BDSM and misogyny

[intothewoods]

again, happy is not and never has been the point. and yes, stuff changes. but it also stays the same.

It's the point for some people, certainly the baby boomers were in part into self-fulfillment and all that, but I give you it's a relatively and first world (more or less) privilege to be concerned with happiness and not just survival. Still, substitute "what works" and the idea is the same.

Too late. You've already been beaten to the punch on that one.



NOOOOOO!!!!! *Cries*

Who says I don't like a pile on?

 

[Stella_Omega]

i appreciate men living as nature wired them as opposed to forcing themselves into the emasculation western society forces upon them.

Are you saying that men who see women as their equals are emasculated?

I think that, for osg, "living as nature wired them" means guys who don't ask for permission, or for her preferences, since she's incapable of providing such.

But men and women both, honestly, have deep-rooted instincts towards cooperation, right alongside our instincts for control, and our sense of relative status. Inflicting ones' will on another human actually is not how "nature wired men." It certainly is how some men-- and some women-- are wired, because we are very variable individuals. Even for those folks dominance would be a specific, situational activity, and I'm sure osg's guys take some convincing that-- in this one case-- going for the gusto is okay.

And

 

[LazzieLace]

Just as clarification, do you fight for a woman to be able to choose to stay at home and tend to her children if she so wishes, or are you fighting to get all women to stay at home and pop out babies?

Because there is a massive difference between the two, and I could certainly support you in one, but I'd honestly be rather disgusted by the other.

To clarify: Fight for the right for a woman to stay home and tend to her children if she so wishes.

The idea of a woman having to say at home to mind her children, would appall me. I have had it happen to me, where my mother-in-law told me, that I should be at home with my daughter. It is not a pleasant feeling to be told that.

 

[Stella_Omega]

To clarify: Fight for the right for a woman to stay home and tend to her children if she so wishes

Well, that has always been part of feminism. Always.

Regardless of what the media talks about.

But you have to remember that when women first started speaking up, that was the only option available-- there was a pressing need to fight for our right to work and concentrate on a career if we wanted, the right to NOT have children at all.

Matter of fact, women are having to fight to for the right to not get knocked up-- all over again.

 

[_Stardust]

To clarify: Fight for the right for a woman to stay home and tend to her children if she so wishes.

The idea of a woman having to say at home to mind her children, would appall me. I have had it happen to me, where my mother-in-law told me, that I should be at home with my daughter. It is not a pleasant feeling to be told that.

Ah, thank you for the clarification. I can understand that. It was only a few generations ago women had to fight so damn hard to get into the workplaces, and are still fighting for equal pay and promotions and so on, it looks like back-sliding if a woman says that they want to stay at home, which as far as I understand it, goes against all that feminism stands for.

It's not something I could do for very long, not if I wanted to hold on to whatever sanity I have left, but the same obviously does not hold true of all women.

 

[4bidnfruit]

Well, that has always been part of feminism. Always.

Regardless of what the media talks about.

But you have to remember that when women first started speaking up, that was the only option available-- there was a pressing need to fight for our right to work and concentrate on a career if we wanted, the right to NOT have children at all.

Matter of fact, women are having to fight to for the right to not get knocked up-- all over again.

I don’t believe isn’t just the media. Working women all across America look down on women that stay home to take care of their children and there are women that look down on women for working. We are damned if we do and damned if we don’t. If we work, we are abandoning our children and if we don’t than we are stupid for not looking out for our future.

Everyone that has lived more than a few years has their own life experiences and wants to tell everyone how to do it the right way. Women beat each other down as they claim to be fighting for them. Most of the female population is misogyny. We don't need any help from men to destroy us any more than we need help to provide. perhaps that is the true meaning of feminism.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Speak for yourself, 4bidnfruit. My experience-- and the experience that I try to foster around me, by practice-- is quite opposite that.

 

[His_pet_slut]

I don’t believe isn’t just the media. Working women all across America look down on women that stay home to take care of their children and there are women that look down on women for working. We are damned if we do and damned if we don’t. If we work, we are abandoning our children and if we don’t than we are stupid for not looking out for our future.

