What Is Your Understanding Of A Feminist? Are You One?

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

What Is Your Understanding Of A Feminist? Are You One?

Postby RicDemian » Sat May 19, 2007 9:35 am

In Who Stole Feminism? philosopher Christina Hoff Sommers distinguishes 2 schools of thought. Equity feminism, which oppose sex discrimination and unfairness to women, and gender feminism, which is an empirical doctrine regarding human nature. According to gender feminism the differences in the roles of between men and women are not rooted in biology or psychology, but socially constructed and motivated out of the urge for power. It further claims that men as a group oppose women. Genders are taken as competing units.

Equity feminism is simply fairness applied to the genders and in the classical liberal tradition. Anyone oppose it?

Any informed feminists please fill in the details or correct my skeletal representations.
In the name of tolerance we reserve the right not to tolerate the intolerant (Popper).

Why are philosophers intent on forcing others to believe things? Is that a nice way to behave towards someone? (Nozick)

I do not pretend to start with precise questions. I do not think you can start with anything precise. You have to achieve such precision as you can, as yo go along. (Russell)

Your World Champion shows you WHAT'S CAUSING ALL THIS!!! WOOOOO!!! ( Flair)
User avatar
RicDemian
BANNED
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:05 am

Postby Mr Reasonable » Sat May 19, 2007 10:17 am

I had this job once about three or four years ago in a Philosophy department at a university before I got the one I have now. On my first day there I met about eighteen PhDs, each of whom introduced themselves by their first names. Except one, who introduced herself as "Dr. ______". I took note of the fact that this seemed odd.
Later, upon reviewing her credentials, I found out that she got her degree from MIT,(read Massachussetts liberal/know it all), and specialized in philosophy of feminism.
How could you be an MIT grad and still be so insecure as to go around pointing out your degree to people? By being a woman. That's how.
My views on feminism is this:
Get over it ladies, you're the least discriminated against minority.
Any status that you desire beyond that you'll have to fight for.
It wont be rational or fair.
I don't make the rules, I just recognize them.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25953
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Postby matthatter » Sat May 19, 2007 10:40 am

Yeah but that was just ONE woman, you can't generalize all women from her.

That's really funny, though.

I don't like when they insist on growing out their armpit hair...

but maybe that is just because I get grossed out when I see the conflict between my (asshole manly) idea of what a female is supposed to look like, and the sight of what I've pretty much solidified as a "male" characteristic in my head.

In essence, when I see a woman with armpit hair my brain tells my mind "man-woman".

And not only that. I have also equated females with "nice smell" and the sight of underarm hair with sweat, testosterone, and body-odor.

So I see the female, and at the same time I cognitize a male, and unflattering body odor smells.

Sorry ladies :(

Okay... now it is REALLY time for bed.
User avatar
matthatter
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1104
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 6:07 am

Postby Kriswest » Sat May 19, 2007 12:10 pm

Feminism can be seperated into groups. The most basic with out malice towards males is the suffragette. All that female, wants is equal rights and equal pay for equal work. Now go on down to the other end of the line and you have what I like to refer to as Amazonian cannibals. They would just love for the male gender to vanish altogether because they feel men are the root of all evil.

Most women fall inbetween these two groups somwhere. The majority leaning more on the suffragette side. I am a suffragette. I do enjoy being treated like a lady. I am an equal human to males but, I do enjoy being feminine.

I probably should give an example of being treated as a lady.

If I get a flat tire I know that some man will more than likely help me change the tire. In return for being treated in such a manner I help men out when they need it like in a store. I have seen many men standing lost in front of store shelves with a list in their hands. They have no clue what they are supposed to choose or do. I assist them. Gender roles are real wther society constructed them or not, it is irrelevent. They exist. So we are obliged to assist each other as needed. I trust that if I am stuck on a road alone 90% of males will help me rather than harm me.
Genders are different but, equal. If we were the same we would not need each other.
I will be bitchy, cranky, sweet, happy, kind, pain in the ass all at random times from now on. I am embracing my mentalpause until further notice. Viva lack of total control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is not a test,,, this is my life right now. Have a good day and please buckle up for safety reasons,, All those in high chairs, go in the back of the room.
User avatar
Kriswest
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 20553
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:26 pm
Location: stuck in permanent maternal mode.

Postby ariellowen » Sat May 19, 2007 4:41 pm

RicDemian wrote:Equity feminism is simply fairness applied to the genders and in the classical liberal tradition. Anyone oppose it?

I am not a femenist. As a male, it is in my interest to keep women down. In my view, "liberated women" are not women at all any longer, but rather "persons." Besides conversation on the train, or as co-workers, bosses, shop-keepers and so on, I have no use what-so-ever for emancipated women.

"Gender feminism" seems hokey to me, as there are quite evidently behavioral differences between men and women which are improbably the result of culture.

