What is feminism?

[JMohegan]

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…)

No need to apologize. And thank you for explaining; this is fascinating.

I can see why you're pissed about this. I would be, too. At the core, the system you describe is fundamentally unfair.

 

[Kojote]

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.

6 months?
Pretty useless, but very bureaucratic...
Call it german.
As I said I expect the draft to get abandoned soon.

It is, however, fact that a german male has to attend and a female has not.
I would call that a privilege and that was what we were talking about.
The networking doesn’t take place. Trust me. In civilian service they smoke joints together and in military service they learn how to dodge working too hard. But actually keeping in touch after service doesn’t happen more often than it does with somebody you meet on a vacation.
I think you have this ‘old boy network’ stuff in mind, but that doesn’t happen in the german military on this level.
We are not very good at this kind of stuff…

What happens is, that you get your job education or university-entrance diploma and have to attend to military or civilian service instead of getting a job or starting university.

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.

You are right in this. Can’t deny.
I think the whole thing slowly drifts out of the context it was meant to be understood in.

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.

I do not find it horrible. It’s okay with me.
But aren’t we talking about recent things? We seem to agree that we don’t want to talk about history except for the recent history of feminism needed to let this discussion make sense…
So for this one think the odds are balanced.

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.

Come on.
If I am not allowed to generalize you should not do it, too…

What I’m saying is that I don’t want to be blamed for oppressing women and that instead of feminism we all together should try to fight for everybody’s rights.
You don’t want to blame me for every man’s rape of a woman but you tell me that I actually have the ultimate privilege of getting away with raping one everywhere?

Every minute somebody is getting away with taking advantage of somebody on every continent, because of a position of power or enough money.

All I say is that rape or gender discrimination is not the whole problem and the focusing on only feminism is wrong.
I am asking to stop arguing that only women are on disadvantage. Everybody without money is on disadvantage.

 

[Etoile]

Countries that include women in their national conscription:
Benin, Chad, Cote d'Ivoire, Cuba, Eritrea, Israel, Mongolia, and North Korea.
Also Taiwan.

By the way, the U.S. does not currently have the draft, and hasn't since 1973. The Selective Service is not the same thing as conscription. It is an information repository, not a list of people who will be called up to service.

As an aside, the website http://www.mens-rights.net is interesting. (Watch out for the sack tapping videos.)

 

[Etoile]

All I say is that rape or gender discrimination is not the whole problem and the focusing on only feminism is wrong.
I am asking to stop arguing that only women are on disadvantage. Everybody without money is on disadvantage.

I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of the discussion. Nobody thinks only women are disadvantaged. That would be delusion at its best. But the diminished status of women is the central thesis of feminism, which is the topic of the thread. The conversation is about feminism. You're suggesting that people shouldn't talk about feminism. Perhaps, if you are uncomfortable with the topic, you should re-evaluate your participation in the thread.

 

[JMohegan]

Actually, Etoile, Keroin asked for individual perspectives on what feminism actually is, whether we still need it, and has the pendulum swung too far. See the op, quoted below.

Kojote is addressing those questions, very specifically. Though clearly he's giving answers that you don't care for. Instead of trying to shut him up, why not just give yours.

It seems there have been a lot of discussions in different threads recently about “feminism” so I thought, ‘What the fuck, why can’t it have its own thread?’

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?

Thinking about MisterSir’s recent thread…

What about men? Do they get a fair shake all the time? Has the pendulum swung too far?



How equal are we these days?

 

[Kojote]

No need to apologize. And thank you for explaining; this is fascinating.

I can see why you're pissed about this. I would be, too. At the core, the system you describe is fundamentally unfair.

Fuck...
Now you caught me.

I have to explain that before I reply to it:
I tend to see and understand both sides in a discussion, but I can pick a side and argue for it. Normally I pick the apparently weaker side which is - in discussions about feminism - the male perspective.
In the last hours the subject spawned a side-discussion about the differences between the US and Germany and to be honest I have to defend the female perspective on this now.

Totally inconsistent, isn't it? Does anybody understand it?


So I am pissed about it whenever a girl comes up with this 'women are the only people in the world on any disadvantage' crap (as I sometimes view it. Depends on the girl I talk to and maybe anybody knows people like this).

But ultimately one can argue for it with the pregnancy thing.
A significant percentage of women have to bear children or the human race will become extinct.
While being pregnant and shortly afterwards women are on job-related disadvantage. Therefore they are exempted from the draft to balance the odds.
This point is used in arguments about the issue and there is some truth in it.

The whole thing is far from being undisputed, but the German Supreme Court ruled it constitutional.
It is called a ‘lex specialis’ which takes pre-eminence before the equality principle in german law.