Everyone that has lived more than a few years has their own life experiences and wants to tell everyone how to do it the right way. Women beat each other down as they claim to be fighting for them. Most of the female population is misogyny. We don't need any help from men to destroy us any more than we need help to provide. perhaps that is the true meaning of feminism.

Wow, maybe the South is just a really different place, but I don't know any women that look down on those that choose to stay home and raise their children. They may upon occasion gaze longingly at them, but then they tend to realize that they are where they want to be.

I belong to several professional women's organizations, some feminist oriented organizations and an equality center in my modest sized university town, and the overriding commonality is a warm, nurturing spirit for one another.

 

[CutieMouse]

Ah, thank you for the clarification. I can understand that. It was only a few generations ago women had to fight so damn hard to get into the workplaces, and are still fighting for equal pay and promotions and so on, it looks like back-sliding if a woman says that they want to stay at home, which as far as I understand it, goes against all that feminism stands for.

It's not something I could do for very long, not if I wanted to hold on to whatever sanity I have left, but the same obviously does not hold true of all women.

Wow, maybe the South is just a really different place, but I don't know any women that look down on those that choose to stay home and raise their children. They may upon occasion gaze longingly at them, but then they tend to realize that they are where they want to be.

I belong to several professional women's organizations, some feminist oriented organizations and an equality center in my modest sized university town, and the overriding commonality is a warm, nurturing spirit for one another.

The bolded bits up there are an example of somewhat common attitudes towards women who choose to stay home and raise children rather than enter the workforce. I was a "professional mother" (stay at home mom) for 12 years. For most of that time, people made comments like the one above - implying that my profession (motherhood) was mindless, boring, unskilled drudgery.

When the drama over Romney's wife not being qualified to comment on economics happened a while back? There was a women I work with who agreed that someone like me (a woman who ran a large household, oversaw the family budget, did volunteer work, and home schooled her children) didn't know enough about "business" to comment on the country's economy. It's "quaint" that I used to be a full time mom, and all well and good that the work I did as a full time mom involved a hell of a lot of CEO-type decisions (I was running a household of 7), but in her mind, because I don't have a 401k to show for it, or a more impressive CV, my views on the economy, politics, or current events are irrelevant. In her mind, women like me "set things back" re: the feminist movement... even though the whole point was for women to have the OPTION of raising a family, or working outside the home, or doing both.

 

[FurryFury]

Anyone who thinks being a feminist is something terrible and old fashioned is an idiot who doesn't know what they are talking about.

Anyone who says staying home and being a mother is back sliding from Feminism also doesn't know what they are talking about.

One of the most important points of feminism is to have the right to make a choice to work or stay home or some combination. I've done all of these things at certain points in my life. I'm damned glad I did. I'm glad I had the choice to do so.

And yes, there is a war on women right now. And yes, I'm very pissed off that we are having to fight these insane control freaks - again.



FF

 

[JMohegan]

The bolded bits up there are an example of somewhat common attitudes towards women who choose to stay home and raise children rather than enter the workforce. I was a "professional mother" (stay at home mom) for 12 years. For most of that time, people made comments like the one above - implying that my profession (motherhood) was mindless, boring, unskilled drudgery.

When the drama over Romney's wife not being qualified to comment on economics happened a while back? There was a women I work with who agreed that someone like me (a woman who ran a large household, oversaw the family budget, did volunteer work, and home schooled her children) didn't know enough about "business" to comment on the country's economy. It's "quaint" that I used to be a full time mom, and all well and good that the work I did as a full time mom involved a hell of a lot of CEO-type decisions (I was running a household of 7), but in her mind, because I don't have a 401k to show for it, or a more impressive CV, my views on the economy, politics, or current events are irrelevant. In her mind, women like me "set things back" re: the feminist movement... even though the whole point was for women to have the OPTION of raising a family, or working outside the home, or doing both.

Hilary Rosen was thrown under the bus for her comment - by numerous politicians and commentators, on both sides of the aisle, all the way up to the President. So I'd say that incident revealed strong national support for moms across the board.

