You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 03, 2016, 04:01:51 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Will feminism really bring women happiness?  (Read 9178 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Silverfyre

  • Mr. Fyre, or if you're slightly more daring, oh Silver my Silver.
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2010
  • Location: Affixed to a Star
  • Gender: Male
  • Once more, with gusto.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #75 on: February 14, 2013, 06:21:09 PM »

For instance, you will never be whistled at, you will never be told to get off a game because you are female, you will never be paid less because you are female.  You can comprehend these notions, but in the same way I cannot understand truly what it is like to be a black person in the West, I don't feel a male can truly understand what it is like to be a female, nor completely comprehend the issues that we face.

I can walk past a building site and get wolf whistled and objectified.
A transgender can walk past a building site and get insulted or stared at
A man can walk past a building site and get shouted at

Each are completely different experiences.  I know what experience you may face, I do not know how it makes you feel or fully comprehend how it affects you.  You may have female influences, and live with women, you still don't know what it is like to be a woman because you have a completely different biological make up from a woman and you never face the obstacles that we face.  Most men know what a period is yet they don't fully comprehend it further than knowing it has an effect on moods.  Without having one, you can never really understand it.

Again apologies for any offence, it certainly wasn't my intention.  Have a good evening.

I appreciate the apology but still, I think you are drawing the wrong sort of conclusions about being a feminist and not being able to relate to someone based solely on what their gender is.  I understand what it is like to be paid less (yes, it does happen to men sometimes, believe it or not or to people of lesser education etc.) and I have been whistled at and felt objectified sexually (kilt and all).  Perhaps I come from a different sort of background or have been in odd situations than "most men" have but that is again a generalization that does little to advance your argument or conclusions.  I will just agree to disagree and move on.

Thank you.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #76 on: February 14, 2013, 06:25:33 PM »
I am not intending to pile anything onto Brittany’s plate with this post.  Still there is the problem that while a man cannot understand the subjective feelings a woman feels, he can still attempt to understand and rectify that situation.  He can contribute from his own valuable perspective and help resolve the issues, if only by explaining what might drive that action forward.  Ultimately though men do understand sexism because they too are at the mercy of societal pressure.  Men have their own expectations of being risk-takers and brave which has led to many deaths among young men.  As women we do not feel that same urge as they do, but we can examine and understand.  Men are seen as predators in even the most nurturing capacity and their motives are always questioned if they are standing near a gathering of young women.  As a woman we can stand by a pack of teenage boys and few, if any, people will question if we are trying to sleep with them.  A man is not considered as important to their children as a woman, men are supposed to be good at math and are supposed to bring in the larger income.  Men go to extreme lengths to do so often working more jobs than necessary so they can feel important.

So there is certainly a place for men to stand beside women in feeling the burden of a sexist society.  That, in my opinion, should absolutely be recognized by both sides and perhaps bring them together knowing there is much to be gained for men and women.

Offline Star Safyre

  • Mrs. Fyre or, if you're slightly more daring, O Captain my Captain.
  • Dame
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2010
  • Location: Beyond the flesh
  • He who is fixed to a star does not change his mind
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #77 on: February 14, 2013, 06:26:23 PM »
Though you cannot know this, I want to make it clear my husband is a man of empathy.  He has been immersed in the experiences of both cis and transwomen for many years.  He's been harassed sexually.  He sees and lives within the means of the paycheck I bring home.  When I, his female relations, his female friends, have shared our own experiences in the very situations you describe, he feels our pain literally.  Excluding him and his opinions because of his gender is sexism, pure and simple.  What is feminism but the fight against sexism?  Excluding the experiences of non-ciswomen in the discussion of feminism devalues others in just the same way females have fought to not be devalued.  I hope the irony is not lost here.

Also +1 on the restrictive nature of all gender roles, as PS pointed out. 

Offline Brittany

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #78 on: February 14, 2013, 06:35:47 PM »
So my last post because I'm causing trouble and thats not my intention.

Yes men can back the cause.  And yes men can and should educate themselves on womens lib.  But it does come down to much bigger differences than "I have a penis between my legs".  There are massive hormone differences between men and women and our primary functions in life are completely different.

