Female power! At the least, what is feminism to you?

[KillerMuffin]

I don't want to see sources, backed up evidence, or any cutting and pasting. Quote if you must, but short and to the point. I want your own words, your own vision.

Feminism means different things to different people. Just like pornography and large as it modifies penis. There are definite feminist camps, groups of people who believe the same things and are very vocal about it. I tend to think of feminists more along the lines of just like Americans with a vast, silent majority.

So, that all in mind, what's a feminist to you? What do you think feminism is? If you like, do you have any ideas of what feminism is not?


A nice, neutral topic for the day, no?

 

[Freya]

I don't want to see sources, backed up evidence, or any cutting and pasting. Quote if you must, but short and to the point. I want your own words, your own vision.

Feminism means different things to different people. Just like pornography and large as it modifies penis. There are definite feminist camps, groups of people who believe the same things and are very vocal about it. I tend to think of feminists more along the lines of just like Americans with a vast, silent majority.

So, that all in mind, what's a feminist to you? What do you think feminism is? If you like, do you have any ideas of what feminism is not?


A nice, neutral topic for the day, no?

Yes, I can see this remaining a nicely neutral, controversy free thread - especially once Frimost gets here to offer his opinions.

I'll need a bit of time to put mine into words - I have a fairly jumbled view of feminism. It's revolves around the concept of all genders being equal - not one better or more privileged than the other. But in some ways, I'm a bit old fashioned - I like my men to be men.

 

[P. B. Walker]

Isn't feminism about women not wanting to have sex?

PBW

 

[sheath]

Feminism is all about having choices.

I think being a feminist is all about choices.

If someone chooses to go the route of breaking through the glass ceiling, go for it. If someone chooses to fight for higher pay, for more sexual and medical rights, for equality...go for it.

However, if a woman chooses to be a loving wife, stay at home with the kids, have supper on the table for her man every night and focus solely on his pleasure and not her own personal gain, that's fine too.

Being a strong woman making choices for yourself is the important part.

It seems that often feminists are seen as being "stronger" women than their more "vanilla" counterparts when it comes to social, economic, and various other issues.

But the fact is, the woman who CHOOSES to stay home, who CHOOSES to do what she believes is right...

Instead of jumping on the proverbial bra-burning bandwagon...

In my opinion is the stronger woman.

S.

 

[sheath]

*****bracing for the plethora of attacks*******

 

[intrigued]

I'm still sorting out this feminism stuff. I like to act like a lady and be treated like a lady because I am a lady. It does not mean that I can't do traditional "manly" kinds of things, I can. But I freely admit that if there is a man around that can do it for me, (especially if he can do it better than I can) I'll nab him in a skinny minute.
I like men to act like men and I will treat them like men. I guess what I really believe in most is treating people like people, with the respect they deserve and earn. If a woman does a better job of something, so be it. If a man does, so be it. I think we are pretty much equals as human beings, where the distinctions lie is whether or not we do something deserving of distinction.

I don't think that strong/independant/outspoken women should be labeled as feminist any more than a man that is emotionally strong enough to express his feelings (or his softer side) or an understanding/acceptance and appreciation of these women should be called a feminist.

 

[Olivianna]

Feminism, to me, is about re-reading and deconstructing prevailing discourses in order to de-naturalize what appears "natural." This process seeks to understand and reconfigure notions about gender as well as those of race, class, ethnicity, nationalism, etc., and thus undermines dominant themes of present and historical discourses. At the same time, feminism is about reclaiming a spot in the hierarchy - if we do away with the supposed positions of power/the hierarchy (as Postmodernism proposes to do), then the authorial voice available traditionally to certain men will be denied to those who are only now having the chance to assume and assert it. Many have been so quick to jump on the Pomo bandwagon, but it is interesting to note the emergence of Postmodernism exactly during the emergence of the civil rights and women's movements - so, does white male patriarchy get the last laugh after all?

 

[MissVictoria]

There are two main ways that I view femanism.

1. Women who are proud to be women. These aren't neccesarily active in political pursuits, they are simply proud. Femanism for them is a sisterhood, or a clique of some sort. I tend to view them as women who have never gotten past a highschool mentality.

2. Feminazis. Angry manhating women, who feel that somehow they have been trod upon by the male dominated society. There is enough hate in the world, I feel sorry for these. If they opened their eyes to the good as well as the bad, perhaps they would realize that women don't have it as bad off as they scream they do.

Of course, I wish to state first off that I do not believe ALL femanists are so easily stereotyped. And while I believe that at one time there was a need for a femanist movement, I believe that that day has passed. I am not a femanist, and would consider myself an anti-femanist. Many femanists would take away for me what it is to be a woman.