Ironically, if you look at what Rosen actually said, in context (a novel thought these days, I realize), you'll see that Rosen was talking about the impact of Mrs. Romney's extreme wealth on her perspective.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...t-hilary-rosens-comment-ann-romney-never-wor/

Somehow, in the rush to express outrage over Rosen's soundbite, the national collective ignored the really disgusting response to Rosen from homophobic pricks at the catholic church.

"Lesbian Dem Hilary Rosen tells Ann Romney she never worked a day in her life. Unlike Rosen, who had to adopt kids, Ann raised 5 of her own."

https://twitter.com/#!/CatholicLeague/status/190427506904539136

In short, I agree that the incident exposed a persistent prejudice in this country, but disagree strongly with your notion as to the target here.

 

[JMohegan]

Look at the reaction to Rick Santorum and all of that contraception craziness. Women want to be in charge of their own bodies. I feel like the backlash wouldn't have been that strong even just in the 80s. Shit changes.

Women used and appreciated contraception in the 80s. Heck, my generation already took its availability for granted. So I think the outrage would have been just as widespread. The difference now is that more women are in positions of power, capable of fighting back against Santorum and his antediluvian ilk.

I have to say, I'm loving all the protest bills sponsored by female legislators this year. Rectal exams as a prerequisite for Viagra prescriptions, all sperm sacred so no ejaculating except in a vagina, etc.

 

[CutieMouse]

Hilary Rosen was thrown under the bus for her comment - by numerous politicians and commentators, on both sides of the aisle, all the way up to the President. So I'd say that incident revealed strong national support for moms across the board.

Ironically, if you look at what Rosen actually said, in context (a novel thought these days, I realize), you'll see that Rosen was talking about the impact of Mrs. Romney's extreme wealth on her perspective.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...t-hilary-rosens-comment-ann-romney-never-wor/

Somehow, in the rush to express outrage over Rosen's soundbite, the national collective ignored the really disgusting response to Rosen from homophobic pricks at the catholic church.

"Lesbian Dem Hilary Rosen tells Ann Romney she never worked a day in her life. Unlike Rosen, who had to adopt kids, Ann raised 5 of her own."

https://twitter.com/#!/CatholicLeague/status/190427506904539136

In short, I agree that the incident exposed a persistent prejudice in this country, but disagree strongly with your notion as to the target here.

JM, I was simplifying an example of a conversation i have had re: feminism & working outside the home I didn't give *my* view of the Romney thing, I pointed out that a coworker read a snippet of a Yahoo News article and started pontificating about how women who just sit back and raise babies have no right to comment on politics of economics. I countered that it had nothing to do with
being a SAHM, and was more an issue of the Romney family being out of touch with middle America's financial struggles due to their extreme wealth. She informed me that a) I didn't know what I was talking about and b) didn't know enough about business/economics to have an opinion.

I may not follow politics as fervently as you, but I am well aware what was said, how things were twisted, who was ripped to shreds, etc, and glanced through articles from both sides of the debate.

 

[intothewoods]

Women used and appreciated contraception in the 80s. Heck, my generation already took its availability for granted. So I think the outrage would have been just as widespread. The difference now is that more women are in positions of power, capable of fighting back against Santorum and his antediluvian ilk.

I have to say, I'm loving all the protest bills sponsored by female legislators this year. Rectal exams as a prerequisite for Viagra prescriptions, all sperm sacred so no ejaculating except in a vagina, etc.

You're right, that is precisely what has changed.

 

[JMohegan]

JM, I was simplifying an example of a conversation i have had re: feminism & working outside the home I didn't give *my* view of the Romney thing, I pointed out that a coworker read a snippet of a Yahoo News article and started pontificating about how women who just sit back and raise babies have no right to comment on politics of economics. I countered that it had nothing to do with
being a SAHM, and was more an issue of the Romney family being out of touch with middle America's financial struggles due to their extreme wealth. She informed me that a) I didn't know what I was talking about and b) didn't know enough about business/economics to have an opinion.

I may not follow politics as fervently as you, but I am well aware what was said, how things were twisted, who was ripped to shreds, etc, and glanced through articles from both sides of the debate.

Good to know.