That said I begin to ask myself how I can make my point understood if I start arguing against myself now…
Appears to be a problem, eh?

 

[Etoile]

Actually, Etoile, Keroin asked for individual perspectives on what feminism actually is, whether we still need it, and has the pendulum swung too far. See the op, quoted below.

Kojote is addressing those questions, very specifically. Though clearly he's giving answers that you don't care for. Instead of trying to shut him up, why not just give yours.

The only part of the question that Kojote is addressing is whether men have gotten a fair shake. I don't see how "we don't need feminism" and "other people's discrimination needs attention to" address the question of "what is feminism" at all. Then again, I perceive the question of "has it gone too far" as relating to the "big F" feminism (what Rush called Feminazis) and therefore irrelevant because I don't recognize man-hating separatists as having actual feminism at heart.

I don't have a problem with Kojote's answers. I have a problem with being told to ignore the issue and focus on something else. Feminism is still an issue.

I continue to be amazed by his English skills, though, given how insistent he is that he's no good at it.

 

[Homburg]

I blame the original Olympians, who were clearly well-documented pervs.

True that!

--

Curling.

Well, yeah, though I have a tough time calling it a "sport".

--

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

A friend's wife was a pilot in the Air Force. She flew transports, and bucked constantly to be allowed to fly fighters, eve just for Stateside training. They refused her, of course, and it always bugged me. Women, statistically speaking, handle G-force better, and psych test have shown no substantive difference in cognitive ability in the areas needed.

While I did not like the woman, she would've made one helluva combat pilot. Hell, she would've made one helluva combat soldier period. Warrior spirit all the way, but our system simply won't allow it.

As an aside though, there is one area where women do serve in what amounts to actual combat units, up to and including airborne, and that is MP duty. Military Police need women on the force to deal wit issues where female officers are needed, and some MP units are airborne. MP's are used in city fighting, pacification, and occupation among other things. And there is an airborne MP unit on Ft Bragg that has female, jump-qualified members. No idea if those women will ever see combat patrol, but they are part of the unit.

 

[satindesire]

Women, statistically speaking, handle G-force better, and psych test have shown no substantive difference in cognitive ability in the areas needed.

This is totally off topic, but where did you hear this? I've heard that women perform the same as men. The only thing I've heard about g-force strain endurance is shorter people have an advantage, not women.

 

[JMohegan]

A friend's wife was a pilot in the Air Force. She flew transports, and bucked constantly to be allowed to fly fighters, eve just for Stateside training. They refused her, of course, and it always bugged me. Women, statistically speaking, handle G-force better, and psych test have shown no substantive difference in cognitive ability in the areas needed.

While I did not like the woman, she would've made one helluva combat pilot. Hell, she would've made one helluva combat soldier period. Warrior spirit all the way, but our system simply won't allow it.

As an aside though, there is one area where women do serve in what amounts to actual combat units, up to and including airborne, and that is MP duty. Military Police need women on the force to deal wit issues where female officers are needed, and some MP units are airborne. MP's are used in city fighting, pacification, and occupation among other things. And there is an airborne MP unit on Ft Bragg that has female, jump-qualified members. No idea if those women will ever see combat patrol, but they are part of the unit.

I don't understand why the military can't just assign individuals where their skills are most useful, gender and sexual preference being totally irrelevant. Give a test to fly fighters and if you can pass it, you're in.

As an aside, my understanding is that the combat/noncombat lines are significantly blurred in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. Fact is that American women, serving in those conflicts though technically not in combat positions, have been fighting. And dying. Just like the men.

 

[Homburg]

This is totally off topic, but where did you hear this? I've heard that women perform the same as men. The only thing I've heard about g-force strain endurance is shorter people have an advantage, not women.

Article I read probably 15+ years ago regarding the topic of female combat pilots. Couldn't remotely give you a cite for it.

 

[Etoile]

As an aside, my understanding is that the combat/noncombat lines are significantly blurred in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. Fact is that American women, serving in those conflicts though technically not in combat positions, have been fighting. And dying. Just like the men.

Absolutely. One of the Iraq War's first casualties was Lori Piestewa, a member of the 507th AMC - a unit that provided cooks, clerks, and mechanics. Her colleagues Shoshana Johnson and Jessica Lynch were injured in the same attack that killed her. Cooks aren't supposed to be on the "front lines" in battle. But there are no more "front lines" - just war zones.

 

[Netzach]

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.

The ones I've known would like to be able to text message on a bus like American chicks without being socked in the face by haredi modesty patrols because they are wearing pants, which happens a lot more than being attacked by palestinians.

 

[Netzach]

True that!

--



Well, yeah, though I have a tough time calling it a "sport".