 

[KillerMuffin]

My take on feminism actually has nothing to do with a man's behavior towards his manhood or how he feels about himself or acts as a man. I think men can be feminist and they can be a man's man at the same time. They can have attitudes that put women equal with them on the power structure and in the social playing field.

For instance, a man can open a door for me and I'll reward such manners with a smile and a friendly thank you. I don't think a man has to be female to be a feminist just as I don't have to be male to be a masculinist. A man should conduct himself as he feels comfortable in his own skin.

For me, feminism isn't about changing gender roles to fit a concept. Feminism is about changing attitudes toward gender roles to fit a concept of equality and respect. A man doesn't have to cry at An Affair to Remember and a woman doesn't have to have a job for them to both be feminist. They can do it, if that's their choice, but they don't have to. That's anti-feminism.

To me, feminism is defined by two words: equality and respect. When men and women both recognize that the genders should have equal opportunity at whatever and when men and women both respect the genders, the choices that we each make, and the thought behind those choices, then we have the ideal feminist world.

It seems severe to some people at times because some women want to change the language from the male dominated terminology and change the industries that historically exploit women and objectify them. In some cases, I agree, in others, I don't. I didn't like being called a serviceman when I was in. It is a little hostile to women, it holds implicit implications of "not good enough." History changed to herstory and women changed to womyn is something I think is ridiculous. I think that there's going overboard sometimes.

So, basically, I'm a staunch feminist by my own definition. I firmly believe in equal opportunity for all to make what they will of their lives. I fanatically believe in respect for everyone's choices, lives, and thoughts. Respect is earned by dint of how we behave, not by thing inherent in our physical bodies or other things beyond our control like station at birth, color, and appearance.

Amazing how I can boil an ism down to two words.

 

[sunstruck]

To me it's about the right to choose. I think even choosing to be an at home mom is just as important to the femminist cause than choosing to be a doctor.

I think it's about equality but not sameness. I think this message often gets lost in the women can to anything men can do movement. Yes we can, but we don't have to.

That's what it means to me, probably a moderate femminist at best.

On the other side I think extreme feminism is largely, though not totally at fault for the break down of family and the disasterous problems this country has with it's youth.

Another great idea taken too far and ulitmately ruined.

 

[medjay]

A feminist is a woman who is able to beat me up.

 

[Lancecastor]

Isn't feminism about women not wanting to have sex?

PBW

No, it's about not wanting to have sex with you.

Ha!

I'd prefer we were all secular humanists, myself.

Lance

 

[sigh]

Equal in terms of opportunity, I'll accept, but really, KM, for the most part I can toss equality out of the loop and be quite content with cleanly separate, mutual respect.

See, I have no desire to be a man's equal, and even less for a man to be mine. I am different from a man in many, many ways and no matter how much he cries or opens himself to his softer side, he'll never be my equal in things feminine. And no matter how hard I strive to lead my little family, I'll never be a man's equal in masculinity.

And that's quite all right with me. It's biology, after all. There's no point in railing against reality.

For me, a feminist strives for respect when respect is earned, and offers deserved respect in return, irregardless of the sex of the person involved.

 

[Freya]

I think that the basic concept of feminism was fine and dandy, and then twisted to fit individual agendas and views, and now has become a bit of a mess really.

The idea that, as a female, I am able to make my own choices in life is very appealing to me. The idea that, if I'm just as good as, or better than, a man at something, I will be entitled to the same rewards and promotions as he, I like. The idea that I can opt to be either a stay at home mother, or the President of the US (chosen because either are unlikely for me) is a good one.

But, the idea that rules will be changed, qualifications will be downgraded, or bars will be lowered so that I can do what men do, is inherently repugnant to me. If I want to be a fireman, I want to do it knowing that I can do just what the men do - not knowing that I am one because they had to make the test easier for me to pass. If I can't pass the test, how can I expect to gain the same rewards he does for the same job - the job is no longer the same because it was made different to fit my weaknesses. I think that femisinists who believe that women should be allowed the same opportunities as men, while simutaneously stating that standards should be lowered for them to gain access to those opportunities are dangerous - not only to legitimate feminists but to everyone.

I watched a TV show once on the differences between men and women. It did studies, ran tests, and was done very scientifically. It showed, for example, the truth behind the theory that men are directionally impaired. It proved that, for the most part, women are more nurturing and men are more the "bring home the bacon" type. Of course some feminists protested against the study being done - because to them men and women should be considered exactly equal - which is total hogwash. They discussed women who applied for various "traditionally" masculine type jobs, ie: firefighters. Because of so many women suing after being rejected from this type of work, a company in CA somehwere decided to videotape the tests that a particular woman did - assuming that she might sue if she didn't pass, and was rejected. She couldn't lift the ladder, she couldn't carry the weight or do many of the other things that men were "supposed" to do to pass these tests. so the feminist that they interviewed regarding this said that the bar should have been lowered for her, to take into account the weaknesses of being female - which directly contradicts every message they have sent since this movement began. Her theory was, that if the woman was unable to carry a person out of a burning building, she could grab them by the ankles and drag them out. This statement was what started my movement towards the view that some very well respected feminists were dangerous. I weigh 175 pounds, and if I'm in a burning building on the 10th floor, I do not want some woman who didnt' pass the basic test dragging me down the stairs by my ankles. I want someone with enough strength to carry me - I don't care if they're female, male, white, black, green - as long as they have the necessary strength.