I would never claim to understand why our male leaders start so many wars.  If I was in charge of the United Kingdom, I'm pretty certain going to war with the female leader of Afghanistan would be the last possible resort.  Because it isn't in my nature.  I do not understand it.  I can read the reasons to start a fight, I can read about men's testosterone, but I can never truly understand it.

I have faced issues related to being a woman in the past fortnight, in the workplace, that I doubt most men would even see as issues.   But then I have completely different hormones and emotions than you do, so I just accept that we are different.  I wouldn't like men to "take over" women's lib, because as was written on the first page, women's lib has never been about men.  It's not anti-men, but men as a whole have caused almost all of the difficulties associated with being a woman.  It's why a lot of feminism is extreme, because while men can and do try to be part of the solution, they've also been a huge part of the problem.  Who decided we should be paid less?  Men.  Who tells us to get into the kitchen when we just want to play a game?  Men.  Who kept us as slaves?  Men.  Who banned us from clubs?  Men.  Who forced us to marry?  Men.  Who objectifies us?  Men.  Who causes most crime towards women?  Men.  Almost every problem related to women's lib is caused by guys.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2013, 06:40:12 PM by Brittany »

Offline Beguile's Mistress

  • Time flies like an arrow ~ Fruit flies like a banana ~ Elliquiy's Fair-E Godmother
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Location: Faeleacanvald ~ The Steeler Nation ~ Home of Lord Stanley's Cup 2016 ~ She won't stay throwed! ~ 48\22-5\1\11-5\7
  • Gender: Female
  • Perpetual Notion Machine ~ 'What if...?'
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #79 on: February 14, 2013, 06:38:52 PM »
We all have ideals for what we want our life to be.  When those ideals include a partner or partners and additional family members we need to take their ideals into consideration.  Partnerships work best when they make good use of the strengths each person brings to the union and when any weaknesses are recognized and compensated for.

What is good for one person or partnership is not always good for the others so it's best to keep your ideals for your own partnership and work them out between or among yourselves.  The world is changing and so are peoples ideas.

Frankly there is very little in this thread that I can agree with or feel comfortable about but that is my opinion and I'm content with that. 

Incidentally for every woman I've heard say that men don't understand what it's like to be a woman and never will I've heard a woman say she knows exactly what a man is going through and why.  The opposite applies.

Offline MonfangTopic starter

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #80 on: February 14, 2013, 06:41:18 PM »
Let me put it the other way, then: does the traditional model allow for wives to have careers etc.?
Yes it does.

In fact, it wasn't uncommon for women to work as much or more than men during Biblical times. I stated before that if the husband owned a business, the wife was often handling one half of it while he worked the other. If the wife was skilled in a trade like basket weaving, the husband then would work to gather the materials she needed and then sold her creations on the market before bringing back food and goods for her.

In the Medieval times, women in the peasantry were as close to equals as was possible during that time. Because it was an aspect for survival, a man would be a fool to say a woman couldn't help with the fields or the livestock. In the middle class, it was often the daughter of the family that took up a business if her father took ill, and often Taverns were owned exclusively by women.

As a sidebar: The path of the Nun that some women chose during the time, while painted as one of the most restrictive of paths, was actually one of the more liberating. Women were given free education, some more than what a lord during that time could ever hope to learn. And should she rise to be an Abbess, she sat in a rule of authority higher than most local lords.

It actually wasn't until more modern times that the role of the woman was shrunk to the point that it was, though even then the more extreme cases were rare overall.

Alright, if you want to cite the Bible, let's cite the Bible.

