RE: Feminism and submission

RE: Feminism and submission (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

LafayetteLady -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/6/2010 8:23:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub I am confused. It happens a lot. My question is to LL regarding the last comment about quote: I said that pages ago. The radical feminism of years ago is not the feminism of today, but along with not wanting to find out what has happened since 1975, the concept that "ignorance is bliss" will continue to be the prevalent thought for those people. In their minds, they went to school, that was all the opening of their minds that was going to occur. They're done now. I've concluded that rather than try to educate those who think they already know everything, it is better to just thank whoever it is that you pray to that they don't live nearby. How do you justify calling someone ignorant, when they base their thoughts on their experiences? I know nothing about that stuff to do with the 3rd wave of feminists and hell. I am good with that. I live as I choose, I do my best to treat everyone I come in contact with like I would want to be treated. And I consider my self to be in favor of fairness for all humans. I guess that makes me a feminist, who the hell knows. Thing is, at some point, we have to look forward instead of back, and know that life will never be perfect for any of us, cause some people suck. To me, it seems that in 2010, anyone can be anything if they work hard towards a goal. Men, women, blacks, whites, midgets, 1 legged rednecks or yankees with warts on the end of their nose. We all have it good today, if we want to reach out and grab it. It's really quite simple. Someone who judges a group or philosophy based solely on their limited experience with a few people is ignorant. It's like someone who thinks all minorities are gang members because they live in an area that is rife with gang violence. It's ALWAYS ignorant to base an opinion on a large scale population on a small limited experience. Add to that someone telling you what is the current thought on the issue as defined by educators of TODAY, and saying that you couldn't care less what it means today, you will stick to your thought process because this is what you have seen in your very limited experience just further illustrates that ignorance.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/6/2010 8:30:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: laurell3 Really? You find this intelligent debate? You have not one clue of knowing anything about me period. You would be amazed. I use that education to further other people's lives, not throw out theories and start granstanding self-important arguments on the internet. Actually to find any debate with you intelligent, I would have to have that view of you, which obviously I don't. You're quite right all I know about you is what you post on these boards. In my opinion, you do more to promote your own self-importance than many people on here. I'm sure you don't like it, I'm sure you don't like me, which makes us equal in our opinions of each other. I certainly won't lose any sleep over it. But basing your opinion on your small limited experience that you described is complete ignorance. Saying that you don't care to know how things have progressed because you choose to keep your opinion based on that little experience is even more so. I know from your posts that you like to present yourself as being among the most intelligent open minded people around, but I don't see it that way. You think I'm grandstanding, tossing out theories (that are pretty well documented, but whatever) for some self importance? Please, feel free to hide me.

jujubeeMB -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/6/2010 9:37:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub Please tell me that is sarcasm....I mean theres a smiley there, so I think it is. I'm being totally silly - was hoping to diffuse some of the tension [:D]

sexyred1 -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/6/2010 9:51:23 PM)
I want to thank jujubee for starting this thread. I find it fascinating how it has evolved. I like intelligent debate and it is interesting to see how everyone views such a highly charged topic like feminism. Of course, we derailed from feminism vs. submission into the concept of feminism in general. I think the most valid points are that we need to learn from history, absorb which views coincide best with our own world views and try to enrich your lives on a daily basis. All the pontificating in the world is not going to change anyone's views, just possibly their reaction to said views.

PeonForHer -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/7/2010 2:27:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania fast reply http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-wave_feminism . . . I've cited that before - possibly in the the thread entitled 'Are You a Feminist?' - the thread to which Lady Hibiscus refers, above (the one that she started some time ago). It's an accurate article. It doesn't fit with what many would want to term 'feminism' - but they're wrong. Sigh. The anti-feminist forces made such a massive effort, for so long a time, to dirty the word 'feminist'. The propaganda was vicious and utterly relentless. It was only partially successful, though. Of course, the idea behind the propaganda machine was to stop anyone buying into anything feminism had to offer. It was believed that, eventually, simply accusing a woman of 'being a feminist' would stop her taking on any feminist ideas. But what really happened was that women ended up taking on feminist ideas but refused to label those ideas 'feminist'.

