongly...just how i can see and understand that evolution. none the less, in today's climate especially....i see nothing to be negative about feminism, still a worthy goal....and most definitely a part of the grander humanitarian efforts for equality. i think as women have gained more power in their own lives, a better equilibrium between feminist/general humanitarin goals has arisen and continues to be fostered and worked towards. i personally do still see many 'women's issues' that still require focus, thus feminism still very much has a purpos in my mind.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
I, on the other hand, still see this dynamic today, all the time, in women (feminists), who hold within anger/frustration, etc. that they've not yet resolved. Yes, it's because they are still at more rudimentary phases of their own personal evolution. Or because they temporarily regress there. I understand it. I understand the validity to it. And yet, proponents who do project their own inner issues on others still hold accountability. This is something gauged within each thought/word/deed in all situations. There is no blanket "feminists have gotten past that, today".
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
i don't think a women need to identify herself as a feminist to think or behave that way....nor does a man need to be a misogynist to on occasion behave with a caveman mentality either.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
Such associations cannot minimize the valid purposes of the philosophy, but they do associate a bad name with the mindset.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
And that it is, on a very practical level, until a woman in the workplace get the same economic treatment as a man for an equal position and merit, or the same career opportunities even if stopping for maternity leave, etc.
This is without even considering the abuses that happen around the world with forced female circumcision, etc.
you said it.
cross the river to the eastside
yes.
my point was tho, women behving in such a fashion may or may not be 'feminists' at all....and just behaving that way, period, b/c it is their personal mindset. the fact that they are women doing so should not necessarily or automatically be labelled 'feminist' nor looked upon as a reflection on feminism.
lgt - excellent points!
you got there far better. haha. i DO believe one can be a feminist ANd a humanitarian, and one identifying themselves as a feminist in no way diminishes the other. there are plenty of people walking this earth who most certainly are NOT humanitarians, so i certainly elieve it's well within rights to differentiate the two, and identify with the two, if one so chooses. i am a strong supporter of BOTH....but i DO think it is necessary to focus on women's issues all on their own oftentimes.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
I think there is definitely a power structure and socio-economic level to consider as well in the whole men/women equal rights dynamic.
It's not just a question of an individual woman rights and her ability to be treated with respect and equally.
It's more than that, if you see what I mean.
But I guess, that might be too reminiscent of the 60s and collective rights!
Indeed!
And I guess, the more the term is discredited the more it becomes appealing to me in light of the history of the women's movement and the struggles they've overcome and still are to overcome - nothwithstanding certain excesses: it's not a dichotomy between men or women on who's best - to trivialise it somewhat - just equal rights and treatment across the board.
And as you point out, support of women rights does not contradict or diminish - indeed, I would even suggest enhances - support of the humanitarian rights.
This is certainly not outside the bounds of humanitarian.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Exactly, just another aspect of the same, if you will.
But until there is an effective equal treatment - in facts, not just principles and laws - I believe it does still make sense to argue for specific women rights.
Whether their poor behaviours "should" or "should not" be associated with the ideals of feminism, they are associated with feminism. One's poor behaviours cannot cloud the ideals of feminism. And yet the poor behaviours of those acting in a capacity of feminism, as feminists do taint the movement of feminism as it exists in practical terms.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
exactly!
i think the term, and the movement HAS been discredited in some ways using such tactics...which is a shame, but it really in no way diminishes it's true and worthy purpose. also not to say there haven't been thoe who perhaps were overzealous in their personal support of the cause, but should be seen as the individual, and not discredit the enitre group or cause.....and that holds true for ANY cause. i personally see feminism as a positive and reaffirming notion, and hopefully one day there will be no purpose for it's existance, it will just be.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!