Feminism

Heineken Helen

writersu wrote:

That is so cool ---about Mary Robinson, I mean. See, that is the answer. We all bring the best to the table as they say, if we don't get caught up in the crap...

here is my vote for a black man candidate like this man,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1Lt5LihES0


and for a woman, well I don't know, but I will be busy thinking...

I have no volume on the computer so I can't watch that. Well Robinson was elected president when I was 10 til I was 17 so a very influential part of my life. She carried out the work (in the public eye at least) with such grace and dignity. One could argue that the president is primarily an ambassadorial role anyway but she made it so much more than that.

writersu

Heineken Helen wrote:

I have no volume on the computer so I can't watch that. Well Robinson was elected president when I was 10 til I was 17 so a very influential part of my life. She carried out the work (in the public eye at least) with such grace and dignity. One could argue that the president is primarily an ambassadorial role anyway but she made it so much more than that.

That is so cool......(not about the volume on your computer but about the president there).

I think women benefit from other women as role models who stay women while still being intelligent, driven, important role models.

I can't help but think there are still certain things that we as a society expect from the sexes. Like for me, while I do not mean that a woman should take and not give at all by this comment, I do mean that a man is really not respected if he cannot do his share in regard to a man thing, you know? Like being the head of his family. Not being a Nazi about it but by leading in his own way, you know?

Heineken Helen

writersu wrote:

That is so cool......(not about the volume on your computer but about the president there).

I think women benefit from other women as role models who stay women while still being intelligent, driven, important role models.

Oh definitely, and I really think they are the best role models too... but there's a very small but very special group of women who seem to be capable of that. I think Hillary's mistake was that you can't please all of the people all of the time. For a job like that, you have to be true to yourself. If you try and force it... it will show.

writersu wrote:

I can't help but think there are still certain things that we as a society expect from the sexes. Like for me, while I do not mean that a woman should take and not give at all by this comment, I do mean that a man is really not respected if he cannot do his share in regard to a man thing, you know? Like being the head of his family. Not being a Nazi about it but by leading in his own way, you know?

Absolutely! There's a lot of stigma for men too... if he does something in a slightly less than manly way, he's gay :rolleyes: . Since when can people not just BE?

writersu

Heineken Helen wrote:

Oh definitely, and I really think they are the best role models too... but there's a very small but very special group of women who seem to be capable of that. I think Hillary's mistake was that you can't please all of the people all of the time. For a job like that, you have to be true to yourself. If you try and force it... it will show.



Absolutely! There's a lot of stigma for men too... if he does something in a slightly less than manly way, he's gay :rolleyes: . Since when can people not just BE?

because as a society we have ruined it by never being happy. idk...

vedderfan

Heineken Helen wrote:

I AGREE COMPLETELY!

The reason there aren't more women in power is cos it simply doesn't come natural to us to WANT to be in charge. That's more of a male trait. The quicker people accept the differences between men and women and work together to balance everything out, the better. There's no point forcing any issue!

Did you really say that "it simply doesn't come natural" ... sounds like some serious internalized oppression to me! Wow. One of the reasons why I visit this site and for my love of Pearl Jam is that from the time they came on the scene (I've followed them since before the release of Ten), they have been ardent feminists. You might want to see this provocative framing of feminism by UCSC's Bettina Aptheker.

http://www.introtofem.org/

Feminism is not merely a women's movement, but a community endeavor. Look to critical pedagogue Paulo Freire who would say that, through oppression, all are oppressed. Both the oppressor and the oppressed. Men have as much to gain from feminism as do women.

Just think about it.

writersu

vedderfan wrote:

Did you really say that "it simply doesn't come natural" ... sounds like some serious internalized oppression to me! Wow. One of the reasons why I visit this site and for my love of Pearl Jam is that from the time they came on the scene (I've followed them since before the release of Ten), they have been ardent feminists. You might want to see this provocative framing of feminism by UCSC's Bettina Aptheker.

http://www.introtofem.org/

Feminism is not merely a women's movement, but a community endeavor. Look to critical pedagogue Paulo Freire who would say that, through oppression, all are oppressed. Both the oppressor and the oppressed. Men have as much to gain from feminism as do women.

Just think about it.

I am not sure if you read through the posts by Helen, but we were talking about women being able to be in leadership positions and not forget they are still women. That women should hold on to their own sexual identity not to be stifled by it but to be lead by it in order to find their own strengths in their own abilities that need not mirror a man, but can compliment his strengths with neither one better or worse; just different.

She pointed out that Ireland had a woman President that was great for a number of years and that she was not a manly woman; but a rather smart one while she still was feminine.

vedderfan

writersu wrote:

I am not sure if you read through the posts by Helen, but we were talking about women being able to be in leadership positions and not forget they are still women. That women should hold on to their own sexual identity not to be stifled by it but to be lead by it in order to find their own strengths in their own abilities that need not mirror a man, but can compliment his strengths with neither one better or worse; just different.

