What is feminism?

[Kojote]

I won't address what's been going on in Germany. I'll leave that to you.

In the U.S., the fight for women's rights wasn't just a "pretty good idea" when it started. It was (and is) a critical effort to address grave injustices, and insure the fundamental integrity of our democracy.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Thomas Jefferson, 1776. Nice words, but unfortunately the signers of that document took the "men" thing literally.

American women did not obtain voting rights - the most basic of rights for a citizen - until 144 years later.

We didn't even start getting serious about insuring equal pay for equal work until 1963, and we're still fine tuning the details on that legislation today. See the Ledbetter Act, signed into law by Obama.

The penal code of every single state in this country permitted a marital exemption to rape until 1975, when laws slowly began to change - one at a time, state by state - a process that took until 1993 to be complete. Fucking 1993. And even now, there are states in which the penalty for spousal rape is less severe than the penalty for an identical crime perpetrated by a stranger.

I could go on, but presumably I've made my point. I don't see feminism as the embodiment of some vague notion about everybody following his or her heart. I see it as a series of tangible efforts to redress serious wrongs in our society. Wrongs that exist precisely because of the distinctions that you decry.

I didn't blame feminism to be wrong.
I just accuse it to be onesided.

One of the initial questions was if feminism might have been taken too far.
I do think so.

Whenever I hear (or read) someone muttering about unequal pay for women I can't help to ask for all those other people who get paid less well because they don't have the lobby or any kind of lever to get fight for their rights.

What is it?
Is it a kind of ‘injustice appears everywhere but women go first in getting their rights’?
Like women go first to the lifeboats…?

Where’s the fucking difference between you (as a woman) getting discriminated and lil Igor (as a Eastern European in Germany) or Pablo (as a Mexican in the US) getting discriminated?
Is it more severe to discriminate a woman?

Of course there are things that men don’t have to face often.
And evolving to the modern age from a patriarchal society brought women in a disadvantageous position.
Therefore I stated that feminism was a good idea.

But looking at the progress of social development I think it is time to include others into the picture.
That is including cross-dressers or transgender people into the group feminism fights for.
And ultimately even men.

It doesn’t mean women get excluded. But the fight for equal rights and more safety shouldn’t be an exclusive women thing anymore. It should be an everybody’s thing.

(I have to apologize [again] for phrasing a bit difficult. It’s pretty hard to express this complex thoughts he right way, but I feel it helps me getting deeper into this English thing)

 

[Netzach]

I didn't blame feminism to be wrong.
I just accuse it to be onesided.

One of the initial questions was if feminism might have been taken too far.
I do think so.

Whenever I hear (or read) someone muttering about unequal pay for women I can't help to ask for all those other people who get paid less well because they don't have the lobby or any kind of lever to get fight for their rights.

What is it?
Is it a kind of ‘injustice appears everywhere but women go first in getting their rights’?
Like women go first to the lifeboats…?

Where’s the fucking difference between you (as a woman) getting discriminated and lil Igor (as a Eastern European in Germany) or Pablo (as a Mexican in the US) getting discriminated?
Is it more severe to discriminate a woman?

Because Paloma and Irina are always going to get even MORE of a raw deal, they have to deal with Pablo and Igor's shit on top of whatever he's dealing with.

Most women concerned with equality recognize other forms of oppression and that we're interconnected, but are not willing to be shoved under the bus over and over. Women fought for peace, racial equality, GLBT equality, for as long as those issues have been alive - and somehow the issues facing *women* in those subcultures were always sidelined till "after the revolution, darling" until they actually decided they were done waiting.

I agree, though, that gender is a much more complicated animal than simple XX XY chromosomes, and the recognition of transwomen as women, and sometimes more vulnerable than XX born women, is necessary in feminist thinking, likewise I think re-examining masculinity and the role of transmen in that process - also important. I'm more of a Butlerian than any other academic strain.

That doesn't make me OK with every weekend crossdresser claiming an "inner lesbian" because he likes panties whining for some reason.

