|
Andalusite -> RE: Feminism (10/26/2009 8:16:36 AM)
|
aidan, no, comparing insults over the Web or even wanting women to lose some of the rights we have gained is not something that can be reasonably compared to killing people or enslaving them unconsentually.[:'(]
elisabella, using "honey" as an insult is degrading and dismissive in a similar way to Shakti calling you "little girl." Nothing wrong with either in other, positive contexts. I strongly disagree with you on the social "bits." I think we everyone should be free to pursue the career/educational field/hobbies they like, regardless of their gender, without any social pressure. If they aren't in your immediate family, what they do for a living, how they raise their kids (as long as they aren't being abused), and how they exercise are *none of your business* (both you specifically, and in general). I think paternity leave as well as maternity leave is a good idea, and in some families, they can stagger it so that they have more time for the infant with at least one parent home. Fathers can feed the baby as well, if the mother uses a breast pump, or if they choose to use formula. Men on average are stronger and faster than women, especially at the top levels of competition, but there are plenty of exceptions, and there's absolutely no correlation between that and D/s. My Master and I are fairly closely matched in both areas - he has an edge on strength, and I do on speed, especially over a distance.
Orion, while it might not be as easy for nurturing to come to some men, part of that is that they don't tend to get as much practice while growing up. They're less likely to babysit or take care of younger siblings. I know a lot of dads (and older brothers, where there weren't any sisters old enough to help out much) who are very nurturing. It's not all instinct, some of it is learned skills. Surely you're not claiming that men are incapable of learning how to change a diaper, walk a colicky or cranky baby, etc.?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Elisabella
Social expectations don't completely disappear, they just change and evolve. You can't just say you want to have a world where a woman isn't expected to do certain things, without replacing it with new expectations. A woman isn't expected to stay home and have babies...but now she is expected to have a good career. You can say "well women can choose to stay home and have babies" but the fact is society would look at her differently. Just like 50 years ago a woman could choose to eschew marriage and have a career...and she'd also have social repercussions.
I have *not* seen any social pressure against stay-at-home moms, especially ones with young children. There still is social pressure against stay-at-home dads, though. I feel there shouldn't be any social pressure either way, for men or for women. It doesn't affect you, so you don't get any say in the matter.
ElWray, the way that the survey was worded is a false dichotomy. People shouldn't need to choose only one of those options, and a lot of people have all three. It's not surprising that the women who were surveyed were more focused on getting grandkids than on their daughters' careers. It's sad, though. If your mother or sister or daughter was attacked that badly, you wouldn't be angry or upset about it at all?
Venatrix, I agree that men shouldn't have the right to beat their wife/SO, (or vice versa) unconsentually. If that means keeping BDSM illegal, to protect victims of actual domestic violence,that's better than the alternative. Ideally, it would be more like rape laws should be in theory, rather than in practice. No means no, no pressuring/threatening, no getting someone drunk or otherwise impaired, both people joyfully participating in expressing intimacy and sexuality in ways they *want* to. I hope your mother's ex-boyfriend was jailed for his treatment of her, and that she has recovered physically and emotionally from the experience.
pyroaquatic, sure, they have a *CHOICE* to become a cheerleader. That doesn't imply that they also *CHOOSE* to be a slut. Since the vast majority of cheerleaders are under the age of 18, I think it's very creepy of you to be interested at all in their sexuality.
ShaktiSama, sure, some cheerleaders are probably also promiscuous. So are some theater techies, computer geeks, jocks, etc., and I disagree that there's any strong correlation, much less that there's an official duty! I strongly disagree with using gender-based insults. No matter how many people someone chooses to have sex with, I won't call her a slut or whore. Even if a lady is grossly overweight, I won't call her a "fat cow" or a "greedy sow." No matter how vehemently I disagree with her, I won't call her a bitch or a cunt. Even with men, I disagree with calling them sissies, or pricks, but socially, men are enough at an advantage over women that I'm more concerned about femininity used as a way to denigrate and deride people.
I know a lot of female athletes (including ones who have chosen to be cheerleaders) who have been able to get college scholarships for it.
I've disagreed with Elisabella and the guys who've said sexist things here as well, it's just that you were saying far more outrageous things than they were at the last time I posted. Regardless of your "feminist credentials," talking that way about the sexuality of minors is just unacceptable.
|
|
|
|