Plasticine -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/7/2010 3:54:12 AM)
FR As far as I can tell the tenets of this "Third Wave" are entirely encompassed by rational humanism. I don't disagree with any of it, I just think it is extremely short-sighted to call that "feminism". Yes these rights should be fought for, on behalf of everyone (once again) regardless of gender. The principles of personal responsibility and egalitarianism do not apply to a subset. You either buy in or you don't. I reject "Third-Wave feminism" just as I would reject anyone who would deny those rights. Those who would deny egalitarian individual rights are my enemies. I don't care what group it pertains to. In this worldview the notion of feminism is redundant and pointless. Politicking for egalitarian individual rights encompasses the public good entirely and is therefore the higher cause. Spinning the idea of equality for all into feminism is a plain insult to those who actually mean it. It is unlikely that gay men feel represented by feminism for example, however I'm sure that egalitarian individual rights covers them nicely. Why politic from a pigeonhole when you can fight for the big picture just as easily? The notion that submissiveness is weak, that last vestige of old school feminism, still looms over us. It is however absurd. Right alongside our stories of strength through dominance are many examples of strength in submission. There was of course Mohandas Ghandi who sought to destroy the British Empire without fighting them. The famous line from domiguy's lord and savior that "The meek shall inherit the earth" a philosophical insight into submission that pervades most of Western thought yet is widely misunderstood. Zen Buddhism, a religiosity focused on direct realization through meditation ( a ritual of submission). The word Islam means "release" or "surrender". So how is it that over 2000 years of human thought espousing the virtues of submission can be annulled by 60 years of modern feminism? Yes forced submission is abhorrent, but so is forced anything. That notion does not make for its own philosophy. And aside from that little morsel of backward thinking, Everything else about feminism has another name: Obvious.

PeonForHer -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/7/2010 4:12:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Plasticine FR As far as I can tell the tenets of this "Third Wave" are entirely encompassed by rational humanism. I don't disagree with any of it, I just think its stupid to call that "feminism". Feminism was only ever the movement for freedom and equality, now applied to a new case.

JstAnotherSub -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/7/2010 5:34:23 AM)
Thanks LL. I guess I do not see where anyone is judging a thing, I just see differing opinions, and opinions are just, well, opinions that we reach based on our reality. I reckon I should leave these things to tha educumated folkses. But I really can't see a reason for you to be so upset and feeling like feminism is being wronged.

RCdc -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/7/2010 6:08:24 AM)
quote: Those who would deny egalitarian individual rights are my enemies. Love this. quote: The notion that submissiveness is weak, that last vestige of old school feminism, still looms over us. It is however absurd. Right alongside our stories of strength through dominance are many examples of strength in submission. There was of course Mohandas Ghandi who sought to destroy the British Empire without fighting them. The famous line from domiguy's lord and savior that "The meek shall inherit the earth" a philosophical insight into submission that pervades most of Western thought yet is widely misunderstood. Zen Buddhism, a religiosity focused on direct realization through meditation ( a ritual of submission). The word Islam means "release" or "surrender". Love this. quote: Everything else about feminism has another name: Obvious. And love this. the.dark.

came4U -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/7/2010 9:40:11 AM)
quote: What I really want to do is figure out how to reconcile (truly reconcile - not abandon) all of that with my desire to submit to a man and serve him, frequently in degrading, objectifying ways. So really truly seriously, does anyone know how to do that? Any feminists in the house? I'm sorry if I bypassed other comments after the OP, but it is just toooo damn hot to think. But, to summarize an answer. hmm I am a feminist (in reality), a submissive (at heart). You can be both yanno. I have studied feminism (university level, abstract procurement level) and lived feminism (officer candidate). It isn't really living a double life (to me). It is having the mind-set and personal capacity and authority to 'get sht done' for the betterment of one's surroundings (and other women, of course). To confront one's own strength would likely occur more in the submissive-mode, rather than the Feminist role. Being a bad-ass is easy--letting go, is harder (if raised with conflicted thought processes to be all you can be, yet to find a man and settle down). The sanity lies in the ability to distinguish one role from the other...without mixing the two or letting one carry-on into the other. edit: sorry this was a fast reply intended for the OP.