 

[YourCaptor]

A tangent

What would feminism be in a collective culture were individuality and individual success is not a motivator.

 

[ImOnIt]

A tangent

What would feminism be in a collective culture were individuality and individual success is not a motivator.

What would feminism be in a culture WHERE individuality and individual success are not motivators?

Do I have that right? I think your answer may exist firmly in the realm of the imaginary.

 

[Xelebes]

I was

But, turns out you were right all along. Shoe fu, who knew??

Ah, cock-sparring.

 

[Etoile]

I didn't blame feminism to be wrong.
I just accuse it to be onesided.

One of the initial questions was if feminism might have been taken too far.
I do think so.

Whenever I hear (or read) someone muttering about unequal pay for women I can't help to ask for all those other people who get paid less well because they don't have the lobby or any kind of lever to get fight for their rights.

What is it?
Is it a kind of ‘injustice appears everywhere but women go first in getting their rights’?
Like women go first to the lifeboats…?

Where’s the fucking difference between you (as a woman) getting discriminated and lil Igor (as a Eastern European in Germany) or Pablo (as a Mexican in the US) getting discriminated?
Is it more severe to discriminate a woman?

Of course there are things that men don’t have to face often.
And evolving to the modern age from a patriarchal society brought women in a disadvantageous position.
Therefore I stated that feminism was a good idea.

But looking at the progress of social development I think it is time to include others into the picture.
That is including cross-dressers or transgender people into the group feminism fights for.
And ultimately even men.

It doesn’t mean women get excluded. But the fight for equal rights and more safety shouldn’t be an exclusive women thing anymore. It should be an everybody’s thing.

(I have to apologize [again] for phrasing a bit difficult. It’s pretty hard to express this complex thoughts he right way, but I feel it helps me getting deeper into this English thing)

Your English is fine, no worries.

The suggestion that men or cross-dressers should be included in feminism is preposterous. It's about male privilege. The cross-dresser still gets paid more than his female co-workers. And men? Why on earth would men need someone to fight for them? The dominant group doesn't need to be defended from discrimination.

Obviously nobody should be discriminated against. But women make up HALF of the world's population. Working for women's equality is going to serve a whole lot more people than working for the equality of a smaller minority group. (And yes, I include gays and lesbians in that - although I feel marriage rights are more important than equal pay for equal work.)

 

[Kojote]

Because Paloma and Irina are always going to get even MORE of a raw deal, they have to deal with Pablo and Igor's shit on top of whatever he's dealing with.

Most women concerned with equality recognize other forms of oppression and that we're interconnected, but are not willing to be shoved under the bus over and over. Women fought for peace, racial equality, GLBT equality, for as long as those issues have been alive - and somehow the issues facing *women* in those subcultures were always sidelined till "after the revolution, darling" until they actually decided they were done waiting.

I agree, though, that gender is a much more complicated animal than simple XX XY chromosomes, and the recognition of transwomen as women, and sometimes more vulnerable than XX born women, is necessary in feminist thinking, likewise I think re-examining masculinity and the role of transmen in that process - also important. I'm more of a Butlerian than any other academic strain.

That doesn't make me OK with every weekend crossdresser claiming an "inner lesbian" because he likes panties whining for some reason.

Nice Point with Irina and Paloma...

You ARE right Netzach. But I think I am, too.
People who are willing to oppress women are most often also willing to oppress others. They lack the fundamental respect.

I feel that the revolution (I like the image you presented) should not be fragmented.
Either I feel the respect and display it to everybody or I do not.
And I think if more people start to think this way the problem could begin to vanish...

My personal experiences may have spoiled the picture a bit. I admit that.
Being a good listener and getting educated by mom and grandmother without a father I often end up sitting with the girl on the coffee table.
But I also sat with the boys often.
And overhearing the complaining of both groups sometimes gives me the creeps.