Even though a woman may cut her hair short, wear pants and lose all semblance of femininity, inside, she still thinks like a woman; she may very well behave and look like a man, but she does not desire the same thing a man desires; even a dyke is not a man. Oh, Man is man and woman is woman, and never the twain shall meet.

To the homosexual-Americans who are spitting mad at this Old-World way of seeing things: eat another burger and reflect on the Jains and Hindoos --who never eat a cow or harm a living thing, but keep their women indoors and dressed in the most beautiful purple and orange dresses and scarves.
User avatar
ariellowen
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 10:56 am
Location: Manila

Postby Tab » Sat May 19, 2007 5:04 pm

I have a feeling it's always been war.
Image
User avatar
Tab
Deeply Shallow
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:49 pm

Postby tentative » Sat May 19, 2007 5:58 pm

Gender related issues are always blurred. We're all people (well, most of us) first. We now have the brain studies to show that there are biological differences that make a difference in gender related brain activity which strongly suggests psychological differences as well. Equity feminism may create culture clash, but it also makes common sense. The biological gender traits demand certain roles for men and women, and that blurrs the lines even further. I have yet to see a man nurse a baby. We ain't got the right equipment. Mom is mom, and with that comes certain family and social expectations. So a woman is always a woman, but that doesn't make her less than equal in worth even as she plays a different biological role than a man. Working out the "details" in man-woman relationships has no hard and fast rules.

As a male, I've always considered women to be equal if not superior to males. They carry more survival responsibility than males.

Of course, we have to consider the macho male: I never was macho, just lazy. If I could get a woman to do it, it was fine with me...
IGAYRCCFYVM
Sorry, arguing with the ignorant is like trying to wrestle with a jellyfish. No matter how many tentacles you cut off there are always more, and there isn't even a brain to stun. - Maia

I don't take know for an answer.
tentative
.
 
Posts: 12430
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: Idaho

Postby Mr Reasonable » Sat May 19, 2007 6:37 pm

I think that feminists are sexually frustrated women who are too socially inept to seek out the pleasure that they really need in order to be content.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25953
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Postby ariellowen » Sat May 19, 2007 7:26 pm

tentative wrote:So a woman is always a woman, but that doesn't make her less than equal in worth....

Be that as it may, the White plantation owners who were well aware that the Black slaves were not "less than equal in worth" still happily lived the good life off this inequality. "All life is precious;" but this doesn't stop most people from eating non-veg. Matters of morality are easily overlooked when personal profit and welfare are at stake.
ScottMears wrote:I think that feminists are sexually frustrated women....

No doubt they are tired of lying there and getting fucked with no concern for their "needs."

The Western Empire has already fallen, but a masculinist Byzantium will hold out for a very long time --and men will still have their clothes washed, floors swept and cocks sucked in the East long after there is a woman in the White House.
User avatar
ariellowen
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 10:56 am
Location: Manila

Postby Membrain » Sat May 19, 2007 8:14 pm

As usual, I get my highest truths from George Carlin. He sketches out the positives and negatives of feminists.

WARNING: ADULT LANGUAGE:

Here's the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XD5L2CxRMG4

Here's the text:

http://www.tremolocowboys.com/Lyrics_G/ ... yrics.html

Here's an excerpt:

(begin excerpt)
"As I said, I got nothing against the feminists.
In fact, I happen to agree with most of the feminist philosophy I have read.
I agree for instance, that for the most part, men are vain, ignorant, greedy, brutal assholes who've just about ruined this planet
who've just about ruined this planet because they're afraid someone might have a bigger dick out there somewhere.
Men are basically insecure about the size of their dicks and so they go to war over it. "
(end excerpt)
I just changed my signature to be a link to a list of 42 logical fallacies. Feel free to use it:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
User avatar
Membrain
Thinker
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 8:17 am
Location: California

Postby Tab » Sat May 19, 2007 8:24 pm

and men will still have their clothes washed, floors swept and cocks sucked in the East long after there is a woman in the White House. Ariel


Damn, I knew I should have stayed on the plane just a couple more stops...
Image
User avatar
Tab
Deeply Shallow
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:49 pm

Postby someoneisatthedoor » Sat May 19, 2007 9:13 pm

ariellowen wrote:The Western Empire has already fallen, but a masculinist Byzantium will hold out for a very long time --and men will still have their clothes washed, floors swept and cocks sucked in the East long after there is a woman in the White House.


And all those men getting their cocks sucked in the East were brought up by women to be misogynistic self-centred bastards.
User avatar
someoneisatthedoor
threshold darkener
 
Posts: 9224
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:54 pm
Location: A land of silk and money

Postby Joker » Sat May 19, 2007 11:02 pm

I am a sexist chauvinistic male who is not afraid to mention it.
The utopia is smoldering in ashes.

