What is feminism?

[ImOnIt]

Feminism has caused a lot of divorces, huh?

On a similar note, feminism is single handedly responsible for the critical shortage of rotissary milking platforms to the south of here.








And crop circles.

 

[intothewoods]

Feminism has caused a lot of divorces, huh?

Nah, it was the gays. Proof.

 

[Keroin]

Nah, it was the gays. Proof.

Whew, I thought Canadians, (that is to say, "communists"), were the culprits.

 

[teknight]

What is feminism?
I think I know what it was prior to women getting the right to vote and even what it was in the bra-burning era of the 60’s but what is it in 2010, in the first world?
Do we still need feminism?

What about men? Do they get a fair shake all the time? Has the pendulum swung too far?
How equal are we these days?

At the risk of repeating an existing post (too many posts, haven't gone through them all yet: feminism as a single standing socio-philosophical entity splintered in the 80s. In other words, there is no longer a single feminist movement with its own spectrum from the extreme fringes to its mildest forms.

From a purely practical standpoint, I recently read an econ research article dealing with wage discrepancies in the US- women get paid 80 cents for every dollar a man makes (or some such amount) for the same job: they pointed out that women take maternal leave, etc, which prevents them from being "fully employed" thus, on average, they earn less. I found it interesting...I don't think it had an anti-feminist tone, it was research, but, if it's true, then women are earning as much as men, just not for as long a period of time...Of course, that's ignoring a bunch of details and does not apply to all.

 

[JMohegan]

From a purely practical standpoint, I recently read an econ research article dealing with wage discrepancies in the US- women get paid 80 cents for every dollar a man makes (or some such amount) for the same job: they pointed out that women take maternal leave, etc, which prevents them from being "fully employed" thus, on average, they earn less. I found it interesting...I don't think it had an anti-feminist tone, it was research, but, if it's true, then women are earning as much as men, just not for as long a period of time...Of course, that's ignoring a bunch of details and does not apply to all.

When calculating wage disparities, some studies try to correct for maternity leave, time off to care for children, and years spent in part time work. Others don't. Without a link to the study you mention, it's tough to comment on its validity or implications.

But the need to make those corrections highlights the obvious point that women bear the brunt of child-rearing and other family obligations in our society. Leaving aside intangible issues relating to proclivity or personal preference, from a purely economic standpoint this puts women at an enormous disadvantage. Less time spent in paid work means more than just lost wages. It also means less seniority (as you noted) and smaller pensions.

So no matter what your study says, even if the methodology is flawless, adjustments for time off perfectly done, and the clear conclusion reached that there's no material old-fashioned "she's a woman so I don't have to pay her as much" bias remaining, we as a society still have a significant, gender-based, equity problem. The problem being that much of the work performed by women is not financially compensated, and potential remedies are more than a bit complicated.

 

[JMohegan]

i have to agree. and it has caused a lot of divorces where the man gets royally screwed.

I agree that feminism facilities divorce. As an uncle, I consider this to be a very good thing.

My niece is currently a happy college kid. But if she one day finds herself married to a guy who treats her like shit or routinely empties the family bank account on gambling sprees, I don't want her to be trapped by necessity. I want her to have the education, means, and wherewithal to walk out the door and never look back.

As for men getting "royally screwed" in divorce, I don't buy it. You sound like my neighbor, who walked out on his wife and kids after taking up with some chick half his age.... and then started bitchin' about the money he had to pay to the woman who had been his family's free-of-charge cook, chauffeur, nanny, shopper, laundress, housekeeper, and stay-at-home parent for nearly two decades.

 

[teknight]

Going through 1-50

Didn't wanna hijack the thread by answering each message individually, esp. as the coalesce into a theme, so, here I go. See me below, in red...and I apologize for not making a more cogent point- this thread is a bit allover the place.

Yeah, the large F feminism irks me, to be honest, and I think it does more harm than good.

But there needs to be some intellectual debate on the matter even if it does become academic to the point of boring you to tears.

I've experienced honest-to-cod

HAHHAHAHAH. Honest-to-cod!

... just saying a little common sense wouldn't have hurt.

Good point.

I sorta like the small 'f' big 'F' comparison.
'feminism' is the right to equal chances without the bias of your sex or associated propagandist connotations being a factor.
'Feminism' is not about evening the scales, it is swinging radically them to the other side using the past as justification. Useful in the rare occasion, but for the most part I think it undermines things a bit.