PeonForHer -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/7/2010 11:03:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: came4U The sanity lies in the ability to distinguish one role from the other...without mixing the two or letting one carry-on into the other. Absolutely. For some years now I've wondered: where did the idea come from that we just must have blended, homogenised personalities and identities? The assumption is that, otherwise, we're 'illogical', 'dishonest', or plain mad. Why these assumptions? The idea makes no sense, either. It reminds me of the student of Descartes who once worked himself into madness with the question, 'Do I exist?' Finally, he went to the great master to ask, 'How can I know that I exist?' And Descartes replied, 'Well, who is asking?' In the same way, I'd ask: what is the nature of the part of anyone who asks, 'Am I submissive?' The very fact that one can ask that question - let alone answer it - suggests that one part of oneself is able to look at another part of oneself. It's at least a vanilla part of oneself (one that's learned how to think, reason, read, etc, etc). It may just as well be a feminist part, as well. Screw this great movement for mental homogeneity. Who needs it?

Elisabella -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/7/2010 11:05:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Sigh. The anti-feminist forces made such a massive effort, for so long a time, to dirty the word 'feminist'. The propaganda was vicious and utterly relentless. It was only partially successful, though. Of course, the idea behind the propaganda machine was to stop anyone buying into anything feminism had to offer. It was believed that, eventually, simply accusing a woman of 'being a feminist' would stop her taking on any feminist ideas. But what really happened was that women ended up taking on feminist ideas but refused to label those ideas 'feminist'. Truly, it's the feminists themselves who have made me want nothing to do with the label. Not every single one of them, obviously, but enough of them that I don't want that label anywhere near me. Remember that thread where I got called a nazi who should be killed? Do you think that's the first time that's happened? Sorta like, I agree with Democrats more than I agree with Republicans, but I wouldn't call myself a Democrat because there's also so much I hate about Democrats, in general. Republican propaganda hasn't made me hate Dems, rather, self righteous hypocritical cunts of Democrats have. You know, like, 99% of the ones on TV and probably just as high a percentage of people I went to university with. I have other issues with some of the things feminism is fighting for, and some of it's ideals, but to be honest I really don't feel up to debating the pros and cons, so I'll leave it at that.

came4U -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/7/2010 11:30:55 AM)
quote: In the same way, I'd ask: what is the nature of the part of anyone who asks, 'Am I submissive?' The very fact that one can ask that question - let alone answer it - suggests that one part of oneself is able to look at another part of oneself. It's at least a vanilla part of oneself (one that's learned how to think, reason, read, etc, etc). It may just as well be a feminist part, as well. The personality must be able to withstand the 'reflection' or Id without over-compensating with emotion in one situation and yet compensating in/within the other (time/mind-frame situational). Is the same stability that allows a submissive to say 'NO, STOP' when she knows the events could end up debilitating or injurious. Without that common grasp of conceptual self, that person belongs neither within the category of a feminist nor a submissive. They belong in a white coat with doctors on call-24/7.