She pointed out that Ireland had a woman President that was great for a number of years and that she was not a manly woman; but a rather smart one while she still was feminine.

I certainly did read the posts ... and so that's why I decided to add my thoughts. Maybe, to understand how to create change, the question should be 'what is feminine'? How much of that is biological and how much has been created through society? Then we can better understand what the project of feminism can offer to anyone.

writersu

vedderfan wrote:

I certainly did read the posts ... and so that's why I decided to add my thoughts. Maybe, to understand how to create change, the question should be 'what is feminine'? How much of that is biological and how much has been created through society? Then we can better understand what the project of feminism can offer to anyone.

ok, may I ask if you are a guy or a girl?

Collin

vedderfan wrote:

Men have as much to gain from feminism as do women.

Just think about it.

So, I thought about it. What exactly do men gain?

The only thing I could think of was, they will know that there's an equality between men and women.

Feminism is mostly a women's movement, imo.

Feminism: the belief that women should be allowed the same rights, power and opportunities as men and be treated in the same way, or the set of activities intended to achieve this state (cambridge dictionary)

Riot_Rain

writersu wrote:

ok, may I ask if you are a guy or a girl?

To take things one step further than feminism, how about the way gender is constructed in our society? How come there are only two options, male and female? And why does that have such an effect on people's lives and on other people's opinions about people's lives?

Until the Enlightenment, people believed there was only one sex. There were two genders, male (with the equipment hanging out of the body) and female (with the SAME equipment inside the body). Men were considered superior, because they were hotter, i.e. closer to God. That was why their sex organs couldn't be in their bodies. However, women were considered to be ABLE to change into men, becoming hotter and being closer to God.
During the Enlightenment, it became clear that the two genders had different equipment. From this moment on, this biological difference determined a person's future. Men were there to think, women to have babies. A woman turning into a man became unthinkable.

What this rather longwinded story is meant to show, is that gender is constructed. Gender has been made up by people. It has been based on body temperature and on biological differences. And in different societies, it is constructed differently again.

However, is this really what makes you a gendered person? Surely there are other ways in which gender could be defined? Take effeminate men for example. Couldn't there be more than just 2 genders? There could be 10 if enough people agreed to it.

Judith Butler said that gender is performed. Instead of being your body, you perform it. By dressing a certain way, etc. She's got a point.

The least that feminism can do, is make sure women are treated equal. There are many different kinds of feminism and some of them are as biased as the people they despise. I admire the women who paved the way for modern women, who are allowed to work (often for the same wage as men) and vote.

In reality though, we are all living an illusion. Often illusions make life easier to bear, the danger of the gender-illusion is that it limits people severely. And that sucks.

vedderfan

writersu wrote:

ok, may I ask if you are a guy or a girl?

That question right there should prove to you what a dominant force these static and wholly constructed categories have in society. That you need to know when I'm a guy or girl to either make sense of what I'm saying or to respond is very interesting.

What do you think I am?

vedderfan

I really appreciate your thoughts here ... this is exactly what I am getting at. Judith Butler's theory of performativity goes a long in explaining all of this. That people take on and perform certain identities -- that they are wholly constructed. And that those constructed roles come to be naturalized or 'common sense' so people start to assume that this is what it means to be a man or a women and people are constraining by those limiting understandings, particularly of gender.

Riot_Rain wrote:

To take things one step further than feminism, how about the way gender is constructed in our society? How come there are only two options, male and female? And why does that have such an effect on people's lives and on other people's opinions about people's lives?

Until the Enlightenment, people believed there was only one sex. There were two genders, male (with the equipment hanging out of the body) and female (with the SAME equipment inside the body). Men were considered superior, because they were hotter, i.e. closer to God. That was why their sex organs couldn't be in their bodies. However, women were considered to be ABLE to change into men, becoming hotter and being closer to God.
During the Enlightenment, it became clear that the two genders had different equipment. From this moment on, this biological difference determined a person's future. Men were there to think, women to have babies. A woman turning into a man became unthinkable.

What this rather longwinded story is meant to show, is that gender is constructed. Gender has been made up by people. It has been based on body temperature and on biological differences. And in different societies, it is constructed differently again.

However, is this really what makes you a gendered person? Surely there are other ways in which gender could be defined? Take effeminate men for example. Couldn't there be more than just 2 genders? There could be 10 if enough people agreed to it.

Judith Butler said that gender is performed. Instead of being your body, you perform it. By dressing a certain way, etc. She's got a point.

The least that feminism can do, is make sure women are treated equal. There are many different kinds of feminism and some of them are as biased as the people they despise. I admire the women who paved the way for modern women, who are allowed to work (often for the same wage as men) and vote.