Probably the most cited example of anti-equality sentiment in the New Testament is Corinthians 14:34-35: "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."
There has been recent evidence that says that those two verses were added by mistake as prior editions of the book didn't have those passages. And if you take them out, the whole passage makes a lot more sense. Something we use to support this is that it isn't corroborated in other places in scripture.
1 Peter, 2:1-2: "In the same way, you wives must accept the authority of your husbands, even those who refuse to accept the Good News. " Women obeying their husbands was deemed more important than obeying God. The rest of the verse speaks to the woman's weakness, and that's why she needs a man to tell her what to do.
It's 1 Peter 3:1-6. It's key to keep things in context. What this was speaking of was a woman who is loved by a good but unbelieving husband shouldn't be left behind just because he doesn't believe. Instead, she should live a Godly life by the Word and lead him to the Word by her actions. If the husband was abusive in any way, then this is null.
And again, in Timothy (9:11-12): "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence."
again, you mean 1 Timothy 2:11-15. Again, what we need is context. After Christ's teachings came and raised women up, they took it in ran. This lead to them going beyond the simple asking of questions and giving inspired commentary, but to them fully disrupting the entire procession and leading to heated and angry debates in the mist of what was meant to be a time of learning. The woman was to be in silence during prayer and teaching just like a man would be expected to do so. When it was right, for both of them to speak, then they speak. Finally, this was more of a local rule rather than a universal rule as women would often speak up during the teacher were deceived by outside pagan sources and became upset over the contradictions. By asking that they be quiet for this time, he had hoped that they hear the teachings and this would cease. In fact, Paul left Timothy behind so that these deceitful teachers could be silenced and the church go back to being a cooperative between men and women.
Later, in Galatians (3:27-28), Paul goes on to say this: "As many of you as were baptized in Christ have clothed yourself in Christ. There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male or female: for all of you are one in Christ Jesus." That rather puts a whole new spin on the concept of gender equality, one a lot of people tend to skip over. If there is no male or female, all are equal, and the husband therefore cannot be the head of the wife for there isn't a husband. Merely a spouse sharing equal power.
This makes a lot more sense when you add the last part. "29 And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise." This passage was teaching that all are given the promise to Abraham if they follow God and Christ though Faith. What was the promise then? This was covered in Genesis 12:1-3 "I will bless you and make your name great; and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you". That is the promise it speaks of.
The problem with referencing the Bible to make rational arguments is the fact that the Bible is a book filled with inconsistencies such as the ones above. In one part, all are equal and gender doesn't matter. In another, the woman must accept the authority of her husband and submit to him, even if he's not a follower of God. You point out that the notion that the woman is weaker is simply untrue. Well, sir, I welcome your interpretation of the above passages.
I hope my explanations were sufficient.

Offline Silverfyre

  • Mr. Fyre, or if you're slightly more daring, oh Silver my Silver.
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2010
  • Location: Affixed to a Star
  • Gender: Male
  • Once more, with gusto.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #81 on: February 14, 2013, 06:43:04 PM »
Quote
It's why a lot of feminism is extreme, because while men can and do try to be part of the solution, they've also been a huge part of the problem.  Who decided we should be paid less?  Men.  Who tells us to get into the kitchen when we just want to play a game?  Men.  Who kept us as slaves?  Men.  Who banned us from clubs?  Men.  Almost every problem related to women's lib is caused by guys.

So, let's ban them from every being a part of the solution because of their gender and the crimes some members of their gender have committed against women?  Way to not only generalize in quite the sexist manner but go down the extreme path of "this part of X is bad, so let's blame all of them and be done with it!".  Do you honestly think that such extremist views have ever led to anything good? 

Bah.  I'm done with this discussion as like BeMi said, there is very little from this thread that I can agree with any more.  I appreciate all the supporters of feminism out there but people who espouse the sanctity of "the traditional family" and how "penis = EVIL! You are not a feminist!" are just exhausting and shortsighted.  Enjoy your discussion.

Offline Brittany

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #82 on: February 14, 2013, 06:50:40 PM »
So, let's ban them from every being a part of the solution because of their gender and the crimes some members of their gender have committed against women?  Way to not only generalize in quite the sexist manner but go down the extreme path of "this part of X is bad, so let's blame all of them and be done with it!".  Do you honestly think that such extremist views have ever led to anything good? 

Bah.  I'm done with this discussion as like BeMi said, there is very little from this thread that I can agree with any more.  I appreciate all the supporters of feminism out there but people who espouse the sanctity of "the traditional family" and how "penis = EVIL! You are not a feminist!" are just exhausting and shortsighted.  Enjoy your discussion.

Again you are the person who keeps bringing up the male sexual organ as if it is the only difference between us, and shows a complete lack of understanding of our differences.

Men are and have been responsible for almost every problem a women can and does face.  You also find men are far and beyond the largest contributors to racism and other forms of discrimination.  Men cause most of the wars, most of the crime and are the biggest contributors to problems such as the banking crisis.

I probably border on the slightly extreme with my views, I feel a Matriachal society is the best way forward given the mess we are in at the moment, and we've had male leaders for such a long time with no good results.  Germany is an example of a female led country and it is widely accepted as the best run country in Europe at the moment. 