Nineveh -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/7/2010 12:13:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Plasticine FR As far as I can tell the tenets of this "Third Wave" are entirely encompassed by rational humanism. I don't disagree with any of it, I just think it is extremely short-sighted to call that "feminism". Yes these rights should be fought for, on behalf of everyone (once again) regardless of gender. The principles of personal responsibility and egalitarianism do not apply to a subset. You either buy in or you don't. I reject "Third-Wave feminism" just as I would reject anyone who would deny those rights. Those who would deny egalitarian individual rights are my enemies. I don't care what group it pertains to. In this worldview the notion of feminism is redundant and pointless. Politicking for egalitarian individual rights encompasses the public good entirely and is therefore the higher cause. Spinning the idea of equality for all into feminism is a plain insult to those who actually mean it. It is unlikely that gay men feel represented by feminism for example, however I'm sure that egalitarian individual rights covers them nicely. Why politic from a pigeonhole when you can fight for the big picture just as easily? The notion that submissiveness is weak, that last vestige of old school feminism, still looms over us. It is however absurd. Right alongside our stories of strength through dominance are many examples of strength in submission. There was of course Mohandas Ghandi who sought to destroy the British Empire without fighting them. The famous line from domiguy's lord and savior that "The meek shall inherit the earth" a philosophical insight into submission that pervades most of Western thought yet is widely misunderstood. Zen Buddhism, a religiosity focused on direct realization through meditation ( a ritual of submission). The word Islam means "release" or "surrender". So how is it that over 2000 years of human thought espousing the virtues of submission can be annulled by 60 years of modern feminism? Yes forced submission is abhorrent, but so is forced anything. That notion does not make for its own philosophy. And aside from that little morsel of backward thinking, Everything else about feminism has another name: Obvious. You earlier claimed to be an ultra feminist. If you are not oldschool and you are not thirdwave, what sort are you?

Nineveh -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/7/2010 12:16:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: came4U The sanity lies in the ability to distinguish one role from the other...without mixing the two or letting one carry-on into the other. Absolutely. For some years now I've wondered: where did the idea come from that we just must have blended, homogenised personalities and identities? The assumption is that, otherwise, we're 'illogical', 'dishonest', or plain mad. Why these assumptions? The idea makes no sense, either. It reminds me of the student of Descartes who once worked himself into madness with the question, 'Do I exist?' Finally, he went to the great master to ask, 'How can I know that I exist?' And Descartes replied, 'Well, who is asking?' In the same way, I'd ask: what is the nature of the part of anyone who asks, 'Am I submissive?' The very fact that one can ask that question - let alone answer it - suggests that one part of oneself is able to look at another part of oneself. It's at least a vanilla part of oneself (one that's learned how to think, reason, read, etc, etc). It may just as well be a feminist part, as well. Screw this great movement for mental homogeneity. Who needs it? As a great transcendentalist said "Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes."

PeonForHer -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/7/2010 2:53:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella Truly, it's the feminists themselves who have made me want nothing to do with the label. Not every single one of them, obviously, but enough of them that I don't want that label anywhere near me. Remember that thread where I got called a nazi who should be killed? Do you think that's the first time that's happened? I remember the thread - and that threat - only too well. It was odd. I was arguing as a feminist, but it somehow felt that people were treating me like I couldn't be a feminist because I was a) not female and b) not nasty or aggressive. And I do remember arguing that you were a feminist, whether or not you liked the label. But we don't need to rehash all that again here. [;)]

Plasticine -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/7/2010 4:25:45 PM)
quote: You earlier claimed to be an ultra feminist. If you are not oldschool and you are not thirdwave, what sort are you? I'm an absolute fanatic for individual rights, as women are a subset of individuals I am a fanatic for their rights as well. I am the sort of feminist of my own devices, as I said I consider myself. I am the sort that values women's rights as much as I value everyone else's, and have no use for a doctrine to tell me about equality. "Ultra-feminist" has no defined meaning (that I am aware of) except to the person using it, and I am not a post-feminist. Perhaps I need a better nonsense term, but I am very concerned with women's issues; I am just not concerned with any political movement that advances or promotes any one group over the others. I hold no views that contradict thirdwave, save the view that it is a superfluous philosophy. Ed. Maybe "meta-feminist" is better. I don't think it really matters though, as long as I know what it means to me.

corrupted1 -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/9/2010 2:21:53 AM)
Over the years i have been pretty anti-femenist..perhaps because the movement itself has become an all consuming mess. Women are strong creatures, and we have many different strengths and talents, we as females are often Dominant in general life as one has to be or people (i found out) just run all over you..and if a women is also a mother, there is power and control to extents needed to raise the child(ren), but if a women choses to have a man in her life, be it a D/s lifestyle or not, she should also choose to serve him in all ways.. that doesnt mean giving up your sense of self, and your own strength and power..not at all, but finding a balance between the two for you must be difficult to find, but i wish you well with this internal struggle and that soon you find that balance you need..