But to be honest the girls are worse.
On one hand they complain about unequal treatment and on the other hand they insist on getting treated favorably whenever it is beneficial for them.
That’s not fair. It’s opportunistic…

This may appear to be the least part of the feminism thing to complain about, but I feel it is part of the sole problem.
I do not have any problem with treating women favorably. I even like it.
I love to hold the door open or adjust the chair.
I like the difference between men and women. Quite a lot… ;-)

But I don’t want to get crucified for being a man.


On the big picture there are problems to be solved. I also admit that.
There are employers who know they can get through with paying women less than men.
There are men who treat women like third class citizens.
These people are assholes and deserve a beating. But they don’t deserve it for their attitude towards women ALONE. They almost always deserve it for their general attitude towards others.

Whenever there are differences between people somebody will try to exploit them.
It’s not a chauvinistic world or society. It’s always chauvinistic persons.

 

[Etoile]

Nice Point with Irina and Paloma...

You ARE right Netzach. But I think I am, too.
People who are willing to oppress women are most often also willing to oppress others. They lack the fundamental respect.

I feel that the revolution (I like the image you presented) should not be fragmented.
Either I feel the respect and display it to everybody or I do not.
And I think if more people start to think this way the problem could begin to vanish...

My personal experiences may have spoiled the picture a bit. I admit that.
Being a good listener and getting educated by mom and grandmother without a father I often end up sitting with the girl on the coffee table.
But I also sat with the boys often.
And overhearing the complaining of both groups sometimes gives me the creeps.

But to be honest the girls are worse.
On one hand they complain about unequal treatment and on the other hand they insist on getting treated favorably whenever it is beneficial for them.
That’s not fair. It’s opportunistic…

This may appear to be the least part of the feminism thing to complain about, but I feel it is part of the sole problem.
I do not have any problem with treating women favorably. I even like it.
I love to hold the door open or adjust the chair.
I like the difference between men and women. Quite a lot… ;-)

But I don’t want to get crucified for being a man.


On the big picture there are problems to be solved. I also admit that.
There are employers who know they can get through with paying women less than men.
There are men who treat women like third class citizens.
These people are assholes and deserve a beating. But they don’t deserve it for their attitude towards women ALONE. They almost always deserve it for their general attitude towards others.

Whenever there are differences between people somebody will try to exploit them.
It’s not a chauvinistic world or society. It’s always chauvinistic persons.

But feminism is almost never about individuals. It's about the system.

 

[Kojote]

Your English is fine, no worries.

The suggestion that men or cross-dressers should be included in feminism is preposterous. It's about male privilege. The cross-dresser still gets paid more than his female co-workers. And men? Why on earth would men need someone to fight for them? The dominant group doesn't need to be defended from discrimination.

Obviously nobody should be discriminated against. But women make up HALF of the world's population. Working for women's equality is going to serve a whole lot more people than working for the equality of a smaller minority group. (And yes, I include gays and lesbians in that - although I feel marriage rights are more important than equal pay for equal work.)

Thanks...
I bolded out what raised a couple of eyebrows.

Ever tried to get the right of custody as a man?
Ever been accused for sexual harassment you didn't perform as a man?

Of course there are thousands of counterexamples.
But what about the privileges of women?
They may be less obvious, but they exist.
Why don't we arrange with all women drop all those privileges of courtesy and all men drop their chauvinistic attitudes?
Who goes first?

You don’t even want those privileges?
So do I. I don’t want to get paid better than any women equally qualified.

It appears to me that some differences are approved (as I mentioned preferably the ones acting in ones favor).
That applies to women and men equally.
It’s all about the differences which are disadvantageous. And the risks which come with being sexually attractive for the ‘strong sex’.
The latter IS out of question. Nobody has the right to harass somebody sexually in any way.
But the first…?

Feminism appears to be a fight for all advantages without giving up the already existent privileges.
That doesn’t apply to the Feminism with the big ‘F’. Surprisingly these women seem to be willing to erase all differences and develop into a different species or race or what.
But the small ‘f’ feminism encountered in everydays small talk every once in a while seems to aim at it, as it appears to me.