I don't hate all men and believe all men are out to get women.  But the overwhelming evidence suggests there are plenty of guys who still hold out of date views that a woman's place is in a kitchen or to serve a man.  That seems to be the point of this very thread if I am not mistaken.  Companies still use loopholes to pay us less, and it's usually a male making that decision.  It goes on and on.  Until we are treated fairly in life, there will always be resentment and faction groups.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2013, 06:52:35 PM by Brittany »

Offline Star Safyre

  • Mrs. Fyre or, if you're slightly more daring, O Captain my Captain.
  • Dame
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2010
  • Location: Beyond the flesh
  • He who is fixed to a star does not change his mind
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #83 on: February 14, 2013, 07:06:05 PM »
So would a male-to-female transsexual be allowed to be feminist?  A female-to-male?  To bring it back to the OP's statements, where do these people fall in their role in a relationship?  What about those in homosexual relationships?  I've a friend who is a transwoman and a lesbian.  Should she be the "head" of her household or should she still be subservient to her partner?  How about my transmale friend and his genderfluid partner?  Should he rule his house or should they take turns?  What was outlined in the OP ignores whole swathes of the human experience and gender identity, and for this it's entirely flawed.

I'm firmly in the camp of inclusion: if I have an ally who will fight with me, they can stand beside me.  My husband, and many men, acknowledge sexism and are equally disgusted by it.  I'll not make broad statements about what one gender or another thinks because it smacks of sexist stereotyping.  When someone of any gender identity empathizes with another's plight, I applaud that.  When my partner gets upset at the smallness of my paycheck compared to the average male in my profession, or when he hears the catcall at our friend at the ren faire that makes her lower her head, or when his family member suffered sexual assault, he's not upset or disgusted because it another male harmed "his" women: he's upset and disgusted because an indignity was done to a fellow human being for something as uncontrollable as her gender.  The answer to all these issues for me is to accept others as worthy human beings and expect the same treatment, regardless of biology or choice in gender.  I too plan on opting out of the remained of this conversation unless asked to clarify my opinions; as many have said, there's too much one-sidedness and ugly words for my taste.

Offline MonfangTopic starter

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #84 on: February 14, 2013, 07:10:24 PM »
So would a male-to-female transsexual be allowed to be feminist?  A female-to-male?  To bring it back to the OP's statements, where do these people fall in their role in a relationship?  What about those in homosexual relationships?  I've a friend who is a transwoman and a lesbian.  Should she be the "head" of her household or should she still be subservient to her partner?  How about my transmale friend and his genderfluid partner?  Should he rule his house or should they take turns?  What was outlined in the OP ignores whole swathes of the human experience and gender identity, and for this it's entirely flawed.
According to scripture, they are except from having to marry and thus this has no matter to them.

Offline Star Safyre

  • Mrs. Fyre or, if you're slightly more daring, O Captain my Captain.
  • Dame
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2010
  • Location: Beyond the flesh
  • He who is fixed to a star does not change his mind
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #85 on: February 14, 2013, 07:23:22 PM »
According to scripture, they are except from having to marry and thus this has no matter to them.

Quote, please?  I'm sure it does matter to the homosexual married couples that live in the 11 nations where such couples are recognized by churches and national law.

Offline MonfangTopic starter

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #86 on: February 14, 2013, 07:30:03 PM »
Outside of my lifetime.  But this is one lady. 

Out of 74 leaders of the country, 73 have been male and only two females have even been up for election, one with a party with no chance.  Equality?

Yes!

Because a woman appeared with better qualifications than her male peers and won! Inequality would be that same woman not winning because she wouldn't be allowed to run.

Inequality in the other direction would be to force a woman into office by shutting out all the other men because they are men.

Plus the US equivalent of a PM - a woman first ran in 1872, and one cannot discount the powerhouse that Clinton was in 2008 (and, if the rumors are true, will again be in 2016).
Ya, no one seriously believes that Bill was ever in control. It was all Hillary.

There are women of power on both sides. So nether is sexist if ether was sexist at any point in their existence.

Quote, please?  I'm sure it does matter to the homosexual married couples that live in the 11 nations where such couples are recognized by churches and national law.