Hypocrisy can only exist in a moral world. In a amoral world there is no hypocrisy.

We live in a kill or be killed world.
User avatar
Joker
Nihilistic Deconstructionist
 
Posts: 6765
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 5:49 am
Location: Near snow covered mountains and pine forests five hundred miles from the nearest town or city.

Postby Joker » Sat May 19, 2007 11:04 pm

ariellowen wrote:
RicDemian wrote:Equity feminism is simply fairness applied to the genders and in the classical liberal tradition. Anyone oppose it?

I am not a femenist. As a male, it is in my interest to keep women down. In my view, "liberated women" are not women at all any longer, but rather "persons." Besides conversation on the train, or as co-workers, bosses, shop-keepers and so on, I have no use what-so-ever for emancipated women.

"Gender feminism" seems hokey to me, as there are quite evidently behavioral differences between men and women which are improbably the result of culture.

Even though a woman may cut her hair short, wear pants and lose all semblance of femininity, inside, she still thinks like a woman; she may very well behave and look like a man, but she does not desire the same thing a man desires; even a dyke is not a man. Oh, Man is man and woman is woman, and never the twain shall meet.

To the homosexual-Americans who are spitting mad at this Old-World way of seeing things: eat another burger and reflect on the Jains and Hindoos --who never eat a cow or harm a living thing, but keep their women indoors and dressed in the most beautiful purple and orange dresses and scarves.



In my view, "liberated women" are not women at all any longer, but rather "persons." Besides conversation on the train, or as co-workers, bosses, shop-keepers and so on, I have no use what-so-ever for emancipated women.



Haha no doubt.
The utopia is smoldering in ashes.

Hypocrisy can only exist in a moral world. In a amoral world there is no hypocrisy.

We live in a kill or be killed world.
User avatar
Joker
Nihilistic Deconstructionist
 
Posts: 6765
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 5:49 am
Location: Near snow covered mountains and pine forests five hundred miles from the nearest town or city.

Postby Joker » Sat May 19, 2007 11:05 pm

Women have it easy and there is no doubt about that.

( They piss me off too.)

( It really is a love hate relationship.)
The utopia is smoldering in ashes.

Hypocrisy can only exist in a moral world. In a amoral world there is no hypocrisy.

We live in a kill or be killed world.
User avatar
Joker
Nihilistic Deconstructionist
 
Posts: 6765
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 5:49 am
Location: Near snow covered mountains and pine forests five hundred miles from the nearest town or city.

Postby -Oni Omega- » Sun May 20, 2007 3:33 am

Bleh, women are emotional deviants and emotionally irrational.

Femanin men kind of piss off a little too.
Suffering because of stupidity of the rest of the human race i stand alone with a tortured but brilliant mind.

I see allot of unreasonable mind dribble and trivial philosophical questions, can you guess where i am ? ILP Forums! The thing is, these are smartest I've seen so I'll make do.

Image
User avatar
-Oni Omega-
Thinker
 
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 12:48 am

Postby Kriswest » Sun May 20, 2007 2:22 pm

Joker wrote:Women have it easy and there is no doubt about that.

( They piss me off too.)

( It really is a love hate relationship.)



ROTFLMFAO. That is a good joke!
I will be bitchy, cranky, sweet, happy, kind, pain in the ass all at random times from now on. I am embracing my mentalpause until further notice. Viva lack of total control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is not a test,,, this is my life right now. Have a good day and please buckle up for safety reasons,, All those in high chairs, go in the back of the room.
User avatar
Kriswest
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 20553
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:26 pm
Location: stuck in permanent maternal mode.

Postby ariellowen » Sun May 20, 2007 6:39 pm

Yıkes! Are all phılösöphers chauvınıst pıgs? Thıs ıs as 'bad' as the threads about Black people. Is no one gonna stand up for the ladıes?
User avatar
ariellowen
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 10:56 am
Location: Manila

Postby RicDemian » Sun May 20, 2007 10:34 pm

ariellowen wrote:Yıkes! Are all phılösöphers chauvınıst pıgs? Thıs ıs as 'bad' as the threads about Black people. Is no one gonna stand up for the ladıes?


I was wondering along those lines myself. I would have thought a philosophy forum would attract progressive-minded types. I thought this thread would draw some elaborations on the various avenues feminism has taken, some critiques of the radical varieties, but not knee jerk opposition to the modest demands of equity feminism. BTW, are there any women in this forum? Sorry if you're one, ariellowen. If you are, rally your sisters
Last edited by RicDemian on Sun May 20, 2007 11:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
In the name of tolerance we reserve the right not to tolerate the intolerant (Popper).