If you are equally as capable as any other, you should have the same opportunites as they do, male or female. If you are not, then nothing should be changed to suit that. There are differences between men and women - equality does not equal sameness.

 

[Ishmael]

Feminism?

Damn, this is tough Killer.

My concept is that it is the right to be feminine and pursue career goals. Be those goals in some professional field, or blue collar work, or even a home maker. That no career path should be derided by either men or other women. My sole exception to this is combat arms. (A subject you and I have discussed in the past.)

I do not subscribe necessarily to the equal pay for equal work theory particularly for professional and managerial positions. (And my arguments concerning that are in at least three other threads.)

I do not feel that anyone, man or woman, should have special legislation or benefit. Nor do I feel that anyone should attain promotion based on any attribute other than job skill and suitability for the position.

I believe that femininity is the counterpart to masculinity. Neither superior to the other. Complementary attributes meted out by mother nature.

I believe that in our drive for equality we have forgotten that man and women are bio-chemically hard wired in certain ways and that these ways are complimentary if we chose to understand the differences. But these bio-chemical make up's are by no means equal. The brain chemicals are too different.

There, that should start a 'food fight'.

Ishmael

 

[RosevilleCAguy]

Personally, I have an intense dislike for any words ending in "ism", "ist" etc.

People are people. We are all different. That is part of the charm. Broad-based classifcations either for purposes of exclusion or empowerment are silly.

As regards "feminism"specifically, I find it ironic that "feminists" will fight like hell to ensure that clubs that have an exclusively male membership are forced to admit females, then fight equally hard to ensure that exclusively female institutions remain female.

 

[seXieleXie]

KM, i know you posted this because you wanted to give me an anurism and i'm just letting you know that it's not gonna work.

i'm going to leave this thread and stop reading people's posts. i really am. really. i am.



bye now.

 

[sunstruck]

I do not subscribe necessarily to the equal pay for equal work theory particularly for professional and managerial positions. (And my arguments concerning that are in at least three other threads.)

Could you just give me a brief synopsis please?

 

[Olivianna]

*Tip-toes out of thread because I haven't the time or desire to argue these issues here*

 

[Guest]

 

[Ishmael]

Could you just give me a brief synopsis please?

Of course. Many women opt at some point in their career to begin families. I think that that is their decision and right for them to make when they feel that they want to.

However, given two management candidates. One a man and one a woman. Both equal in abitlities and of approximately the same age. Both in stable marriages. I have the budget to send one to a week long school on management technique. Who do I choose and why?

I choose the man. He will be given the advantage. This is because statistacally the woman will start a family soon. I am going to lose her full focus on the business at hand. She will be taking maternity leave as well. What if that is in the middle of a critical project. One that the companies fortunes may rise or fall on? Also statistically, there is only a 50% cahnce that she will return to the position that I've had to keep open for her during her absence. Futher, there is another 50% chance that she will terminate within the first six months of returning so that she can be a full time mother.

Do I fault her in this? Not at all. However, I do have a business to run and her welfare is secondary to all of the other employees that depend on the business for their families welfare.

Ishmael

 

[Freya]

I choose the man. He will be given the advantage. This is because statistacally the woman will start a family soon. I am going to lose her full focus on the business at hand. She will be taking maternity leave as well. What if that is in the middle of a critical project. One that the companies fortunes may rise or fall on? Also statistically, there is only a 50% cahnce that she will return to the position that I've had to keep open for her during her absence. Futher, there is another 50% chance that she will terminate within the first six months of returning so that she can be a full time mother.

I don't disagree, but what if both are past the "typical" childbearing age? Do you then look at them equally?

 

[seXieleXie]

This is because statistacally the woman will start a family soon. I am going to lose her full focus on the business at hand. She will be taking maternity leave as well.

what if she's a lesbian? or has already had kids? or doesn't plan to have any? or can't? or is in the middle of a divorce?









damn you KM.

 

[Olivianna]

what if she's a lesbian? or has already had kids? or doesn't plan to have any? or can't? or is in the middle of a divorce?









damn you KM.

Just leave. Go. And don't come back.

 

[sunstruck]

So should I include the medical records that state I can not bare children (I would have said sterile but I'm not) I would have an equal shot?