(Concerning if a man should bother marrying if divorce is so difficult) “Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.” (Matthew 19:11-12)

In the ancient world, including ancient Jewish culture (as reflected in the Talmud), “natural” or “born” eunuchs were associated with stereotypically effeminate characteristics and behavior (just like modern gay men). Jesus states here that they are exempt from all teachings associated with marriage.

If you are wondering, the other two are those who chose not to marry and those who had lost their capability to reproduce.

Offline Star Safyre

  • Mrs. Fyre or, if you're slightly more daring, O Captain my Captain.
  • Dame
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2010
  • Location: Beyond the flesh
  • He who is fixed to a star does not change his mind
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #87 on: February 14, 2013, 07:38:00 PM »
(Concerning if a man should bother marrying if divorce is so difficult) “Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.” (Matthew 19:11-12)

In the ancient world, including ancient Jewish culture (as reflected in the Talmud), “natural” or “born” eunuchs were associated with stereotypically effeminate characteristics and behavior (just like modern gay men). Jesus states here that they are exempt from all teachings associated with marriage.

If you are wondering, the other two are those who chose not to marry and those who had lost their capability to reproduce.

Thank you for your citation.  I understand the reading of this which would mean that transfolk and homosexuals are excluded from the Biblical laws of marriage, but exclusion from laws is not sufficient guidelines.  Simply saying the rules do not apply isn't a moral guideline.  According to your interpretation of the Bibles teachings, how should transfolk and homosexuals relate in their marriages and relationships?  Also in the Bible, there are many examples of "traditional" marriage that are polygamous.  How do these principles apply to those who are polyamorous?  For that matter, what about those who are in heterosexual relationships but do not subscribe to Christianity? 
« Last Edit: February 14, 2013, 07:41:18 PM by Star Safyre »

Offline BraveEarth

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #88 on: February 14, 2013, 07:38:18 PM »
Yes!

Because a woman appeared with better qualifications than her male peers and won! Inequality would be that same woman not winning because she wouldn't be allowed to run.

Inequality in the other direction would be to force a woman into office by shutting out all the other men because they are men.
Ya, no one seriously believes that Bill was ever in control. It was all Hillary.

No what you are describing is a step towards true equality.  I doubt many can say any woman in politics is judged on her merits and shortcomings alone. Now it is slowly yetting better but there does seem to be a stall at current that could end with the next few generations dying out or more activism to have more women.

I don't agree with Britianny but I have seen some who put that men can only have marginal roles at best for feminist related movements, events, forums.

Offline MonfangTopic starter

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #89 on: February 14, 2013, 08:20:08 PM »
Thank you for your citation.  I understand the reading of this which would mean that transfolk and homosexuals are excluded from the Biblical laws of marriage, but exclusion from laws is not sufficient guidelines.  Simply saying the rules do not apply isn't a moral guideline.  According to your interpretation of the Bibles teachings, how should transfolk and homosexuals relate in their marriages and relationships?  Also in the Bible, there are many examples of "traditional" marriage that are polygamous.  How do these principles apply to those who are polyamorous?  For that matter, what about those who are in heterosexual relationships but do not subscribe to Christianity?
Well, there is one to ponder.

In those situations, I would put the dominant in the relationship as the 'Husband' and the submissive as the 'Wife' let they chose to do it another way.

Now, when it comes to polygamy, yes there are examples of leaders of both Jewish and Christian sects practicing polygamy. In fact, there are no passages in Scripture that clearly state, “No man should have more than one wife.” However, it isn't recorded in a positive light ether.

In fact, it is recorded to have led to bitterness between Sarah and her maid, Hagar, and the eventual dismissal of Hagar and Ishmael; Jacob—led to Rachel’s jealousy of Leah and to Joseph being betrayed and sold by his half-brothers; David—led to the rape of one of his daughters (Tamar) by one of his sons (Tamar’s half-brother Amnon) and Amnon’s subsequent murder by Tamar’s brother Absalom; Solomon—his many wives “turned away his heart” from the Lord and to the worship of false gods .

There are a lot of specific instructions given to kings and priests concerning how many wives they are to have. Paul did expand on this and told the Corinthian church that they must be husbands of one wife.

Those are the only mentions that could concern polygamy aside from what I spoken of before.