I hope you laughed at your co-worker. She sounds just like Hilary Clinton, back in her eye-rolling "I could have stayed home and baked cookies" days.

 

[DeepGreenEyes]

Y'all...I have been here since 2005. Nearly every time OSG comes around and comments on a topic, it turns into another version of the same thing. Can we *please* accept the fact that nobody here is going to change her mind? It's cool for her to believe what she believes, since she's not insisting we all believe it, too.

Like the seasons, I find these small rituals and rhythms comforting.

 

[Licia]

*snippage*
But men and women both, honestly, have deep-rooted instincts towards cooperation, right alongside our instincts for control, and our sense of relative status. Inflicting ones' will on another human actually is not how "nature wired men." It certainly is how some men-- and some women-- are wired, because we are very variable individuals.

http://www.bendweekly.com/Living/6059.html

Indeed, in a recent paper published in the journal Current Anthropology, University of Arizona anthropologists Steven L. Kuhn and Mary C. Stiner contend that labor division by sex and age is a relatively new human invention.

The archaeological record shows little evidence that Neanderthals (who went extinct roughly 24,000 years ago) divided economic roles by gender, say Kuhn and Stiner.

Instead, everyone - male, female and juvenile - appears to have been involved in the biggest, most important work of the time: the hunting and killing of large terrestrial game.

Actual published article preview: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.10...2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=47698962474307

...Yeah, a skeleton fell outta the closet...Note the pocket protector?

Anyway, I've a sneaking suspicion the party foul occured right about the time when our ancestors realized there were birds and bees. Either ridiculous or biology, it's about time the zealots utlize that concordance for the term free will. It's been, what, 2k years or so? Websters would suffice, methinks.

Misogyny?

*scents fear*

 

[_Stardust]

The bolded bits up there are an example of somewhat common attitudes towards women who choose to stay home and raise children rather than enter the workforce. I was a "professional mother" (stay at home mom) for 12 years. For most of that time, people made comments like the one above - implying that my profession (motherhood) was mindless, boring, unskilled drudgery.

When the drama over Romney's wife not being qualified to comment on economics happened a while back? There was a women I work with who agreed that someone like me (a woman who ran a large household, oversaw the family budget, did volunteer work, and home schooled her children) didn't know enough about "business" to comment on the country's economy. It's "quaint" that I used to be a full time mom, and all well and good that the work I did as a full time mom involved a hell of a lot of CEO-type decisions (I was running a household of 7), but in her mind, because I don't have a 401k to show for it, or a more impressive CV, my views on the economy, politics, or current events are irrelevant. In her mind, women like me "set things back" re: the feminist movement... even though the whole point was for women to have the OPTION of raising a family, or working outside the home, or doing both.

It seems I was misunderstood. I do not like children for long periods of time. I do not like tidying up and making sure that everything runs the way it should. I certainly could not do so for a house of seven. It is boring, to me, that does not mean to say I believe it is boring to everybody.
I did not mean to say that wanting to stay at home was back-sliding. I was trying to say that in the eyes of some, it is, because you want exactly what their mothers and grandmothers were fighting against, as far as they are concerned. Rersonally, as I see it, the point of feminism is that if, as a woman, you want to go out and work you should be able to do so with no discrimination. And if you want to stay at home, providing it is financially possible, then you should equally be able to do so with no discrimination.
People should choose whatever path suits them most, and I would never want to belittle anybody's choices, or 'look down my nose' at somebody.

However, I don't see how the statements 'I would not want to stay at home' and 'I feel it would drive me insane' reflect on my opinion of other people choosing to do so.

 

[Licia]

I was trying to say that in the eyes of some, it is, because you want exactly what their mothers and grandmothers were fighting against, as far as they are concerned.

Dear Eyes of Some,

I would thoroughly urge you to read up on warfare, ancient and modern. Wars are rarely won with a full frontal assault. Techniques like flanking and charging from the rear have been proven to be successful despite ratio disparities.

We already know what happens when we reach for the atom bombs.