In reality though, we are all living an illusion. Often illusions make life easier to bear, the danger of the gender-illusion is that it limits people severely. And that sucks.

vedderfan

Even the way you say that seems to assert that men are/should be "dominant" somehow and that women have this upward climb. There are lots of versions of feminism but one way to look at it is this ... that both men and women are limited by the current framing of gender. Men have to act a certain way and so do women; part of the male gig is to keep this up which is deeply embedded in maintaining dominance over. So, the project of feminism isn't necessarily equal rights (though wouldn't it be nice to have some of the same social, cultural, material benefits for women?), but it is larger than that. That by struggling together, men and women can better understand their commonalities and work to reject some of the artificial ways that they've separated.

I'm not saying that there aren't biological differences, certainly there are, that is the whole system works. If there weren't notable differences, this ideology would fall flat on its face.

Collin wrote:

So, I thought about it. What exactly do men gain?

The only thing I could think of was, they will know that there's an equality between men and women.

Feminism is mostly a women's movement, imo.

Feminism: the belief that women should be allowed the same rights, power and opportunities as men and be treated in the same way, or the set of activities intended to achieve this state (cambridge dictionary)

writersu

vedderfan wrote:

That question right there should prove to you what a dominant force these static and wholly constructed categories have in society. That you need to know when I'm a guy or girl to either make sense of what I'm saying or to respond is very interesting.

What do you think I am?

Ok, well, you sure have me thinking........

And you are absolutely right; that it is interesting that I ask, (not in a self inflated way that "interesting" is used but in a thought provoking "interesting" meaning........) because I was thinking that when I asked you that question, my answer to you would be different depending on your answer.

Truthfully, I cannot tell if you are a man or a woman, but I will tell you what I would answer you after I saw yours either way I guess.

If you were a man, I would ask you which qualities you would look for in a mate. I guess if you were a woman, that would be a good question as well. That would help me further discuss with you this concept to see where we differ, where we meet, and what you could may be able to teach me from your point of view.

writersu

Riot_Rain wrote:

To take things one step further than feminism, how about the way gender is constructed in our society? How come there are only two options, male and female? And why does that have such an effect on people's lives and on other people's opinions about people's lives?

Until the Enlightenment, people believed there was only one sex. There were two genders, male (with the equipment hanging out of the body) and female (with the SAME equipment inside the body). Men were considered superior, because they were hotter, i.e. closer to God. That was why their sex organs couldn't be in their bodies. However, women were considered to be ABLE to change into men, becoming hotter and being closer to God.
During the Enlightenment, it became clear that the two genders had different equipment. From this moment on, this biological difference determined a person's future. Men were there to think, women to have babies. A woman turning into a man became unthinkable.

What this rather longwinded story is meant to show, is that gender is constructed. Gender has been made up by people. It has been based on body temperature and on biological differences. And in different societies, it is constructed differently again.

However, is this really what makes you a gendered person? Surely there are other ways in which gender could be defined? Take effeminate men for example. Couldn't there be more than just 2 genders? There could be 10 if enough people agreed to it.

Judith Butler said that gender is performed. Instead of being your body, you perform it. By dressing a certain way, etc. She's got a point.

The least that feminism can do, is make sure women are treated equal. There are many different kinds of feminism and some of them are as biased as the people they despise. I admire the women who paved the way for modern women, who are allowed to work (often for the same wage as men) and vote.

In reality though, we are all living an illusion. Often illusions make life easier to bear, the danger of the gender-illusion is that it limits people severely. And that sucks.

See, I guess for me there are still two main genders, sub divided by a million different personalities that are further divided by our cultural upbringing, our family of origin, our educational experiences, and our social circles. That, of course, is then complicated by our own minds, our own preconceived notions, which whether right or wrong are what they are. I think we have preconceieved notions about everything. Regardless of whether one is coined, "old fashioned", "modern", "evolved", or "worldly" just to name a few, we all come to the table per say with our preconceived notions of just about everything we do in our lives. Although, again, our very own, each of us has one.

Do you agree?

Riot_Rain

writersu wrote:

See, I guess for me there are still two main genders, sub divided by a million different personalities that are further divided by our cultural upbringing, our family of origin, our educational experiences, and our social circles. That, of course, is then complicated by our own minds, our own preconceived notions, which whether right or wrong are what they are. I think we have preconceieved notions about everything. Regardless of whether one is coined, "old fashioned", "modern", "evolved", or "worldly" just to name a few, we all come to the table per say with our preconceived notions of just about everything we do in our lives. Although, again, our very own, each of us has one.

Do you agree?

I see what you're getting at I realise that for most people there are two genders, it is the 'reality' of what we see around us all the time. I always try and remind myself that it needn't be like that, especially when talking about gender equality.