--



A friend's wife was a pilot in the Air Force. She flew transports, and bucked constantly to be allowed to fly fighters, eve just for Stateside training. They refused her, of course, and it always bugged me. Women, statistically speaking, handle G-force better, and psych test have shown no substantive difference in cognitive ability in the areas needed.

While I did not like the woman, she would've made one helluva combat pilot. Hell, she would've made one helluva combat soldier period. Warrior spirit all the way, but our system simply won't allow it.

As an aside though, there is one area where women do serve in what amounts to actual combat units, up to and including airborne, and that is MP duty. Military Police need women on the force to deal wit issues where female officers are needed, and some MP units are airborne. MP's are used in city fighting, pacification, and occupation among other things. And there is an airborne MP unit on Ft Bragg that has female, jump-qualified members. No idea if those women will ever see combat patrol, but they are part of the unit.

Am I smoking crack or weren't those a couple of female fighter pilots on carrier?

I thought we're starting to do what the Russians figured out in the 40's?

 

[Kojote]

The only part of the question that Kojote is addressing is whether men have gotten a fair shake. I don't see how "we don't need feminism" and "other people's discrimination needs attention to" address the question of "what is feminism" at all. Then again, I perceive the question of "has it gone too far" as relating to the "big F" feminism (what Rush called Feminazis) and therefore irrelevant because I don't recognize man-hating separatists as having actual feminism at heart.

I don't have a problem with Kojote's answers. I have a problem with being told to ignore the issue and focus on something else. Feminism is still an issue.

I continue to be amazed by his English skills, though, given how insistent he is that he's no good at it.

Oh my...
You should take five minutes to sit behind me and have a look on my amateur wrestling with the right words...
If I had good skills I would have been able to make my point a little more clear...
And besides that: Without leo.org I would be totally fucked up and very silent...

But back to topic:
Basically I don't even want to argue for men’s rights.
I think all people have enough 'rights'.
The laws are not perfect, but they are okay in most places of the first world. And equalized due to the efforts of feminists.
(That's why I said feminism was a good idea when it started.)

Of course in reality the laws often cannot or will not get applied. And discrimination takes place.

But fighting against this under the label of feminism bears danger in my opinion.
Feminism is the fight for female rights. Equal rights in small ‘f’ and maybe more than a fair share in big ‘F’.
But how likely is a fight to be stopped exactly when equal rights are established?
When did a struggle of this scale stop when the initial goal was achieved?
Isn’t it tempting to put on the fight after reaching equality for squeezing a bit more out of it?

Feminism is is starting to trigger a response on the male side.
I can’t remember anybody to think about some kind of ‘male rights Organization’ back in the 80s. But I met men who actually think about it nowadays.
Out of fear of getting overwhelmed.
Maybe the fear is absurd. But on the other hand history shows that struggles between ‘ethnic groups’ tend to get out of hand. And I do see parallels between those struggles and this one.

That’s why I say: Yes. Feminism has gone too far.
Stop it now and reunite with the males who deserve it (by treating women equal) and let them fight by your side against the remaining chauvinists and all those other problems yet to be solved.

Clearer now?

 

[intothewoods]

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…

It would help if my sentences were more coherent. I know we studied German law in a privacy class, and I remember there were some major conceptual differences, but for the life of me it's all sort of fuzzy. I thought this came up in the context of sexual harassment lawsuits, but I can't find anything on the internet. This is driving me nuts. I may have to bug an old classmate of mine.

At any rate, privacy and freedom of speech are two rights that sometimes are in conflict. The right to free speech is pretty sacred in the US -- again, you could never ban content related to Nazis or anything else. I guess what I'm saying is US law and German law are probably guided by slightly different principles, due to differences in history, constitutional law, etc. I'll try and come back later with more.

 

[JMohegan]

But ultimately one can argue for it with the pregnancy thing.
A significant percentage of women have to bear children or the human race will become extinct.
While being pregnant and shortly afterwards women are on job-related disadvantage. Therefore they are exempted from the draft to balance the odds.
This point is used in arguments about the issue and there is some truth in it.

Shortly? Depending on the extent to which the father assumes/does not assume responsibility for child care, I'd say that's more like 16 to 18 years.

 

[Homburg]

Absolutely. One of the Iraq War's first casualties was Lori Piestewa, a member of the 507th AMC - a unit that provided cooks, clerks, and mechanics. Her colleagues Shoshana Johnson and Jessica Lynch were injured in the same attack that killed her. Cooks aren't supposed to be on the "front lines" in battle. But there are no more "front lines" - just war zones.

A good friend of mine is an Army surgeon. He's about as far from front line as you can get, yet has been involved in firefights in Iraq.