Offline BlightRaptor

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #90 on: February 14, 2013, 09:04:54 PM »
I would never claim to understand why our male leaders start so many wars.  If I was in charge of the United Kingdom, I'm pretty certain going to war with the female leader of Afghanistan would be the last possible resort.  Because it isn't in my nature.  I do not understand it.  I can read the reasons to start a fight, I can read about men's testosterone, but I can never truly understand it.

Wow. I am male, therefore I like death and destruction.

This is the same kind of generalization that some of my male cohorts have been accused of in regards to what women wear and all that other nonsense (and I really don't give crap what a woman wears. Wear a damn clown suit if it makes you happy.)

Guess what. I'm a pacifist. I'm American. I'm a guy. I don't like seeing people coming home in body bags. I don't like seeing civilian homes becoming collateral damage. If you believe a female leader wouldn't consider war an option, you're living in la la land. Take Margaret Thatcher and the Falklands for instance. Lady Prime Minister who threw the hammer down.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #91 on: February 14, 2013, 09:12:21 PM »
Firstly, and with respect, I don't think a man has any place commenting on feminism because he cannot understand it.

This is dead wrong.  Totally and completely wrong.  Women can 'understand' men, but men can't 'understand' women?  That's sexist, exceedingly sexist and close minded.

Feminism, as stated numerous times, is about being treated fairly like a person.  And every person, no matter the gender, orientation, colouring has different needs and expectations, however, I believe that it should society's goal to strive and treat everyone one, and I mean everyone, in a manner they deserve and with respect (until such a time they, the person in question, does something to not deserve it.  Like harm another for self-interest or sadistic pleasure and other myriad of criminal activities.)

Feminism is the woman's right to be treated fairly, and in a job situation, compensated appropriately for her job (same pay as a man doing her job), no more, but especially no less.  At no time should anyone be considered to be entitled for more, whether or not they have dangly bits between their legs.

Offline Star Safyre

  • Mrs. Fyre or, if you're slightly more daring, O Captain my Captain.
  • Dame
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2010
  • Location: Beyond the flesh
  • He who is fixed to a star does not change his mind
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #92 on: February 15, 2013, 05:07:24 AM »
Well, there is one to ponder.

In those situations, I would put the dominant in the relationship as the 'Husband' and the submissive as the 'Wife' let they chose to do it another way.

Now, when it comes to polygamy, yes there are examples of leaders of both Jewish and Christian sects practicing polygamy. In fact, there are no passages in Scripture that clearly state, “No man should have more than one wife.” However, it isn't recorded in a positive light ether.

In fact, it is recorded to have led to bitterness between Sarah and her maid, Hagar, and the eventual dismissal of Hagar and Ishmael; Jacob—led to Rachel’s jealousy of Leah and to Joseph being betrayed and sold by his half-brothers; David—led to the rape of one of his daughters (Tamar) by one of his sons (Tamar’s half-brother Amnon) and Amnon’s subsequent murder by Tamar’s brother Absalom; Solomon—his many wives “turned away his heart” from the Lord and to the worship of false gods .

There are a lot of specific instructions given to kings and priests concerning how many wives they are to have. Paul did expand on this and told the Corinthian church that they must be husbands of one wife.

Those are the only mentions that could concern polygamy aside from what I spoken of before.

Again, thank you for the citation.  I bolded a section that interested me: Why does this apply to some couples and not others?  What makes heterosexual, monogamous relationships subject to a strict set of rules that don't apply to other forms of committed sexual/romantic relationships?

Offline MonfangTopic starter

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #93 on: February 15, 2013, 05:18:46 AM »
Again, thank you for the citation.  I bolded a section that interested me: Why does this apply to some couples and not others?  What makes heterosexual, monogamous relationships subject to a strict set of rules that don't apply to other forms of committed sexual/romantic relationships?
In all honesty?

I don't know.

I'm not fully certain with any of this. Much of this could be placed as much on cultural traditions at the time or things added accidentally as the pages were copied over and over again. But that's the risk we face when we enter into philosophy, none of this can be truly tested with constant results.

It also has to do with faith. Until a part can be proven to have been added later on, we must assume that all of this was Divine Inspiration if you wish to go down that path.