That being said I want to clear out again, that I like the differences.
I am even fine with women setting the tone of social interaction. Which they do!
The female perspective in social interaction is much more profound than the male one.
I would even go that far to put women in charge for politics, business and general leadership. They seem to be better suited for this kind of stuff than men.
I would support a matriarchal society based on merit instead of ancestry.

I think the gender differences should probably even get strengthened.
But not at the expense of individual respect and dignity.
And the way things appear to develop at the moment are not even close to being respectful.
If this whole feminism war puts through we will end up with a society where the men are oppressed and start to fight for their rights. How much sense will that make?

Nah… It’s really rather difficult to get the fine points of this expressed.
I fear would have to write tons of words to make my point of view clear enough to be satisfied. And given my tendency to digress often it would get even longer.
Damn…

 

[Kojote]

But feminism is almost never about individuals. It's about the system.

And that's the point I disagree with.
The system gets executed by people and the personal opinion of this people always makes the difference. Be it a judge or a manager...
A female judge will be more likely to sympathize with a female victim and a female manager (or better yet company owner for they set the payment terms) won't be that likely to pay women less well.

Problem is that the system is currently dominated by old males who grew up with different social conventions.
But given the lifespan of humans we already stand at a breaking point here.
And given the important fight for womens rights in the past the system will change. But it has to be a slow change if you don’t plan to assassinate all current leaders.

It’s like bringing up a child.
You do your best in the first ten years and try not to lose influence in the next five years. But if you did everything right won’t be clear till it gets twenty to twenty-five. And if you try to push further when the teen begins to develop its own opinion you will be likely to spoil every early success.


Does that make enough sense and is the example assignable enough to the above context?

 

[where]

I'm basing my opinion on a HIGH degree of exposure, let's just put it that way, and coming to the ivory tower from a working class background. I found so much of the dialogue completely unmoored from the reality that most women live on a daily basis as to be a distraction from helping with it.

we clearly move in very different academic circles. The feminist (and forgive me for not doing the big F thing) academics I know and work with are very much grounded in reality as are international colleagues.

However, I agree that sometimes the theorising makes it seem some of them are totally disconnected, but without it, we would have a really basic and rather crude understanding about gender. There is a danger of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Thanks...
I bolded out what raised a couple of eyebrows.

Ever tried to get the right of custody as a man?
Ever been accused for sexual harassment you didn't perform as a man?
these are always the things that men throw up as female 'priviledge'. Historically women have only had preferential custody in quite recent times and that is for the simple reason that because men earn more than women they have been far less willing to give up employment to become a single parent. Basically men have been hoisted by their own petards

the whole area around sex crimes likewise arouse out of women being male 'property' thus making us objects. Rape wasn't originally a crime against women, it was a crime against the woman's husband/father (and still is in some parts of the world. Because women ended up so objectified and seen as being 'less' they were deemed to be in more need of 'protection' from men, therefore men have consequently cast themselves as 'harrassers'

Despite this it's worth pointing out that (in the UK anyway) rape convictions are extremely low as in the vast majority of cases charges aren't brought.

Of course there are thousands of counterexamples.
But what about the privileges of women?
They may be less obvious, but they exist.
Why don't we arrange with all women drop all those privileges of courtesy and all men drop their chauvinistic attitudes?
Who goes first?
please outline the priviledges I have that men don't

You don’t even want those privileges?
So do I. I don’t want to get paid better than any women equally qualified.

It appears to me that some differences are approved (as I mentioned preferably the ones acting in ones favor).
That applies to women and men equally.
It’s all about the differences which are disadvantageous. And the risks which come with being sexually attractive for the ‘strong sex’.
The latter IS out of question. Nobody has the right to harass somebody sexually in any way.
But the first…?

Feminism appears to be a fight for all advantages without giving up the already existent privileges.

what priviledges... seriously, I'm interested to know what these are
That doesn’t apply to the Feminism with the big ‘F’. Surprisingly these women seem to be willing to erase all differences and develop into a different species or race or what.
But the small ‘f’ feminism encountered in everydays small talk every once in a while seems to aim at it, as it appears to me.