Nice point...but I think Feminism is too fractured for just that right now. I mean, if Feminism is up against a Western centric, male oriented world view, it needs to work on a lot of fronts...

I'm just not ever going to change the way I dress out of fear over what might happen, because to me that's no way to live. It's not about fashion. I'm just not going to come from a place of fear. I'm sure you see it as just being prepared. It just seems excessive to me. If it's that dangerous, I'll just give up and move.
You undermine your point with what you say below:
I've lived in a lot of cities and have done fine with staying in a group, staying in well-lit areas, keeping my wits about me, etc. At this point, if something is going to happen, it will probably be for money, in which case I'll just turn it over. Or, sadly, a stray bullet, which there's nothing I can do about anyway, other than not go out too late (which I don't do, mostly because I like my sleep!). The violence that comes out of the drinking/partying scene? I think if you stay away from confrontational fucked up people, you'll be just fine. I never once had a problem when I was younger.
No offense, but your subjective experience doesn't apply to all. Your safety in the past doesn't secure anyone now.

Yes, it's very much about being prepared and knowing my environment. If I go biking, I wear a helmet. If I hike in the woods here, I carry bear spray. If I go to the beach, I put on sunscreen. Are those precautions based on fear or common sense?
Now if I were to go out to a club here, I wouldn't worry about how I dressed no matter what. A club in Vancouver, in Gastown? Well then, yes, I'm going to put a little more thought into things. Fear doesn't enter into it, preparation does.
My original point was simply that when it comes to safety, women need to own theirs - which you've illustrated with the part in bold.

Again, you make a valid point- life is ultimately random- you don't know what's gonna happen next. We're lulled into a sense of security because stuff hasn't happened yet (or we developed anxiety disorders 'cause of it), but you should try to be reasonable prepared.

I know of one such situation where a woman 5 foot tall and maybe 100 pounds dripping wet was working as an access agent for a contract security company. She had nothing to back her up except the uniform she wore. No firearm, no pepper spray and no handcuffs. A firearm would give her more equality against someone, but it's rare that contract security personnel are ever issued firearms because of the high insurance premiums.
She was hired because the law (EEOC) required it.

She was hired because she'd do the job for cheap. Her lack of training, etc. would point out the fact that she's basically just a body with a pulse, a visual deterrent to any would be non-professional robber.
A determined thief would find a way to get through a squad of Navy Seals, if need be (other things equal).

Ah, but the 100 pound woman is an obvious target. Someone with more weight, maybe some more height, you would at least look more convincing in the uniform. Now, if someone is going to confront you, that's not always easy, even the trained individual. Often you're caught off guard (sorry for the pun). But, that 100 pound security guard, an obvious and easy prey to someone who happens to be looking.

See my point above

I love how the discussion of feminism usually evolves towards size, and safety.

Short answer to the original question, no things aren't equal. They are just more insidious than before.
I don't believe in a halcyon age.

Gender binaries suck.
I'll be a dick here and ask: what else have you got?
I am all for the fall of the patriarchal western power over nonsense.
But I like life as it is, what with me being a Western white male!

Two points to the lady in red.
Everybody's equal, it's just that some are more equal than others.
A bit of self defense training can offset some of the bulk of a big man, but men and women will never be equal because they aren't equal. You can push for equality where playing fields are a little more level.
But don't start adding that women and men should be equal everywhere. Never gonna happen.
And to answer the OP rant - try sitting down every time you have to pee, then complain about that we pay less at the door. Boo hoo. We pay for it in the bathrooms. And the fact that we are hit on constantly by the asswipes that think because they paid an extra tenspot at the door that they are God's gift to the genepool.

Yeah, there will never be equality with that attitude.

Gotta elaborate this statement.. equal where? Globally?

I agree- although I'd imagine the answer comes after post 50...will get there.

 

[teknight]

Sublimation...?

It'd seem that the subject comes down to responsibility and assuming it.
In a male run world, women are not and cannot be responsible...however, it's not up to me to goad you into finding responsibility, much as I'd like to be goaded to be more responsible at times. Maybe F/feminism is letting us do just that- acknowledge and agree to bear whatever responsibilities we are faced with?