What I do sense in your explanation is the idea that although we are all different, we all reach a state of stability and uniqueness. I believe that people do not have a stable identity. We have many identities that change constantly, depending on the situations we are in. Any 'stability' is created by the narrative of the self. I also like reminding myself of that

writersu

Riot_Rain wrote:

I see what you're getting at I realise that for most people there are two genders, it is the 'reality' of what we see around us all the time. I always try and remind myself that it needn't be like that, especially when talking about gender equality.

What I do sense in your explanation is the idea that although we are all different, we all reach a state of stability and uniqueness. I believe that people do not have a stable identity. We have many identities that change constantly, depending on the situations we are in. Any 'stability' is created by the narrative of the self. I also like reminding myself of that

I am so glad that my true self came through; so often it is hard to really get across what we feel without seeming harsh and overbearing.

I guess now that you have seen what I was meaning to say, I will go on to say that your points have made me think as well. Stereotypes in any realm are dangerous. They restrict people from further expanding their lives sometimes and worse than that, they make is all feel inadequate. Like, all men are not athletes, so all young men and further in little boys who cannot bat very well as baseball players or who do not like bugs, (as a more crazy stereotype) are by no means less men. They still have the core within of being males. And not all women like to cook or bake or find their own identities in simply being a wife. They as well are not less of women.

I have seen boys come from families of primarily women and they are most of the time a lot more calm than boys from primarily male families. Girls who have a lot of brothers, (I always thougtht) were a lot cooler because they were not so boy crazy because they were use to their brothers and their friends, so it was more familar. (I was not this group, so I was always impressed by that; as well as I am impressed with female guitar players who as I have said in one of my writings, "gives them the penis they did not get at birth", i.e., makes them a bit stronger.)

And even if the above are not factors, then if a boy has a father who is a man that is comfortable showing his feelings and feels no less a man because he truly respects and appreciates his wife without being a wimp and getting taken advantage of, that boy I think is more likely to end up a young man who can be the same.

I think still the extreme cases of effeminate men or masculine women are a lot more rare than common. Still though, I totally now get the high school girl's softball team a lot better than I understood them then.


And to add to your comment of the fact that we change all of the time, I totally agree. I also think that is what keeps life fresh and interesting and shows that we are growing.

Heineken Helen

vedderfan wrote:

Did you really say that "it simply doesn't come natural" ... sounds like some serious internalized oppression to me! Wow. One of the reasons why I visit this site and for my love of Pearl Jam is that from the time they came on the scene (I've followed them since before the release of Ten), they have been ardent feminists. You might want to see this provocative framing of feminism by UCSC's Bettina Aptheker.

http://www.introtofem.org/

Feminism is not merely a women's movement, but a community endeavor. Look to critical pedagogue Paulo Freire who would say that, through oppression, all are oppressed. Both the oppressor and the oppressed. Men have as much to gain from feminism as do women.

Just think about it.

I have thought about it... when I was younger I used to agree... but then the older I got and the more I observed I realised I was wrong... that people seem to be fighting their natural tendencies to fit into societal roles.

Internalised oppression? Huh? Not a chance

Heineken Helen

vedderfan wrote:

That question right there should prove to you what a dominant force these static and wholly constructed categories have in society. That you need to know when I'm a guy or girl to either make sense of what I'm saying or to respond is very interesting.

I agree about constructed categories in society... that's the point I've been making.

I've suggested that people need to simply RESPECT eachother... whatever or whoever they are. If we push for more respect... rather than respecting women, respecting races, respecting different categories... just fucking respect everyone... that's all I'm saying!

Heineken Helen

vedderfan wrote:

Even the way you say that seems to assert that men are/should be "dominant" somehow and that women have this upward climb. There are lots of versions of feminism but one way to look at it is this ... that both men and women are limited by the current framing of gender. Men have to act a certain way and so do women; part of the male gig is to keep this up which is deeply embedded in maintaining dominance over. So, the project of feminism isn't necessarily equal rights (though wouldn't it be nice to have some of the same social, cultural, material benefits for women?), but it is larger than that. That by struggling together, men and women can better understand their commonalities and work to reject some of the artificial ways that they've separated.

I'm not saying that there aren't biological differences, certainly there are, that is the whole system works. If there weren't notable differences, this ideology would fall flat on its face.

Did you really miss my main point? I'm suggesting people stay who they are. Some women feel the need to be 'more manly' and they force it when they're going for positions in power... but women, using their own qualities... are more than capable of holding these positions and FIXING them! I simply think there is too much pressure on women today to do EVERYTHING. So what if a woman wants to stay at home and mind the kids? Doesn't research suggest that's GOOD for a kid anyway? And society these days tends to look down on a woman who chooses to do so.