That being said I want to clear out again, that I like the differences.
I am even fine with women setting the tone of social interaction. Which they do!
The female perspective in social interaction is much more profound than the male one.
I would even go that far to put women in charge for politics, business and general leadership. They seem to be better suited for this kind of stuff than men.
I would support a matriarchal society based on merit instead of ancestry.

that's nice of you!

I think the gender differences should probably even get strengthened.
But not at the expense of individual respect and dignity.
And the way things appear to develop at the moment are not even close to being respectful.
If this whole feminism war puts through we will end up with a society where the men are oppressed and start to fight for their rights. How much sense will that make?
it's not a war. men are not oppressed, other than by their own masculine construction

Nah… It’s really rather difficult to get the fine points of this expressed.
I fear would have to write tons of words to make my point of view clear enough to be satisfied. And given my tendency to digress often it would get even longer.
Damn…

my eyebrows were raising up and down like a yoyo reading this post

 

[Kojote]

Wanna talk about privileges? Fine.
In Germany we have a military draft. Every male has to subject to medical examination and must serve for 10 months (or maybe 9. In my time it where 12) if healthy.
He is allowed to refuse in which case he gets subjected to civilian service.

Women don't have to.
They may choose to volunteer for professional soldier, but they are not subjected to draft.

Given the nature of career planning this days I would call that a privilege.

these are always the things that men throw up as female 'priviledge'.

Of course. The things that get brought up by women don't change much either...
Maybe because the problems don't change much?

But I didn't call these 'female privileges' though.
The privileges are the things boys get educated to do. Treat women with courtesy and so on.

As I said: Its okay with me. I like to be courteous. I even like the 'manly' feel you get from the thankful looks.
I carry my girl on my hands gladly and she likes to submit to my decisions (we have a top/bottom relationship but tend to discuss things prior to deciding the proper course of action anyway).
That doesn't mean that I am not interested in her opinion and she isn't able to walk around on her feet.
But we like it that way. Both of us.
And the most important thing is: She doesn't compel me to behave like a gentleman and I don't force my decisions upon her. We bestow it out of free will.


In arguments like this I always get the same feeling about what I am expected to do:
To confess that all male behavior patterns are bad to the bone, humiliating, harassing and chauvinistic.
We dominated the female race two thousand years and now it’s payback time and men are expected to admit that and start suffering the same treatment for the next two millennia.
Or what?

You wrote about objectification.
Do you really want to tell me that men are more often looking at tits than women are looking at asses?
That men don’t get bothered by this that much is not a valid argument in this. It’s the same form of objectification anyway.

Rape (as you mentioned) IS a crime. That’s out of question.
But am I to blame for the things my grand grandfather did?
The Huns once invaded Europe. Let’s get over there and beat them up for it, or what?
Arguing with things happening a centuries ago really fucks me up for I am german and get blamed for things happening two generations ago every other day. So excuse me for getting a little rough about this.


That said I am glad that you find my general thoughts about the ‘how society should be run’ nice. Even if it may be meant ironic.
It’s only…
Every time this kind of discussion starts women accuse men. And being male I find this unfair.
It’s the same thing as accusing Germans to kill Jews.
I don’t do that and I have never done. Accuse the ones who did (or do the things that discriminate women). But stop accusing everybody please.

 

[Etoile]

I tried reading alternative views to feminism and I fell into the vortex that is "sack tapping" videos on YouTube. Done now.

 

[JMohegan]

Wanna talk about privileges? Fine.
In Germany we have a military draft. Every male has to subject to medical examination and must serve for 10 months (or maybe 9. In my time it where 12) if healthy.
He is allowed to refuse in which case he gets subjected to civilian service.

Women don't have to.
They may choose to volunteer for professional soldier, but they are not subjected to draft.

Given the nature of career planning this days I would call that a privilege.

In the U.S., I would call that unconstitutional.

Has your draft been challenged through the German courts?