 

[intothewoods]

teknight - My subjective experience doesn't have any meaning for any other individual nor does it have any statistical relevance. We all make trade offs on freedom for safety. My point was just that the idea of dressing for the possibility of danger doesn't seem worth it to me. That's just my feeling.

On the topic of statistics and violence to women, I think (hard to remember at this point) that I just wanted to differentiate between rape, random violence and violence as part of robbery/mugging.

 

[Netzach]

I agree that feminism facilities divorce. As an uncle, I consider this to be a very good thing.

My niece is currently a happy college kid. But if she one day finds herself married to a guy who treats her like shit or routinely empties the family bank account on gambling sprees, I don't want her to be trapped by necessity. I want her to have the education, means, and wherewithal to walk out the door and never look back.

As for men getting "royally screwed" in divorce, I don't buy it. You sound like my neighbor, who walked out on his wife and kids after taking up with some chick half his age.... and then started bitchin' about the money he had to pay to the woman who had been his family's free-of-charge cook, chauffeur, nanny, shopper, laundress, housekeeper, and stay-at-home parent for nearly two decades.

What about H, who was basically the "mom" in his family, with a dysfunctional wife who did none of the above, worked part time because it was "too stressful" to work full time, and still gets the benefit of the doubt?

I agree that generally the "men getting screwed" meme is bullshit but not always.

 

[intothewoods]

What about H, who was basically the "mom" in his family, with a dysfunctional wife who did none of the above, worked part time because it was "too stressful" to work full time, and still gets the benefit of the doubt?

I agree that generally the "men getting screwed" meme is bullshit but not always.

When did they get divorced? From everything I've read, the standard today is to award joint custody. Of course that's not the rule across the board. It's just become more the general rule these days, like awarding custody to the mother used to be.

 

[richard_daily]

When calculating wage disparities, some studies try to correct for maternity leave, time off to care for children, and years spent in part time work. Others don't. Without a link to the study you mention, it's tough to comment on its validity or implications.

I'm not sure where you're from; but in the states, there isn't generally paid maternity leave - not for mothers, and certainly not for fathers. You can take vacation time for it, but for as much as people want to put their boots on people's backs about abortion being murder and all that nonsense, there sure isn't a lot of respect for women (and men) and their children after birth.

Hell, Botswana gets better maternity leave than the U.S. does...

http://www.apesma.asn.au/women/maternity_leave_around_the_world.asp

 

[JMohegan]

What about H, who was basically the "mom" in his family, with a dysfunctional wife who did none of the above, worked part time because it was "too stressful" to work full time, and still gets the benefit of the doubt?

I agree that generally the "men getting screwed" meme is bullshit but not always.

It sounds like he had a raw deal in the marriage.

What do you mean when you say his ex got "the benefit of the doubt"? Are you talking about custody or visitation arrangements?

I'm not sure where you're from; but in the states, there isn't generally paid maternity leave - not for mothers, and certainly not for fathers. You can take vacation time for it, but for as much as people want to put their boots on people's backs about abortion being murder and all that nonsense, there sure isn't a lot of respect for women (and men) and their children after birth.

Hell, Botswana gets better maternity leave than the U.S. does...

http://www.apesma.asn.au/women/maternity_leave_around_the_world.asp

Not vacation time, FMLA time off - an option for both parents, at many companies though not all.

I'm in the states, east coast.

The problem with paid maternity leave is that employees who don't have newborns effectively subsidize the raising of other people's kids. Which is nice for new parents, but tends to piss off everybody else. I don't see this as a respect issue; I see it as an economic fairness issue, and it's tough.

 

[richard_daily]

Not vacation time, FMLA time off - an option for both parents, at many companies though not all.

I'm in the states, east coast.

The problem with paid maternity leave is that employees who don't have newborns effectively subsidize the raising of other people's kids. Which is nice for new parents, but tends to piss off everybody else. I don't see this as a respect issue; I see it as an economic fairness issue, and it's tough.

Yeah, FMLA is 12 weeks unpaid... that's pretty much the worst maternity leave in the civilized world (and most "uncivilized" parts).

So are you saying that society shouldn't support families? Without families, there wouldn't be a society.

I'm all for people who choose not to have children. They should have support in other ways... but take a look at that link I provided. It's pretty sad that we literally have some of the worst maternity leave in the world. I think that speaks volumes about our priorities.

