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

I think women should be empowered. That way I can use my charm rather than my merit to get places in life. For instance, the person I report to at my job is the #2 person in the whole place. She’s got a PhD in chemistry, and PhD in philosophy, a master’s in physics and did her undergrad in biology. She’s about as empowered as they come. The other lady who I deal with there has a PhD too. They’re both empowered. If these two were guys, they’d get fed up with my smart ass nature pretty quick. But I always get along better with women. I say thank God for empowered women, because they can give me a job.

I am a man, but it really doesn’t matter to this thread.

the last lines are not just “angry women talk,” it is an observation of the way the world is now, with some prose and color ful words to make the sentence less boring to type for me. But yes, I “AM” angry at men who degrade women, and I “will” not put up with it if I am around, nor am I ashamed of my anger at these men. (I am not accusing you in geneneral ariel, but all men or women who continually either degrade or trivilize others in any way from a full happy life.)

the real “pussy men” are the ones who act like assholes, not the ones who stick up for others.

Where do you draw the lines between degrading and opinion with regards to gender talk? I think that some people think they are one and the same, and I don’t think they are.

aspacia!

Uh-oh…you’d better watch out, somebody’s stepped up to label you an ‘angry woman talker’. Proceed with caution, as you have now been weakened, they’ve ferreted out your innate female foolishness; that is to say the word’s out that you’re incapable of containing those irrational and unpredictable female emotions that will be your undoing in this den of reasonable, rational and oh-so-secure males.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!

Thanks guys, I needed a good cleansing laugh.

Well, that sounds good in theory, doesn’t it? For instance, men are better at throwing and women have more dexterity. Men are better at mentally rotating shapes and women are better at visual memory. Men are better at solving word problems, women are better at the calculating.

(Oh wait, was I supposed to stick to the ‘men are more intelligent and women are better socializers’ theories put forth by several of our esteemed fellow ILP’ers thus far? Sorry!)

You’d think we’d get that and find a degree of equanimity and happiness in creating and celebrating balance, no?

On the surface, you might think that a particular engineering problem can only be solved by the particular skills (note that I didn’t write ‘superior’; that’s just what those with sexual bias reading this are concluding…) that men, statistically, tend to display more often. But suppose that said task can be accomplished either by representing geometry or by representing individual landmarks. Girls tend to rely on the landmarks, and boys on the geometry. And both can solve it!

But wait…my god, what a despicable, feminine take on things! Where’s that innate masculine drive to stand alone upon yonder hill, flag raised (so to speak), one foot placed before the other in the timeless symbol of leadership, ready into battle, drenched in noble cause, defender of the truth whatever the cost…

[i]“…for look there, friend Sancho Panza, where thirty or more monstrous giants present themselves, all of whom I mean to engage in battle and slay…”

“Look, your worship,” said Sancho. “What we see there are not giants but windmills, and what seem to be their arms are the vanes that turned by the wind make the millstone go.”[/i] - de Cervantes

In the end, balance is relative and, even more problematic, in constant flux. Its achievement can’t even be evaluated until after the fact, by which time you’ll be pretty assured that things have shifted some. :slight_smile:

IMO, what matters most is how power is defined and perceived and, ultimately, negotiated. It’s my experience that when a woman and a man with similar understanding along these lines meet up, then that’s great fortune for both. It’s rare, though. So if you got it, savor it. (sigh)

[size=75][Pulls over to the kerb in his Shiny red convertable][/size]

“Uh - S’cuse me ma’am ah’ma lookin’ fer a place called Stepford…?”

Ingenium, the problem I have with the “men are better at x, women are better at y” line is that, even if statistically true (i.e. on average, within the general population and over a large number of individuals the trend holds), the variation within each gender makes the finding practically useless. Even if men are better on average in all aspects of mathematics, there are still women who are better at math than 99.999+% of men, and likewise for any trait where there is some statistical sexual discrepancy. In the workplace, the statistics are useless: since you’re dealing not with the general population but with a biased sample, a woman applying for a math-heavy position who has a comparable resume to that of a man is as likely as not to be a better candidate for the position. The statistics would only make you expect more male applicants to a specific position, or more men with the relevant experiences.

Carleas:

I’m not feeling much inspiration to deal seriously with this thread; however, your participation seems sincere.

I’m uninterested in a brand of feminism that holds the ideal above and beyond valid scientific findings. It would just be a shadow game, adding more fuel to the ‘enemy’s’ fire, as it were. With that said, there’s a difference between the morality of the social and political imposition of gender (or any other) discrimination and empirical findings regarding biological similarities or differences between the sexes. Plain old vanilla information is no threat in and of itself and, in fact, it’s disinformation and ignorance that does us in, no?

That’s true, if you’re considering male curve versus female curve, the means may be different, but at any particular measurement there are always representatives of both genders. But the variance depends a lot on the tails of the distribution curve, populated by the fewest samples. Even when there’s only a small difference in the means of two distributions, the more extreme a score, the greater the disparity there will be in the two kinds of individuals having such a score. That is, the ratios get more extreme as you go farther out along the tail. This is not insignificant in the empirical sense, of course. But there’s a difference between denoting difference and inferring that denotation in a discrimatory manner, which you alluded to in your employment scenario. The problem is that you have some who over-emphasize these outer extremes to justify what are essentially social or political propositions.

Interestingly, research has shown that candidates for such jobs who are stellar – the highest of the high – are not viewed differently in terms of gender. It’s when you get to the much larger, more average group of candidates that you see gender-based bias when it comes to perceived productivity, quality of experience, suitability as a colleague.

[quote=“Ingenium”]

[quote]
Are you looking in the mirror?

Yes, my significant male other and I are very balance. However, my first husband played the alpha male, power trip, and I divorced him and spent two year in court divorcing him as he did not want it.