In the U.S., we currently have only voluntary conscription, though all males must register for possible service at 18 (in case we need to call up a lot of troops in a hurry.) The exclusion of females from mandatory registration was challenged here, but the Supreme Court allowed it because the purpose of any draft would be to provide emergency combat troops, and women are not permitted to serve in combat roles. (See Rostker v. Goldberg, if you're interested.)

Personally I agree with the late, great Thurgood Marshall, who dissented, writing:

"The Court today places its imprimatur on one of the most potent remaining public expressions of 'ancient canards about the proper role of women.' It upholds a statute that requires males but not females to register for the draft, and which thereby categorically excludes women from a fundamental civic obligation. Because I believe the Court's decision is inconsistent with the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection of the laws, I dissent."

Dissenting opinions in Rostker aside, I really don't think a German-style system of conscription would hold up in U.S. court today, particularly given the non-combat element of your requisite service.

 

[WriterDom]

In the U.S., I would call that unconstitutional.

Has your draft been challenged through the German courts?

In the U.S., we currently have only voluntary conscription, though all males must register for possible service at 18 (in case we need to call up a lot of troops in a hurry.) The exclusion of females from mandatory registration was challenged here, but the Supreme Court allowed it because the purpose of any draft would be to provide emergency combat troops, and women are not permitted to serve in combat roles. (See Rostker v. Goldberg, if you're interested.)

Personally I agree with the late, great Thurgood Marshall, who dissented, writing:

"The Court today places its imprimatur on one of the most potent remaining public expressions of 'ancient canards about the proper role of women.' It upholds a statute that requires males but not females to register for the draft, and which thereby categorically excludes women from a fundamental civic obligation. Because I believe the Court's decision is inconsistent with the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection of the laws, I dissent."

Dissenting opinions in Rostker aside, I really don't think a German-style system of conscription would hold up in U.S. court today, particularly given the non-combat element of your requisite service.

I don't think you can draft women and THEN exclude them from combat or make combat voluntary. Would you want to go to war in a platoon of eight random eighteen year old women whose draft number just happened to hit the jackpot? Israeli women perhaps, because they have a warrior spirit, but not the average ipod Twitter American high school graduate chick. No thanks.

 

[intothewoods]

In the U.S., I would call that unconstitutional.

Has your draft been challenged through the German courts?

In the U.S., we currently have only voluntary conscription, though all males must register for possible service at 18 (in case we need to call up a lot of troops in a hurry.) The exclusion of females from mandatory registration was challenged here, but the Supreme Court allowed it because the purpose of any draft would be to provide emergency combat troops, and women are not permitted to serve in combat roles. (See Rostker v. Goldberg, if you're interested.)

Personally I agree with the late, great Thurgood Marshall, who dissented, writing:

"The Court today places its imprimatur on one of the most potent remaining public expressions of 'ancient canards about the proper role of women.' It upholds a statute that requires males but not females to register for the draft, and which thereby categorically excludes women from a fundamental civic obligation. Because I believe the Court's decision is inconsistent with the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection of the laws, I dissent."

Dissenting opinions in Rostker aside, I really don't think a German-style system of conscription would hold up in U.S. court today, particularly given the non-combat element of your requisite service.

German law has some pretty significant differences from US law, IIRC. There are protections built in that would be unconstitutional in our country. Anything to do with the Nazi party is not allowed, for example. I think basically that many laws err on the side of protecting people over certain civil liberties. Maybe Kojote knows more about this. I'll have to go try and refresh my recollection.

 

[JMohegan]

I didn't blame feminism to be wrong.
I just accuse it to be onesided.

One of the initial questions was if feminism might have been taken too far.
I do think so.

Whenever I hear (or read) someone muttering about unequal pay for women I can't help to ask for all those other people who get paid less well because they don't have the lobby or any kind of lever to get fight for their rights.

What is it?
Is it a kind of ‘injustice appears everywhere but women go first in getting their rights’?
Like women go first to the lifeboats…?

Where’s the fucking difference between you (as a woman) getting discriminated and lil Igor (as a Eastern European in Germany) or Pablo (as a Mexican in the US) getting discriminated?
Is it more severe to discriminate a woman?