 

[bridgeburner]

Re: FMLA --

What about a bonus? It would be whatever amount is deemed for family leave and if you don't end up taking the time, then you get the money in a lump sum at the end of the year.


Of course some idiot somewhere will start up some shit about promoting childlessness.

 

[teknight]

Re: FMLA --

What about a bonus? It would be whatever amount is deemed for family leave and if you don't end up taking the time, then you get the money in a lump sum at the end of the year.


Of course some idiot somewhere will start up some shit about promoting childlessness.

You don't really wanna offer that kind of incentive- how much is your potentially unborn child worth to you?

 

[bridgeburner]

So are you saying that society shouldn't support families? Without families, there wouldn't be a society.

I'm all for the bonus program I mentioned above and then good, well-funded public child care and education.

I am heartily opposed to laws, rules and policies that seek to disenfranchise those who choose not to procrete in favor of those who too often expect everyone else to take responsibility for their choice to have children.

 

[BiBunny]

I'm all for the bonus program I mentioned above and then good, well-funded public child care and education.

I am heartily opposed to laws, rules and policies that seek to disenfranchise those who choose not to procrete in favor of those who too often expect everyone else to take responsibility for their choice to have children.

This. Yes.

 

[bridgeburner]

You don't really wanna offer that kind of incentive- how much is your potentially unborn child worth to you?

Why not?

I like babies and am fiercely protective of the children in my family and in my classroom, but however sentimental I become, ultimately, the decision to have a child should be based in no small part on whether or not one has the resources to adequately provide for the raising of that child.

Too often people spawn with no more or less consideration than the average salmon. If an extra ten grand can really induce you not to have a child, then you probably weren't ready to be a parent to begin with.

However, if ten grand can keep people who aren't really ready yet to be parents from having children for a year or two until they ARE set, then that's better for children and families and society all around.

 

[teknight]

I'm all for the bonus program I mentioned above and then good, well-funded public child care and education.

I am heartily opposed to laws, rules and policies that seek to disenfranchise those who choose not to procrete in favor of those who too often expect everyone else to take responsibility for their choice to have children.

How are you disenfranchised by FMLA? Because parents need time off from their jobs to cope with having a new life brought about? Are you saying that any one job's contribution to society (which you can actually measure in dollars and cents) is more important than the potential contribution of a kid? I'll grant you this: the job is concrete, right now, in your face reality, and if you have to pick up the "slack" from someone else, it sucks... but why should the company pay you extra money for not doing anything (which is exactly what happens if you don't have a kid)? Why is the owner paying for your inaction, on top of paying for other people's choice (if indeed their kids are nothing but burdens to everyone else).

What further confuses me is that you advocate good public education, which is money I'm spending on a bunch of people's kids (maybe my own, maybe not). Why are 6-18 y.o.s worth more than a newborn? If anything, the newborn's potential is virtually limitless, hence their expected value is basically infinite (for all intents and purposes)...as they mature, their potential is realized, and as such, it drops...their "value", for lack of a better word, lessens. Yes, I just said a newborn is worth more than someone older than they are. Frankly, given a society where capital accumulates at any given rate, a newborn now will contribute more to society than a newborn who was given birth to n years prior. Simply put: if they work the same amount of hours over their lifetimes (and the kid born now will live longer than the kid from yesteryear, too), because the kid of today has access to better technology (as a result of capital accumulation) will produce more and thus contribute more.

$$$$$$
Anywho, what would feminism or Feminism think of my Utilitarian, dollars and cents approach to the issue?

 

[satindesire]

What is feminism?

The fact that I can sit here and post my thoughts freely and be respected and conversed with intellectually even though I'm nearly naked in my avatar.

That's badass right there, it is.

/end thread

 

[teknight]

What is feminism?

The fact that I can sit here and post my thoughts freely and be respected and conversed with intellectually even though I'm nearly naked in my avatar.

That's badass right there, it is.

/end thread

Would you be a dear and get me a sammich?

/thread's back on!

 

[satindesire]

Would you be a dear and get me a sammich?

/thread's back on!

No.








That's feminism too!

 

[teknight]

No.








That's feminism too!

You are 100% right. Thread's still back on, though.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I have something pithy to say about hetero marriage being the state's vested interest in procreation (As per DOM's lameass pisspoor attempt to defend prop8) versus those same people's absolute lack of interest in what happens to those lives once they've been procreated.

But i seem to be too braindead tonight to come up with it.