I wish I could give you an answer. Maybe it has to do with it being 5:17 AM right now and I am running on no sleep or maybe there really isn't an answer as of yet.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #94 on: February 15, 2013, 05:55:45 AM »
I will also withdraw from the conversation.  My posts seem to be looked over by the original poster in his rebuttals and so I can only assume my comments are either off point or going to be continually ignored.  I see no further point in adding my own thoughts, comments or points to the discussion.  Do enjoy the rest of your conversation.

Offline Branwen

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #95 on: February 15, 2013, 06:07:17 AM »
Monfang, from what I can tell, and please do correct me if I'm wrong, your entire argument is pinned on the Bible, Divine Inspiration and the Christian God.  As these are matters of faith and belief, and thus outside the realm of logic and proof, it's very hard to try and think of how to discuss this with you.  Are you able to set that aside and discuss it in a purely secular manner?

If not, and you're not required to, how can anyone take the contrary position as you automatically win because of your faith and its inability to be challenged?

Edit: it's, its, its' ooof.

Offline Caehlim

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #96 on: February 15, 2013, 07:20:57 AM »
I've moved my post here to a different thread to avoid derailing the original one.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2013, 07:24:24 AM by Caehlim »

Offline MonfangTopic starter

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #97 on: February 15, 2013, 01:29:17 PM »
Monfang, from what I can tell, and please do correct me if I'm wrong, your entire argument is pinned on the Bible, Divine Inspiration and the Christian God.  As these are matters of faith and belief, and thus outside the realm of logic and proof, it's very hard to try and think of how to discuss this with you.  Are you able to set that aside and discuss it in a purely secular manner?

If not, and you're not required to, how can anyone take the contrary position as you automatically win because of your faith and its inability to be challenged?

Edit: it's, its, its' ooof.
I looked at the Judeo-Christian Philosophy because that's the only fully developed philosophy I could find that laid out the roles so distinctly, these are the duties of the man and these are the duties of the female, that didn't require women to wear full body clothing and stone them for the slightest transgression (And you think this is sexist.)

I study the Bible as I suppose a hobby, I learn so much about the older cultures involved and about this culture in peticular that did things so drastically different from the others that allowed them to outlast most other faiths. And you are sorta right about this giving me an 'automatic win'. While what I say can't be disproved, only disagreed with, I can't prove it ether, only agree with it. That's more or less the tricky thing about Philosophies.

Offline Brittany

Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #98 on: February 15, 2013, 01:56:02 PM »
This is dead wrong.  Totally and completely wrong.  Women can 'understand' men, but men can't 'understand' women?  That's sexist, exceedingly sexist and close minded.

Feminism, as stated numerous times, is about being treated fairly like a person.  And every person, no matter the gender, orientation, colouring has different needs and expectations, however, I believe that it should society's goal to strive and treat everyone one, and I mean everyone, in a manner they deserve and with respect (until such a time they, the person in question, does something to not deserve it.  Like harm another for self-interest or sadistic pleasure and other myriad of criminal activities.)

Feminism is the woman's right to be treated fairly, and in a job situation, compensated appropriately for her job (same pay as a man doing her job), no more, but especially no less.  At no time should anyone be considered to be entitled for more, whether or not they have dangly bits between their legs.

Firstly I never claimed to be able to understand men.  The opposite. 

And again I see this same argument, and again it comes from a male,. which is that the only difference between women and men is our sexual organs.  Societies expectations on a young woman and a young man are greatly different.  Historically the differences have been greater, and we are moving towards a similar lifestyle, but the woman is still generally expected to marry and raise children and the male is still expected to work and provide.  This gives us a completely different perspective on life and it begins from the very moment we are born and I wear pink and you wear blue.

If you ask a group of males and females to play word association, and come out with words such as Education, Sex, Love, while some words are the same, the females will provide a completely different perspective.  Words that a male wouldn't even think of, and vice versa.  An average female and an average male have different priorities in life.  While Sarah from Swansea may hold the same ideals and thoughts as you do, as a male, if you poll a reasonable amount of women and men on almost anything, you will have different results.

Regarding feminisim I disagree that it is about "being treated fairly as a person".  While that is a goal of any civil rights group, feminism is about tackling the issues that women face, that in the main have been caused by men.  Issues such as women's health, women's rights, women in the workplace, getting strong female role models in high places.  It is about having equal rights to the men who have held women down throughout history and today.