I'm a guy.

What kind of discrimination are you talking about? And what rights, specifically? I can't answer your question about relative severity without a specific reference here.

In the U.S., males were granted the constitutional right to vote, "regardless of race, color, or previous condition of servitude," 50 years before females of any race or color were granted that same right.

In the U.S., equal pay for equal work is the law for all citizens, regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, etc.

Of course, there are violations of our constitutional rights, and our laws, that take place on a regular basis. And you're right, fighting for justice often requires a knowledgeable, skilled, and well-funded advocate. There are both privately-funded and government groups in this country who do that advocating - not only on behalf of women, but on behalf of immigrants and citizens of varying ethnicities & racial identities as well.

 

[where]

Wanna talk about privileges? Fine.
In Germany we have a military draft. Every male has to subject to medical examination and must serve for 10 months (or maybe 9. In my time it where 12) if healthy.
He is allowed to refuse in which case he gets subjected to civilian service.

Women don't have to.
They may choose to volunteer for professional soldier, but they are not subjected to draft.

Given the nature of career planning this days I would call that a privilege.



Of course. The things that get brought up by women don't change much either...
Maybe because the problems don't change much?

But I didn't call these 'female privileges' though.
The privileges are the things boys get educated to do. Treat women with courtesy and so on.

As I said: Its okay with me. I like to be courteous. I even like the 'manly' feel you get from the thankful looks.
I carry my girl on my hands gladly and she likes to submit to my decisions (we have a top/bottom relationship but tend to discuss things prior to deciding the proper course of action anyway).
That doesn't mean that I am not interested in her opinion and she isn't able to walk around on her feet.
But we like it that way. Both of us.
And the most important thing is: She doesn't compel me to behave like a gentleman and I don't force my decisions upon her. We bestow it out of free will.


In arguments like this I always get the same feeling about what I am expected to do:
To confess that all male behavior patterns are bad to the bone, humiliating, harassing and chauvinistic.
We dominated the female race two thousand years and now it’s payback time and men are expected to admit that and start suffering the same treatment for the next two millennia.
Or what?

You wrote about objectification.
Do you really want to tell me that men are more often looking at tits than women are looking at asses?
That men don’t get bothered by this that much is not a valid argument in this. It’s the same form of objectification anyway.

Rape (as you mentioned) IS a crime. That’s out of question.
But am I to blame for the things my grand grandfather did?
The Huns once invaded Europe. Let’s get over there and beat them up for it, or what?
Arguing with things happening a centuries ago really fucks me up for I am german and get blamed for things happening two generations ago every other day. So excuse me for getting a little rough about this.


That said I am glad that you find my general thoughts about the ‘how society should be run’ nice. Even if it may be meant ironic.
It’s only…
Every time this kind of discussion starts women accuse men. And being male I find this unfair.
It’s the same thing as accusing Germans to kill Jews.
I don’t do that and I have never done. Accuse the ones who did (or do the things that discriminate women). But stop accusing everybody please.

According to Wiki it's actually 6 months and doesn't have to be in military service and certainly not in a war zone, so how excluding women from something which could be construed as ultimate networking at a young age can be construed as a privilege is beyond me. That said, I would have thought that under european law a compulsory military/social service for males only would be open to challenge under gender discrimination.

That aside, historically the draft (and indeed armed forces) was something that is male created to protect male interests and property on local and national scales.

Men treating women with courtesy is not a privilege all women enjoy (as in one they get, obviously just about everyone likes to be treated with courtesy) just as blow jobs aren't a 'privilege' all men enjoy. it's great when it happens, but it's not an automatic right. Your implication is that women conversely don't treat men with courtesy or even that men treat each other with courtesy. I've met quite a lot of german women and they have all, to a fault, been polite, courteous and charming to everyone. Apart from the mad one but she was an anomaly.

I have never said men behave badly as a whole. Most men are perfectly charming and well behaved, a few are pretty horrible and a very very small minority are plain dangerous. I should think you could typify women in the same way.