Why are philosophers intent on forcing others to believe things? Is that a nice way to behave towards someone? (Nozick)

I do not pretend to start with precise questions. I do not think you can start with anything precise. You have to achieve such precision as you can, as yo go along. (Russell)

Your World Champion shows you WHAT'S CAUSING ALL THIS!!! WOOOOO!!! ( Flair)
User avatar
RicDemian
BANNED
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:05 am

Postby someoneisatthedoor » Sun May 20, 2007 10:41 pm

ariellowen wrote:Yıkes! Are all phılösöphers chauvınıst pıgs? Thıs ıs as 'bad' as the threads about Black people. Is no one gonna stand up for the ladıes?


I'm a sexual egalitarian. I would call myself a feminist, but these days that means being pro-female, rather than egalitarian. I believe that equality, as they say, goes both ways. On the other hand, biologically there are a few pretty fundamental differences between them that, short of some pretty radical evolution in human physicality, remain problematic to any program or ideal of equality.

It doesn't help calling anyone who either makes a joke or doesn't come out explicitly firing 'for the ladies' a 'chauvinist pig'. Just a suggestion.
User avatar
someoneisatthedoor
threshold darkener
 
Posts: 9224
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:54 pm
Location: A land of silk and money

Postby Mr Reasonable » Sun May 20, 2007 11:12 pm

I could take up the side of the ladies if that'd make for a better thread. How about this,
You guys are all sexist! Your arguments are illogical and unfounded in anything observable. I've yet to see any substantial evidence for a single claim here of any relevant difference between the sexes! You're all a bunch of man-ists!
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25953
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Postby Brad » Mon May 21, 2007 12:06 am

Well, feminism is an ill defined concept. There aren't just two types of feminism there are multiple feminisms. If one then assumes a single, unitary framework, it becomes sophomorically easy to ridicule.

To a large extent, liberal feminism has won the war but is still waging many battles.

Part of the problem, perhaps, is identity politics as a whole. Like any society, ideology, government, or movement that claims collectivism as a goal, it immediately confuses individual reactions with collectivist reactions. I can't think of an example where this doesn't happen.

The problem then is not feminism as such, but the inability to differentiate between one's own needs and the needs of the whole.

And that brings us back to Classical Liberalism.
to wound the autumnal city.
So howled out for the world to give him a name.
The in-dark answered with wind.
All you know I know:
Brad
 
Posts: 445
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2002 4:18 pm
Location: Chejudo, South Korea

Postby Membrain » Mon May 21, 2007 2:25 am

RicDemian wrote:
ariellowen wrote:Yıkes! Are all phılösöphers chauvınıst pıgs? Thıs ıs as 'bad' as the threads about Black people. Is no one gonna stand up for the ladıes?


I was wondering along those lines myself. I would have thought a philosophy forum would attract progressive-minded types. I thought this thread would draw some elaborations on the various avenues feminism has taken, some critiques of the radical varieties, but not knee jerk opposition to the modest demands of equity feminism. BTW, are there any women in this forum? Sorry if you're one, ariellowen. If you are, rally your sisters


Well, I put up 8 minutes of video that shows a balanced look at feminism. But If I have to post more, here more is:

"But, when it comes to changing the language, I think they make some good points, because we do think in language and so the quality of our thoughts and ideas could only be as good as the quality of our language.
So maybe some of this patriarchal shit ought to go away.
I think spokesman ought to be spokesperson.
I think chairman ought to be chairperson.
I think mankind ought to be human kind, but they take it too far, they take themselves too seriously, they exaggerate.
They want me to call that thing in the street a personhole cover.
I think that's taking it a little bit too far.
What would you call a lady's man, a person's person?
That would make a He-man an It-person.
Little kids would be afraid of the boogieperson.
They'd look up in the sky and see the person in the moon.
Guys would say come back here and fight like a person.
And we'd all sing "for it's a jolly good person."
That's the kind of thing you would hear on late-night with David Letterperson.
You know what I mean? So...so I think it's an exaggeration and I like to piss off any group that take's itself a little bit too seriously.
An it does not take a lot of imagination to piss off a feminist."

Funny and true.
I just changed my signature to be a link to a list of 42 logical fallacies. Feel free to use it:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
User avatar
Membrain
Thinker
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 8:17 am
Location: California

Postby SirEbrum » Mon May 21, 2007 3:04 am

I've heard that most hardcore feminists tend to have small nipples and a very large clitoris.
.
    " Your mind virtually breathes - an invisible cloud of gut-feel memes "
PDF files worth reading --- Permaculture Video --- The Man Who Planted Trees
User avatar
SirEbrum
 
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 6:08 am
Location: Beside the outside of the box

Postby Membrain » Mon May 21, 2007 3:34 am

Image
I just changed my signature to be a link to a list of 42 logical fallacies. Feel free to use it:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
User avatar
Membrain
Thinker
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 8:17 am
Location: California

Next

Return to Society, Government, and Economics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot]