Where are all the women?

[myinnerslut]

Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity - men and women - to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams.

its that bold bit that grabbed me. the choice to be a stay at home traditionalist, or the educated liberal. it applies to the audience he addressed that day as much as it does to us here. we fought for the right to choose whether to stay at home of go out and work. extend it a step further and you can say we have the right to choose to be submissive or dominant, the right to choose to have children or opt not to. its all about the choice. and about other people being able to respect the choice that you make after you have made it.

 

[intothewoods]

Well, my recollection is that feminists of my generation have said this in the public sphere. I'm vaguely reminded of Naomi Wolf and the brouhaha over her hotness, but it's been a few years and admittedly my memory may be faulty. Also she later claimed to have talked to God so she's definitely not the best example.

 

[JMohegan]

Name some. Dworkin's dead and gone.

I've always loudly and consistently opposed the anti SM contingents and didn't win any feminist accolades on campus for that. The SM question really is the perfect distillment of whether or not we're going to judge sexualities and how.

The Michigan Women's music festival is hardly going to trash the planet single handedly. Even if I think they're assholes and I've said it a million times.

Name some what?

I'm talking about how I believe feminism got a bad name among many in society at large. Equal rights seems like such a simple, obvious concept. Who could possibly oppose it on rational grounds? And yet "feminist" is not considered a positive term for many people. How did that happen? The past is what I'm talking about here.

 

[00Syd]

I've always thought of this as feminism/queer liberation phase 2, though a number within the movements are so hostile to hets and men that, well, they don't see the value either. If you think about it, men are much more comfortable with women's shifting roles than being required to examine their own or change inside them at all.

Well, I think that many men are totally able to examine their own shifting gender roles and change accordingly, but the vast majority of men aren't and the humongous cry of "SUCK IT UP, SISSY BOY!" coming from that camp completely downs out any dissenting feelings on the matter.


*Throws up her hands in frustration*

MEN!

I never thought about this as anything like 'feminism/queer liberation phase 2' but I guess it could be. I guess I just find it very, very strange to feel any sort of need whatsoever to defend men in this type of discussion. That's new, huh? I think the main queer liberation thing that's happening now is the realization that arguments of "we've suffered more than you!" are totally besides the point, and that everyone's situation is obviously different, but no less worthwhile or worth consideration than anyone else. People (who think about these sorts of things) seem (for some part) to actually be thinking about each other now without resentment or other bullshit and considering them equally. Its nice.

 

[Homburg]

Yes.

That was the whole thing that bothered me with the real man thread to begin with. That we're saying that its okay for women to not fit into their gender stereotype, and it may very well even be a positive thing, but for a men to do it its not okay and not a positive thing and thats just the way it is and tough shit for the guys who don't like it.

But, y'know, that's what the situation was for women for eons, and it sucked, and women went ahead and changed it and now we know that its not cool to treat women like that en mass. So why can't we get ourselves together enough to realize that maybe the situation for men, while obviously different, may not be too hot either? Why continue to further the "suck it up, sissy boy" ideal when we know its pretty shitty?

I've said before in this thread that I find it interesting that it is the women that are aggravated about these male stereotypes. The closest thing to a guy that has issues with it is Shanks (not that he's close to a guy, but that he's closer to having issues with it).

I find it amusing that the women are rushing to protect these non-manly men. I guess you see them as needing protection.

Is that horribly atavistic and ur-manly/patriarchal of me?

ETA: Appears that we simul-posted and that you find it weird too.

 

[00Syd]

I've said before in this thread that I find it interesting that it is the women that are aggravated about these male stereotypes. The closest thing to a guy that has issues with it is Shanks (not that he's close to a guy, but that he's closer to having issues with it).

I find it amusing that the women are rushing to protect these non-manly men. I guess you see them as needing protection.

Is that horribly atavistic and ur-manly/patriarchal of me?

I don't feel like I need to rush to anyone's protection, but I do find it very frustrating the nobody seems to be realizing that MAYBE there is an issue here that isn't being fully addressed.

 

[00Syd]

ETA: Appears that we simul-posted and that you find it weird too.

Yes, see my simul-post re: your simul-post.

 

[intothewoods]

I've said before in this thread that I find it interesting that it is the women that are aggravated about these male stereotypes. The closest thing to a guy that has issues with it is Shanks (not that he's close to a guy, but that he's closer to having issues with it).

I find it amusing that the women are rushing to protect these non-manly men. I guess you see them as needing protection.

Is that horribly atavistic and ur-manly/patriarchal of me?

ETA: Appears that we simul-posted and that you find it weird too.

Like any good narcissistic mother, I look at it from the perspective of a parent of a son. I don't like the trend towards either or. Either pink or blue. Either boy-identified clothes/toys/activities or girl-identified same.

 

[JMohegan]

its that bold bit that grabbed me. the choice to be a stay at home traditionalist, or the educated liberal. it applies to the audience he addressed that day as much as it does to us here. we fought for the right to choose whether to stay at home of go out and work. extend it a step further and you can say we have the right to choose to be submissive or dominant, the right to choose to have children or opt not to. its all about the choice. and about other people being able to respect the choice that you make after you have made it.

Because of the choices that he and his wife have had to make as parents, I think he absolutely, 100% gets it. He knows exactly what the choices are, and the ramifications of making them.

By the way, an interesting 2007 article on Michelle may be found here. The fact that she felt the need to dance around the question on feminism seems very telling to me. (Telling with regard to the extent to which feminism is perceived to have a potentially negative, or at best questionable, name.)

 

[Homburg]

Like any good narcissistic mother, I look at it from the perspective of a parent of a son. I don't like the trend towards either or. Either pink or blue. Either boy-identified clothes/toys/activities or girl-identified same.

It's easier for me. The house is full of boy stuff, girl stuff, and non-gender specific stuff. The kids are free to choose whatever they want to play with. So the boys will occasionally play with the dolls and such, and the girls will occasionally play with the hot wheels.

At the end of the day though, the boys like boy colours and boy stuff. The girls like the pinks and lavenders and girl stuff. Part of it is response to marketing, sure, but part of it is just how they are.

 

[intothewoods]

Because of the choices that he and his wife have had to make as parents, I think he absolutely, 100% gets it. He knows exactly what the choices are, and the ramifications of making them.

By the way, an interesting 2007 article on Michelle may be found here. The fact that she felt the need to dance around the question on feminism seems very telling to me. (Telling with regard to the extent to which feminism is perceived to have a potentially negative, or at best questionable, name.)

I guess my feeling is that it's part a result of the nuts and part a self-fulfilling media prophecy.

It's easier for me. The house is full of boy stuff, girl stuff, and non-gender specific stuff. The kids are free to choose whatever they want to play with. So the boys will occasionally play with the dolls and such, and the girls will occasionally play with the hot wheels.

At the end of the day though, the boys like boy colours and boy stuff. The girls like the pinks and lavenders and girl stuff. Part of it is response to marketing, sure, but part of it is just how they are.

My house has the same, complete with some "girl" stuff that he picked out. Part of it is how they are, and he's well into the boy stuff. I don't think we should ignore reality, even if that reality is influenced by marketing and society at large, but it's hard to provide choices if everything is gender-identified. Because then you're either going along or putting your boy in a tutu just to prove a point (and yes, there are those parents, rare as they may be). At this point, not everything is gender-identified, but there is more that is in comparison to when I was a kid.

 

[00Syd]

Also, its a very bad thing that feminism has been so mischaracterized, yet talking about men in a similar way gets an instant WTF from just about everyone and that's not so bad, right? Because, really, thinking about men in a more complex way than hammers, cars, and guns is pretty WTF.

 

[Homburg]

My house has the same, complete with some "girl" stuff that he picked out. Part of it is how they are, and he's well into the boy stuff. I don't think we should ignore reality, even if that reality is influenced by marketing and society at large, but it's hard to provide choices if everything is gender-identified. Because then you're either going along or putting your boy in a tutu just to prove a point (and yes, there are those parents, rare as they may be). At this point, not everything is gender-identified, but there is more that is in comparison to when I was a kid.

Really? I feel like the divide was wider when I was young. While there's more stuff branded for boys/girls, the toy divide was wider then. Boys did NOT play with dolls, and girls did NOT play with trucks.

It may be more because the toy industry has metastasised into the enormous agglomeration producing toy-branded dreck across a broad spectrum of interests. There's still toy cars, dolls, building blocks, etc. Those are as boy/girl as ever. Where it gets weird is the toy car manufacturer trying to pink up a car to get the girls to buy it, and same with other girl-centric toymakers trying to grab boy-dollars.

 

[Netzach]

Name some what?

I'm talking about how I believe feminism got a bad name among many in society at large. Equal rights seems like such a simple, obvious concept. Who could possibly oppose it on rational grounds? And yet "feminist" is not considered a positive term for many people. How did that happen? The past is what I'm talking about here.

Everyone's talking about the fringe who have hijacked the movement, they must have names, then, if they're such powerful forces. Whatever the "nuts" I'm supposed to be distancing myself from might espouse, it might help to catch some of their soundbites.

These public man-hating loud loonies who have hijacked the struggle to make a buck for the same work and maybe have more people concerned with making work and parenting work together better.

Or are those really not the people in charge of anything significant and more a scapegoat for a concept that still has a long way to go?

IME, the second anyone points out that having a dick wins you a lot of non-hassles, people tend to assume hostility and get nutty, rather than maybe considering the likelihood.

It also entails a lot of hassles, hence my point about feminism phaze 2.

 

[Netzach]

I've said before in this thread that I find it interesting that it is the women that are aggravated about these male stereotypes. The closest thing to a guy that has issues with it is Shanks (not that he's close to a guy, but that he's closer to having issues with it).

I find it amusing that the women are rushing to protect these non-manly men. I guess you see them as needing protection.

Is that horribly atavistic and ur-manly/patriarchal of me?

ETA: Appears that we simul-posted and that you find it weird too.

I'm queer. Got a dog in the hunt or three.

Is the sissy/queer continuum in need of explanation?

 

[00Syd]

I'm queer. Got a dog in the hunt or three.

Is the sissy/queer continuum in need of explanation?

I think so.

 

[Netzach]

I think so.

Dude. Maybe masculinity DOES boil down to "stay away from my butthole."

I totally get the loathing of incompetence thing, I feel the same way about men and women. How one defines incompetence is subjective. BiBunny's definition and mine could not be more different.

But the special loathing and recasting of male incompetence as inherently feminine is really interesting. Like testosterone increases your competence magically?

I have a set of traditional admirable traits in a manly male that get me hot, and they're the ones that put guys under the ground sooner on average. Endurance. What you'll take from me and for me and instead of me. Really masculine male rawr hotness is, in my head, always always always submissive, always ready to suffer always on board for the test. T's masculinity rests on this, it's his bendy feminine, ineffable qualities that make me flip for him, too.

Failure to live up to my little martyrdom program doesn't earn anyone disdain or hate, just sexual disinterest.

 

[00Syd]

Dude. Maybe masculinity DOES boil down to "stay away from my butthole."

HA! Looking at a lot of recent posts around these parts, I'm beginning to think that this is a strong possibility.

 

[JMohegan]

But the special loathing and recasting of male incompetence as inherently feminine is really interesting. Like testosterone increases your competence magically?

I made this exact point, days ago. Clarification was received.

 

[00Syd]

Yet, we're still referring to the feminiztion of men.

And, Netz, oy vey with the editing. But, yes, I pretty much agree with everything you said and whathaveyou.

 

[JMohegan]

Also, its a very bad thing that feminism has been so mischaracterized, yet talking about men in a similar way gets an instant WTF from just about everyone and that's not so bad, right? Because, really, thinking about men in a more complex way than hammers, cars, and guns is pretty WTF.

I know little to nothing about auto mechanics, roof repair, laying tile, construction equipment, or electrical work. Have never hunted, joined the military, or even so much as picked up a gun.

I did not find that conversation to be insulting to me personally, or threatening to my masculinity in any way. Mostly this is because of my own comfort level with who and what I am.

But I also had the impression that most people in that conversation were discussing skill with "hammers, cars, and guns" as a proxy for "man as provider and defender of house and home." I actually see the issues surrounding those roles as quite complex, in many cases.

 

[JMohegan]

Yet, we're still referring to the feminiztion of men.

Because men are becoming feminized, in some contexts.

 

[00Syd]

Because men are becoming feminized, in some contexts.

And its talked about like its a bad thing. But when women take on more traditionally masculine qualities its usually celebrated. This is something that I find personally insulting.

 

[Netzach]

I know little to nothing about auto mechanics, roof repair, laying tile, construction equipment, or electrical work. Have never hunted, joined the military, or even so much as picked up a gun.

I did not find that conversation to be insulting to me personally, or threatening to my masculinity in any way. Mostly this is because of my own comfort level with who and what I am.

But I also had the impression that most people in that conversation were discussing skill with "hammers, cars, and guns" as a proxy for "man as provider and defender of house and home." I actually see the issues surrounding those roles as quite complex, in many cases.

And see, I respect a guy who can pick up a phone and dial the roofer but gets my Odyssey reference most.

Or one who can overclock my computer and make me laugh easily. Car parts don't impress me and never really will.

 

[Netzach]

Because men are becoming feminized, in some contexts.

What does that even mean?

Do you mean the skin care thing? I think they're just being marketed to effectively en masse, my God, try a little Marxist analysis for breakfast.

No one but no one MADE my dude decide that hair south of the eyebrows is nasty nasty nasty. It's like the boy who opts for the doll. How is this a societal woe?