Objectification. Women have always been sexually objectified. objectification of men is comparatively recent in terms of society generally and whilst pretty horrible, isn't that common outside of bars and clubs.

and no, you personally are obviously not to blame for every man's rape of a woman, just I'm not personally responsible for every man who loses custody of his kids. the point is, is that statistically, if you are a woman and you have been raped, the man will get away with it. and this applies all over the world. Right now. this very minute women are being raped and men are getting away with it in every country from south africa to china to america to germany. fucking ultimate male privilege I'd say.

I'm not arguing about what happened 2000 years ago or 200 years ago. I'm talking about stuff happening now and all the so-called female privilege that you seem to think exists, has it's roots in patriarchy.

 

[JMohegan]

I don't think you can draft women and THEN exclude them from combat or make combat voluntary. Would you want to go to war in a platoon of eight random eighteen year old women whose draft number just happened to hit the jackpot? Israeli women perhaps, because they have a warrior spirit, but not the average ipod Twitter American high school graduate chick. No thanks.

I don't see why women can't "man" those drones we're using to pick off Afghan targets.

German law has some pretty significant differences from US law, IIRC. There are protections built in that would be unconstitutional in our country. Anything to do with the Nazi party is not allowed, for example. I think basically that many laws err on the side of protecting people rather than putting a freedom on certain civil liberties. Maybe Kojote knows more about this. I'll have to go try and refresh my recollection.

Thanks, that's interesting.

 

[where]

I don't see why women can't "man" those drones we're using to pick off Afghan targets.

.

they might lose track of where to drop them whilst facebooking

 

[WriterDom]

I don't see why women can't "man" those drones we're using to pick off Afghan targets.

The best for that might be 14 year olds of either sex. And the great thing is they'd put a dollar in the slot to play.

 

[JMohegan]

they might lose track of where to drop them whilst facebooking

Ha.

It's interesting that WD gave an exception for Israeli women, due to their alleged "warrior spirit." Wish we had an Israeli on the board to comment on that.

But speaking of Israel and women's rights, this crap is so disgusting.

 

[JMohegan]

The best for that might be 14 year olds of either sex. And the great thing is they'd put a dollar in the slot to play.

War as video game. yay.

 

[Kojote]

In the U.S., I would call that unconstitutional.

Has your draft been challenged through the German courts?

Actually I don't know exactly if it has been challenged.
But I can tell that it changes pretty fast nowadays.
When I was a kid it was 24 months. When it was my turn it was 12 months and now it is 8-9 months.
It is supposed that the whole system will change to all volunteer soon. The need isn't given anymore. The Bundeswehr is getting smaller and specializes more every year.
But the draft thing is kinda traditional in Germany. It was intended to provide nearly combat ready troops in case of need with a small core of long time volunteers on duty all the time.
Didn’t work well even when it where 12 months. I can tell. I volunteered for the navy and every time we had trained one of the draftees (can I call it that way?) to get his work done he went home.
Navy may require more specialized people than the army for equipment operation but we all found that stupid as hell.

Anyway…
Most of the young people get into the civilian service and our residential and nursing homes or the charitable organizations would be totally fucked up without this cheap manpower (the pay in civilian service here is even worse than for the military draft).
Thing is: This civilian service is suited for women. Even in our military women are allowed to take any career path since 2001. Including combat roles. But they are exempted anyway.

(Sorry. This took me almost an hour to write because of some family business interrupting…)

 

[Kojote]

German law has some pretty significant differences from US law, IIRC. There are protections built in that would be unconstitutional in our country. Anything to do with the Nazi party is not allowed, for example. I think basically that many laws err on the side of protecting people rather than putting a freedom on certain civil liberties. Maybe Kojote knows more about this. I'll have to go try and refresh my recollection.

Help me out. I am not sure that I understand this correctly...
You are right with the ban of anything that is related to the Nazis.
Even our national anthem consists of only the third verse of the original composition, because the 3rd Reich interpreted some of the lines in a glorifying way instead of the adoring way it was meant…