Not an idiot :) I appreciate your attitude on the subject; the big mistake a lot of feminists (and others with strong beliefs) make is that they tend to blast apart people who are well-intentioned, but may not necessarily understand or have all the information, especially when they bring up certain subjects or suggest things that may be offensive. I suppose this is where the 'raging, angry feminist' stereotype comes from.
This is why you rock. I'm extremely Socratic and you've been nothing but nice and patient with me. In a lot of places, even on this site, I just end up giving up because people attacking me makes me shut up and start arguing, which doesn't help anyone.
I'm guessing what you're getting at here is workplace discrimination between the sexes or is it something else? The issue with equal pay is that it seems there are women who hold positions that are the equivalent of another man's and they are routinely paid less, on average, which I think is worth investigating. There was recently a lawsuit by a group of women against Wal-Mart due to some issues where it seemed to be that there were women who were up for promotion, but were consistently passed over for men. I think they tossed it out because Wal-Mart was deemed to already have sufficient non-discriminatory practices, but I find it hard to believe that if you see a pattern of a certain group being routinely passed over, that it's purely based on merit.
I have absolutely no idea if it's discrimination or not. I'll agree that it shouldn't happen if it's because of discrimination, but it's impossible to say. I don't even know how you'd prove it.
There used to be things like Affirmative Action where you absolutely had to have someone of a particular race. They probably still exist in various ways, but I don't know because I haven't looked into it. However, I consider it completely the wrong direction to require people of a particular race/gender/etc. in order to fill a particular quota. Maybe it used to be required; I don't believe it still is.
Personally, I think that if you don't hire or promote someone based on some sort of discrimination, and they're the best person, you're handicapping yourself. Other people will not have such practices, and therefore they'll have better people on average, so you're hurting your business. However, that's pretty academic.
In the 40's and 50's,
Absolutely no argument that we used to be very, very discriminatory. However, this always seems to be the breakdown in the argument. I call this the "Caveman Problem" because that's in the past as well, but I don't feel any compulsion to apologize for the sins of ancestry. Doubly so when I'm not even related to the people in any significant way (like how my ancestors didn't come until after slavery had been stopped in the USA).
Just a point I've wanted to make for a while now. I see so many arguments about people who hate white males, or Christians, for something that happened way, way back when. As I read this over and over, though, maybe you're trying to say that it bled over, but I don't really understand why it would. Consider how vastly styles changed in the 60s and 70s.
Nowadays, we have so many fashion magazines written up, like Seventeen, Redbook, and Glamour, just to name a few. I don't know who runs them, but so many of the articles are written by women. This suggests that women are pushing the fashion world in its direction, but I would figure that the primary force of such things would be what women actually buy and don't buy, that women are intelligent enough to choose for themselves what they do and do not want to wear in casual situations.
Professional dress I realize is very different. Given the choice, I wouldn't even wear a suit and tie to my own wedding or funeral. (If you're reading this, please bury me in a T-shirt and jeans. If it's the last thing I'm going to wear for a while, I want to be comfy. ^_^ Sorry, serious convo requires at least one joke thrown in somewhere). I do consider heels every bit as idiotic as a necktie, and will gladly agree to abolish both for people who don't want to wear them. Beyond that, I don't know enough about female fashion to see if you're as limited at options of dresses as men are with suits.
I think you're misplacing my point a bit. I have nothing against women who want to dress provocatively - if they're doing so for the right reasons. This is the premise for female self-objectification. I personally think it's kind of a blurry subject because who am I to say what empowers one female and degrades another -- but at the same time, if they're emulating their favorite superheroes or anime characters or what-have-you, who created THOSE characters, and to what end? Wonder Woman is a strong female lead, but she's wearing bondage cuffs and a bustier, which are hardly practical for fighting crime. Are they dressing up as those characters because it makes them feel good and empowered, or are they doing it because it's expected? The whole joke about Halloween being one of the only times it's acceptable to dress "like a slut" pretty well exemplifies it, I think.
I've been to many anime conventions but don't really understand people dressing up. I'm going to agree on the premise that it's possible that there's discrimination going on, but it's impossible to say. However, nobody makes women dress up for these things, nor for making characters more based to their liking if they so choose.
Wonder Woman originally came from 1941 according to Wiki. I guess this is part of how that bleedover occurs. The funny thing there is that she was originally part of the Amazons, which was a sort of feminist movement all its own. I guess it was just one of those "it was acceptable in the 40s" thing, but if they gave Catwoman a new outfit, I don't see why they can't with Wonder Woman as well. (The original Catwoman had many, many different outfits, some sexier than others).
Of course, Batman's suit has nipples as well, and I think I already said that chainmail bikinis are idiotic.
I'm not condemning men for being attracted to women -- I think this is a point that kind of gets lost in a lot of these kinds of discussions. When you become fixated on a woman for her body, it is objectifying. Initial attraction isn't a bad thing, certainly someone's looks are the most readily noticeable thing about them, but things like staring and occasionally obsessing over body parts (tits and ass, if you will!) is objectifying and it is harmful. It reduces the owner of those things to the sum of their parts.
I honestly used to believe that girls were very concerned about their appearance, so if a girl was all dressed up and looked great, it was a compliment to stare or make comments. Obviously, I have learned better.
(some feminist websites, for example, don't presume innocence until proven guilt, so they lump all reported cases of rape/sexual assault together regardless of the legal verdict)
To me, this is a major damage to the cause. If you really believe that something is a problem, you should be willing to bring your case honestly and truthfully (which you have, don't get me wrong there). It's sort of like the whole Climategate thing where they found out just how much various scientists were fudging the data on global warning. If you have to lie, it only makes it look like the truth won't hold you out.
I'd say it's a fairly realistic guess to say that men, on the whole, are not being oppressed by rape in the same way women are and it is a more realistic guess with the given statistics to say that while male rape does happen and should be addressed and the victim-shaming stopped, it is simply not as prevalent as violence towards women.
Probably. I'm not going to try to say which is more prevalent; my point is more that it's terrible regardless.
With a lot of these, it's more subjective. Is WalMart sexist or isn't it? Is the clothing line sexist or isn't it? Rape is terrible no matter what.
Is there any truth to that statistic that Miekle gave about 16% of all women have been raped or had it attempted? That just seems completely insane. If nearly 1 in 6 of all women have, our justice system has completely failed us. Even at 10%, I'd want to own a gun.
I guess a lot of everything is that I either want to be able to do something, or else prove to myself that I'm not doing this. I've had people yell at me before and it makes me worry that maybe I am a little bigoted, but it seems like I'm pretty okay.