If you look at almost any major issue facing young women specifically, it is caused by men.  And this is not me saying "you are a man so you must be evil", but the truth is that feminism's major opponent is the male and male views.  Women get paid less because a man thinks we should.  In many places women are still forced to marry, by men, to men.  In 2013, women have started to play video games and enter into a male domain and are being told to "get back in the kitchen" and refused to join groups, by men.  In politics women are smeared by men.  Why?  There are lots of theories on this.  The bigger, physically stronger sex wanting control of the weaker one, or men scared as to what would happen if women ever decided they didn't need men are both theories.  And while you CAN support feminism and you CAN cheerlead and you CAN change the views of those and those around you, you can never understand what it means to be a woman or truly be a feminist.

Until you have faced injustice, you have no perspective on that injustice.  If someone walks to a black man and insults him racially, I can sympathise with him, I can feel for him, I can know that it was not very nice.  But I have no perspective on what it's like.  I can relate it to when someone has been sexist, but it is not the same.  I don't know what it's like to be an african man, or a man, and I would never claim to.

Lets say a young girl was inspired by the Popes visit and wanted to be the Pope.  A bold ambition.  Women cannot be named pope because they are unable to become ordained priests in Catholicism.  How you see that, and how that girl sees that are completely different.  She is crushed, cannot do what she wants in her life because she was not born a man.  You can't understand her emotion.  You can sympathise, you can try to understand, but you can never fully comprehend what it is like to be told you cannot do something "because you don't have dangly bits between your legs".  And it's insulting to think you can. 

Those rules were made by man to hold women down.  Men and men's rules have put women at an unfair disadvantage.  This is why I don't worry about being called sexist.  I'm not going to get a violin out, because I've been the victim of sexism from the moment I was born into this society.  I know anger shouldn't be met with anger, but a female sexist viewpoint is far more understandable and rational than a male one in the same way a foreign person who has been abused since he got here doesn't like the locals much.  He doesn't like the locals because many of them are mean to him.  The locals don't like him, because he is foreign.  It's the same with sexism.  You may not like my views but they are based on my experiences and unfair limitations in life caused by men.

Feminism is not, will not, and can never be about men.  Feminism is because of men.  In spite of men.  But it's not for men.  If men want to help the feminist movement then get the rest of the men to start paying us fairly, stop whistling and have more respect.  You feel it's sexist that some feminists don't want to let you in their club?  Well how did you think all those women felt that were banned from every club, for their entire lives, and still are in many places?  It's not about men, it's the one thing that is ours (and men have many).  This is our "get back in the garage" to your "get back in the kitchen" if you will.  Sorry if I come across rude but I am very passionate about this subject.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2013, 02:47:31 PM by Brittany »

Online Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Will feminism really bring women happiness?
« Reply #99 on: February 15, 2013, 02:05:47 PM »
I looked at the Judeo-Christian Philosophy because that's the only fully developed philosophy I could find that laid out the roles so distinctly, these are the duties of the man and these are the duties of the female, that didn't require women to wear full body clothing and stone them for the slightest transgression (And you think this is sexist.)

I study the Bible as I suppose a hobby, I learn so much about the older cultures involved and about this culture in peticular that did things so drastically different from the others that allowed them to outlast most other faiths. And you are sorta right about this giving me an 'automatic win'. While what I say can't be disproved, only disagreed with, I can't prove it ether, only agree with it. That's more or less the tricky thing about Philosophies.

It is worth noting that Elliquiy is a multinational, multicultural forum.  The Judeo-Christian philosophy - as well-codified as it is - is not universally held.  You may have noticed the rather active 'Elliquiy Atheists' thread, for one, and I know that there are also numerous polytheists on the forum (myself included).  As a result, the phrase 'according to Scripture' will elicit varying degrees of respect, up to and including complete dismissal.  Some will even point out that those rules were put in place by and for a small, nomadic society in a harsh environment that required an emphasis on prolific reproduction in order to balance out the high infant mortality and shorter life span.  The bits about pork and shrimp come from that same environmental impetus, by the way.  And any chef will tell you that the techniques for avoiding cross-contamination are very similar to the traditions of keeping 'milch' and 'fleisch' utensils in a kosher kitchen.

So, not an 'automatic win', by any stretch of the term.