--

Am I smoking crack or weren't those a couple of female fighter pilots on carrier?

I thought we're starting to do what the Russians figured out in the 40's?

*shrug* Honestly, it's been a long time since we hung out.

Just looked it up, and apparently it has changed since. Well, here's hoping she got a slot. Last time I talked to them, she was working in the Pentagon.

As an aside, the referenced article was undated, but it said that there were a whopping 46 female combat pilots in the USAF at the time of the article.

 

[Netzach]

Oh my...
You should take five minutes to sit behind me and have a look on my amateur wrestling with the right words...
If I had good skills I would have been able to make my point a little more clear...
And besides that: Without leo.org I would be totally fucked up and very silent...

But back to topic:
Basically I don't even want to argue for men’s rights.
I think all people have enough 'rights'.
The laws are not perfect, but they are okay in most places of the first world. And equalized due to the efforts of feminists.
(That's why I said feminism was a good idea when it started.)

Of course in reality the laws often cannot or will not get applied. And discrimination takes place.

But fighting against this under the label of feminism bears danger in my opinion.
Feminism is the fight for female rights. Equal rights in small ‘f’ and maybe more than a fair share in big ‘F’.
But how likely is a fight to be stopped exactly when equal rights are established?
When did a struggle of this scale stop when the initial goal was achieved?
Isn’t it tempting to put on the fight after reaching equality for squeezing a bit more out of it?

Feminism is is starting to trigger a response on the male side.
I can’t remember anybody to think about some kind of ‘male rights Organization’ back in the 80s. But I met men who actually think about it nowadays.
Out of fear of getting overwhelmed.
Maybe the fear is absurd. But on the other hand history shows that struggles between ‘ethnic groups’ tend to get out of hand. And I do see parallels between those struggles and this one.

That’s why I say: Yes. Feminism has gone too far.
Stop it now and reunite with the males who deserve it (by treating women equal) and let them fight by your side against the remaining chauvinists and all those other problems yet to be solved.

Clearer now?

So let me get this straight.

Someone punches you in the head. For about as long as written history. You swing back at them as of 1910.

You're just making them angry and you should stop and invite them in for coffee and it's your fault when they continue to try and punch you in the head with renewed vigor. Perhaps in the form of a modesty patrol that throws bleach in your face instead of acid, because you're in a civilized industrial country. (as in Israel)

I'm assuming you are a pacifist altogether.

 

[Netzach]

A good friend of mine is an Army surgeon. He's about as far from front line as you can get, yet has been involved in firefights in Iraq.

--



*shrug* Honestly, it's been a long time since we hung out.

Just looked it up, and apparently it has changed since. Well, here's hoping she got a slot. Last time I talked to them, she was working in the Pentagon.

As an aside, the referenced article was undated, but it said that there were a whopping 46 female combat pilots in the USAF at the time of the article.

Not trying to call you on anything, I was just as surprised as the rest of the viewing publc, I think. Yeah it's new. And it makes total sense.

 

[intothewoods]

War as video game. yay.

That is reality now.

The ones I've known would like to be able to text message on a bus like American chicks without being socked in the face by haredi modesty patrols because they are wearing pants, which happens a lot more than being attacked by palestinians.

In some ways, the U.S. religious right ain't got nothing on those folks.

 

[Homburg]

Not trying to call you on anything, I was just as surprised as the rest of the viewing publc, I think. Yeah it's new. And it makes total sense.

Nope, I don't mind at all. I'm glad to see the change. Though, I gotta admit, 46 pilots makes me think it is a paper change, not a shift in corporate culture.

ETA: Some more looking shows that the majority of combat duty in the USAF seems to be in A-10 on ground support. Two Soviet women made ace status in WWII, but I'm not finding any stats on air combat of US women. That said, air-to-air doesn't really happen these days. Al Qaida's air wing isn't exactly well-stocked.

 

[satindesire]

Article I read probably 15+ years ago regarding the topic of female combat pilots. Couldn't remotely give you a cite for it.

Gosh Darn it! I really want to find out if it's true or not.

Time for intertubez research.

 

[Netzach]

That is reality now.



In some ways, the U.S. religious right ain't got nothing on those folks.

It's a template for a worst-case scenario on all that Dominionist noise in the house and senate ever getting traction. A reason to be wary , even if Christians don't get how much it could make their lives suck too. Trust me, a country run on secular principals is the way to go if you like beer and driving on saturday.

 

[Netzach]

Nope, I don't mind at all. I'm glad to see the change. Though, I gotta admit, 46 pilots makes me think it is a paper change, not a shift in corporate culture.

There has to be those first few people, though. But yeah, it'll be interesting to see it develop.