Thank-you and fuck off,

Licia

 

[Edith_UK]

(edit sorry my phone is mashing my posts for some unknown reason)

 

[Curious_in_Cali]

After reading through this thread, I wanted to say that in my experience self hatred seems to be more common with women than men. I think that has been the most toxic form of misogyny I have felt/seen color my world in the ripples of hate and anger it tends to cause. So, in that sense, unfortunately I agree that women are also guilty of it at times too.

The way that I understand it is that the feminist movement was/is about gaining something for women, not taking anything away. The key being that the playing field is leveled so that we all have the same choices while maintaining the freedom to chose them. It is an important milestone to work towards for humanity that I am deeply grateful to so many who continue to work toward it everyday. I am fairly youngish and I know I can still feel the ripples of changes like being able to vote (in things like measuring votes by gender or other demographics), so I am not surprised that we are still working out the more subtle and complex battles of crackling glass ceilings while still honoring the invaluable work of our mothers.

That said, even if we can legally level things out so that all humans have the same choices, hoping that everyone can have tolerance, compassion, and then acceptance for everyone else's choices when they differ so drastically is something else entirely. The emotional challenges limiting the potential of this ideal are so frustratingly palpable in this thread even. It is a nice thought though, that we are no longer separated by categories like male or female and instead just share a much more peer based humane experience. As a bonus, it seems to me that that level of fundamental acceptance would certainly have an effect on the acceptance of BDSM practices/lifestyles... how could it not?

Overall, if I want to maintain my rights to choose to not devote myself to the cruelty of a misogynist, I have to honor the rights of those that willing choose to... don't I?

 

[Netzach]

Try deciding not to use your womb AT ALL, then see what everyone has to say about you as a human being. Please. If you want to sample the most outrageous comments ever just try saying you don't want children just once upon meeting new people. I promise you entertainment.

 

[Netzach]

you certainly make a lot of assumptions about the ideas and beliefs of others. i never stated or implied anything about feminists being hairy lesbians.

i am not a feminist because i do not believe in male/female equality in all things. i also believe the rights of a free/single woman and that of a married/owned woman are very different. for instance i do not recognize the concept of marital rape. i do not believe an owned woman should have the right to open a bank account without the presence and signature of her Owner, etc. i recognize and value the significant differences between male and female. it does not mean i think of men as "better" or as of having higher value, it is a power thing and a primal instinct thing. i appreciate men living as nature wired them as opposed to forcing themselves into the emasculation western society forces upon them.

and yes, this is generalizing. yes, i recognize exceptions to my beliefs in the natural order (which i actually find quite natural as well). in the primal society i envision, a naturally Dominant woman like Netz for instance would be held up as a community leader, a priestess of sorts without the mumbojumbo. but certainly not a norm.

so you see no, i am not a feminist.

Wait, wha?

I'm legally married to a person who, in the eyes of the state is male. Let's pretend I'm not married to a tranny, even just some garden variety submissive guy.

If I wasn't allowed to have a bank account at this time in my life there'd be a whole lot of fucked going on, I'll tell you that.

I'm not inherently opposed to this "and the weird women are the priestesses of woo" ideal - it's very ancient Irish and Viking. That worked really well, till some Church men got the men sold on this idea that they could have whatever they wanted without asking the wise woman first anymore. Did not go well for the non conformists.

It's not a bad ideal for a society based on a non-egalitarian way to solve it's problems, but it's like libterarianism, it doesn't translate to three dimensions very well. There is always going to be a grab for power and stuff, and that's why you have to have a legal system that backs the rights of people without armies or mafia footsoldiers to have power and stuff. It goes past gender, really.

Also, isn't the bottom line of value in a culture based around DNA and biological imperative, making babies babies babies all over the place? At the end of the day isn't the woman who makes mucho babies better in this hierarchy than either you or I?

 

[Netzach]

Y'all...I have been here since 2005. Nearly every time OSG comes around and comments on a topic, it turns into another version of the same thing. Can we *please* accept the fact that nobody here is going to change her mind? It's cool for her to believe what she believes, since she's not insisting we all believe it, too.

Absolutely, this.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Let me just say that saying someone, or a group of someones, is "guilty of self-hate" is a very problematic way of framing the issue.