You will reap what you sow. :wink:

That’s because I’m pretty much in agreement. Well, at least in terms of balance of power and maturity and personalities in a good relationship.

I think you misunderstood my meaning. See, back in the early days of the women’s movement, if you spoke out against male opinion or the male power structure or status quo, you were labelled an ‘angry, irrational, overly-emotional female’. And, see, some poster had called you angry and other male posters had referred to the ‘natural order’ and that women are less intelligent and more social…oh, never mind.

Sigh. It’s one of those deals that if I have to explain it, it doesn’t matter.

LOL, chill out, I wasn’t arguing with you. I agree, at least in terms of balance of power and maturity and personalities in a good relationship. It’s just not that common that two people maintain such balance over the life of it. Most women I know sacrifice and compromise more than they’d like to and will admit it…to another woman. I’ve never understood why, but have been told crap like, “well, it’s better than being alone” or “they’re all pretty much that way, so I might as well stick with the one I’ve already invested my time in.” I can only shake my head at that logic.

And heaven only knows what their mates are admitting to their male friends.

Uh, because we live in a culture where men have been encouraged in both overt and subtle ways to pursue it and girls have not?

Boys get Erector sets and video games, girls get Easy-Bake ovens and Barbies. With lots of pink dresses and accessories. That was not my experience, although I did get a baby doll or two.

That’s good. Mine are not yet out of school, but I’m encouraging them to make lots of money just in case I need a loan when I get too old and feeble to work. :slight_smile:

I’m not convinced that there are that many on here, and virtually none in the truest sense of the word. I know some in real life, though.

I don’t think you understood much of my post, actually. But no matter. I was actually supporting what you’d written, it just didn’t come through because I was also directing a bit of sarcasm at prior posts by some of the males.

(Damn. I KNEW I should’ve stayed away from a thread on feminism on a predominantly male site! But noooo…)

Are you talking about society in general or me personally? If you mean me, then perhaps you can tell me, are you assuming that I’m a man or a lesbian? Just curious. :slight_smile:

Yikes, that sounds expensive! But no doubt worth it, lol.

:blush: Damn, I can be the defensive bitch— sorry about my misunderstanding :sunglasses: I have been slammed as a misanthrop many times by three males on this board. Chuckle, women making equal wages and burdens helps the household and eases the burden on both parties.

Friends???

Smiles,

aspacia :laughing:

Why hasn’t the Equal Rights Amendment been adopted? After all it was passed by Congress in 1971 and ratified by 35 state legislatures. Only three more states need ratify it for its adoption. Members of Congress have reintroduced the measure every year since its defeat. This year it has been renamed the Women’s Equality Amendment. Do you think that will help? The amendment simply states “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.” What could possibly be wrong with that in an enlightened free country like the U.S.A.?

It was defeated because it is redundant. Women are already protected under the Civil Liberties Act. :sunglasses: The laws on the books simply need to be enforced.

aspacia :sunglasses:

If you are referring to the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause, it has never been interpreted to grant equal rights on the basis of sex in the same way that the Equal Rights Amendment would. Ratified in the 19th century, the 14th Amendment wasn’t applied to sex discrimination at all until 1971. Even so, the last major Supreme Court decision on sex discrimination, regarding admission of women to Virginia Military Institute demonstrated that males hold rights and females must prove that they hold them. Why is that a good thing? The Equal Rights Amendment would end that disparity and shift the burden of proof to the alleged discriminator.

Valid claims Felix! However, I was refering to the Civil Rights Act of the 60’s. In any place of employment, one must prove that they are able to adequately perform or excel in the job. This goes for most clerical, teaching, fireperson, policeperson, construction, nurses, doctors, etc. positions. These tests are often three or more hours in length, and some require three to eight years of undergraduate and graduate studies, and 150 hours or more additional training to remain current, and renew their professional licenses.

However, I do believe that eventually technology will take the gender or sex factor out of the equation.

Smiles,

aspacia

:sunglasses:

Did I say that?
If anything physical weakness makes mental compensation a matter of survival.

I’m saying they dominate, period, for whatever reasons.
That males show a stronger ability to abstract and to revolutionize human thought and art, points to a general characteristic.

That only explains how they dominated not why they maintained this dominance.

or has the right to revolutionize human thought etc only been open to males in the past b/c of lingering survival roles. As, technology changes, women are getting in on the game more and more, that is evident in the last 100 years, and it will probably continue to climb.

Sorry, Satyr, I think I misunderstood you. You are just saying that physical difference is an indicator that there is likely mental difference as well, and I interpreted it to say that physical strength was an indicator of mental strength. Apologies. In that case, I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but I don’t think there is necessarily a difference (there are numerous physical and mental qualities in which men and women are equals), nor do we know in which direction the scales are tilted (the playing field has not been equal).
I think Mike is on to something. Women have been rapidly gaining social influence since the industrial revolution, i.e. since the necessity of physical strength was significantly reduced as a requirement for productive labor. Perhaps men maintain dominence because not enough time has elapsed to allow women to prove themselves superior.

This can be viewed as an accomplishment, as your comments apparently hit them somewhere where it stung a bit. :slight_smile:

Of course!

:smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley:

Thanks kiddo,

aspacia

I don’t know if i see it so much as empowering females, as disempowering males.

In a good way, though!

Men wield too much power for their own good. Hasn’t got us very far in the past in terms of world peace!

Why not try women at the fore?

=D> =D> =D>

Oh, let me add to that.

Women are GREAT at running the household.

Think of the world as a great big household.

Therefore,

Women would be PERFECT for running the world!

:laughing: :laughing:

(just crackin’ a little joke there…)

the hand that rocks the cradle already rules the world

-Imp