porcelaine -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/9/2010 9:25:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jujubeeMB What I really want to do is figure out how to reconcile (truly reconcile - not abandon) all of that with my desire to submit to a man and serve him, frequently in degrading, objectifying ways. So really truly seriously, does anyone know how to do that? Any feminists in the house? [:)] jujubeeMB, I don't identify as a feminist, but there are concepts of the ideology that remain. Yes, I'm a slave to my partner. But outside of the relationship I operate differently. In my professional and personal life my interests were heavily invested in projects that resulted in improved conditions for its benefactors. While that included men in many respects, my focus was always on the upliftment of my female kin. Am I my brothers keeper? Most certainly, but that includes both sexes. Now within BDSM some ideas circulate that have attempted to correct the perceived wrongs of feminism and restore the man to his rightful place. I don't debate with these people and I most certainly will not conclude that every male subject is leadership material or deserves the role de facto due to his gender. I use the litmus test and if he's capable so be it, but if a woman can do a better job she gets the nod. I make no bones about that. While I take pride in my slavery and the level of service I give to my partner, I will never downplay my strengths or convictions. I am who I am. That means I'm capable and willing to dismantle, disarm, and dance on your toes if necessary. This doesn't preclude me from being elegant, demure, or deeply surrendered. But it does suggest I'm not feeble minded or willing to roll over nicely when told. I don't view it as a need to reconcile the divergent parts of self, but truthfully an ability to accept your internal contrasts and bring them into cohesion. My feminist ideals haven't waned. I apply them everyday through mentoring and other activities that benefit my fellow subs and slaves. I'm committed to noblesse oblige and wholeheartedly feel that I should give back and share what I've learned with others that are new or filled with questions. My behaviors shine favorably upon my owner and don't diminish his fetter at all. It illustrates a spirit of giving and willingness to assist without external provocation. But I don't disparage men or think of them as brutes determined to undermine women. That's a hard pill to swallow when I've encountered so many that fall outside of the stereotype. In terms of your latter question, the answer is simple. I submit from a place of strength. That doesn't disintegrate when he owns or objectifies his property. It is because of the conviction of self and acknowledgment of who I am that I can endure these things without dissidence or ambivalence. I invite his hand and welcome the degradation because they're externally applied but never internally borne. Irregardless of the treatment of verbiage he doles out I am and will always be the prize. I know it and own it with every fiber of my being. His behavior isn't an assault on my core or internal beauty. It is a reminder of what exists and is deeply entrenched within my person. He can crack the alabaster (the shell) but he'll never destroy its spirit. That's porcelaine. It can't be broken. But the mettle must be tested. Slavery provides the vehicle for such and much more. I don't look upon those moments with disdain, but see them in a larger light instead. In time you welcome the iron and its steely blade and realize every swipe strengthens you in turn. It is because I am that he can and thus I become. Best of luck. ~porcelaine

Firebirdseeking -> RE: Feminism and submission (7/9/2010 8:19:29 PM)
The fact that you have CHOICES, and that you can make them based on your needs, the fact that you have a voice that gets heard, the fact that you have a flippin' VOTE, the fact that you are in the workplace and not barefoot, pregnant and resigned to the kitchen and kids, is because of FEMINISTS, both men and women, who worked hard so that here you are today. Dont ride on the shoulders of those who paved the way without giving them credit. It was the Phyllis Schlafleys, the right wing radicals, and their churches, who painted feminism as a social evil. Feminism made some mistakes, yes. but by and large it was and is simply a movement which promotes women having the same opportunies as men. It was about options. Every woman on this board has options because of previous generations of feminism. You think they made problems for you? you evidently didnt live in the world when women did not have choices. I remember when abortion was illegal, and when the want ad read "Male wanted" or "Female wanted". I know I am off topic, and I apologize, but it ruffles my feathers when younger women dont recognize the efforts of our foremothers, and that we all have opportunities now because of them.

Page: << < prev 16 17 18 [19] 20 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625