RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

Marc2b -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 6:55:10 AM)

When you have been raised to believe that sexual pleasure and desire are immoral it just follows that you are going to hate that which arouses such feelings in you.  It is akin to the same process that makes some homosexuals some of the worst homophobes and gay bashers out there.



Iamsemisweet -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 8:26:59 AM)

Upon reflection, this says it all
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Women already control all the pussy. They don't want them controlling half the money as well.[8D]



Hillwilliam -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 8:33:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

Upon reflection, this says it all
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Women already control all the pussy. They don't want them controlling half the money as well.[8D]


You weren't very receptive of that answer initially but it isn't far off.



Iamsemisweet -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 8:35:19 AM)

And it almost fits on a bumper sticker. Ok, I was initially wrong



Hillwilliam -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 8:36:53 AM)

I can imagine the reception that bumper sticker would get in the Bible Belt.



Iamsemisweet -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 8:58:00 AM)

I think there is some other things going on than just sexuality, though. Men are, in general, physically stronger then women. I think there were periods of history where brute physical strength was more important than it is now. Men somewhat naturally assumed the leadership role for that reason alone. Might makes right. Since fundamentalist religions abhor change and fight tooth and nail to preserve traditions, I think they maintain the historical viewpoint, and feel threatened by women taking a new role.

I hope I didn't offend you Hill, you know I love your big white cock



Hillwilliam -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 9:01:27 AM)

Of course you didn't offend.



hlen5 -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 9:26:26 AM)

ETA: not directed to any one poster in particular.


Did no one watch the video and postcscript video that xssve posted?

Such barren intellectual discourse after the fact if you all have.



kalikshama -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 10:45:06 AM)

I saw this:

undesired-in-india-boys-are-prized-over-girls-with-violent-results

and didn't want to get further depressed, so did not click. I was just reading about sati and "witch" burning last night.



PeonForHer -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 10:47:22 AM)

FR

If anyone's interested, there's quite a body of thought amongst ecofeminists exploring just this question. Common to the various strands is 'the idea of ‘man’ pitted against nature while nature is feminized and “woman” is assumed to have profound connections with her environment.'



hlen5 -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 11:00:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

I saw this:

undesired-in-india-boys-are-prized-over-girls-with-violent-results

and didn't want to get further depressed, so did not click. I was just reading about sati and "witch" burning last night.


I don't blame you for not clicking. There's only so much misanthropy (misogyny OR misandry) one can take at a time.



tweakabelle -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 11:32:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5

ETA: not directed to any one poster in particular.


Did no one watch the video and postcscript video that xssve posted?

Such barren intellectual discourse after the fact if you all have.

I share your sentiments hlen5.

However I find it equally depressing that so many posts decline to mention, or even acknowledge the possibility of a relationship between men and misogyny. Some posts even go so far as to suggest that women are the main drivers of misogyny without even mentioning men.

Even at the most simplistic level of analysis, it is a matter of historical record that almost all fundamentalist movements have been developed and driven by males, and that in almost all religions, the priestly caste is almost always exclusively male (many religions have quasi-priestly subordinate roles for women eg nuns in Catholicism). Please don't take this to mean that I am blaming men in general, all males, or even exclusively males for misogyny. I'm not. Women have contributed to their own disempowerment over the centuries.

It's so sad that a discussion supposedly about fundamentalism and misogyny that neurotically refuses to even acknowledge that males have been historically and remain today the predominant driving force of fundamentalism, the primary beneficiaries from misogyny, and in large part the very individuals who create, maintain and propagate the links between the two, is about as useful and productive as a vote for a corpse.

ETA: not directed to any one poster in particular.



Anaxagoras -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 12:02:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama
quote:

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion."

Ironic signature line in a misogyny thread. I'll add the next sentence from the quote:

quote:

This she can become only when she has the same rights as he and is his equal in education and work.


I wonder how Severin meant it - that it was inevitable that women would eventually achieve equality?

I suppose the intent of Severin is very much a matter of debate but Venus in Furs appeared at the same time as the beginnings of the women's suffrage movement so he may have associated that with the above rather than it being inevitable.



Moonhead -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 12:32:00 PM)

I wouldn't have said the novel had anything to do with sufferage, myself. Apart from anything else, all of the roleplaying is going on in the context of pre revolutionary Russian feudalism, and they didn't give a damn who chained themselves to a railing or jumped in front of a horse over there, did they?
(That's quite without getting into the dim view most feminists take of pornography of any flavour, of course...)



tweakabelle -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 12:44:37 PM)


quote:

(That's quite without getting into the dim view most feminists take of pornography of any flavour, of course...)


Wouldn't it be more accurate to state "the dim view some feminists take of pornography"? My impression is that this vocal minority of pleasure-fearing feminists is increasingly isolated and marginalised within feminism. Their silly trashy claims are becoming less credible and influential with each passing day.

As a politician once remarked to me: "Every movement has its trogs". [:D]



Moonhead -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 12:53:19 PM)

I can't claim to be a feminist myself, but I thought the pro smut wing was still a minority, and a lot of feminists take a dim view of those who don't share their issues with it. It's no bad thing if this situation has improved.



tweakabelle -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 1:07:11 PM)

That anti-sex stream of feminism (ppl like Janice Raymond, Catherine MacKinnon etc) arose initially out the lesbian-separatism stream of feminist thought. It really peaked in the 70s-80s and has been on an extended downhill slide ever since. Sadly it hasn't quite died off yet.

Nowadays it's a surprise for me to encounter a lesbian-separatist under 50 (not that I would describe myself as an -ist of any sort). The younger feminists I encounter regard these people with a kind of quaint amusement - they're indulged because of long years of service to the movement. And then pretty much ignored, like a dear but demanding cantankerous great aunt in her dotage straight out of an Agatha Christie novel.



Moonhead -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 1:14:28 PM)

Right.
I was assuming that they must still be a force to be reckoned with over the mauling they gave Camille Paglia twenty years back. (Mind you, wtf she was doing calling herself a feminist I can't imagine, so I've got a bit more sympathy for that than I should.) A few tongues were clucked at Susie bright as well, if memory serves.



hlen5 -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 1:17:38 PM)

General Reply


The whole point of feminism is choice. A choice to give birth or not, a choice to marry or not, work or not, run for office or not. Some women like porn, some don't.

"Feminism" is not a monolith.

ETA: Just as every man comes to his opinions from his own reasoning, so do women.



Iamsemisweet -> RE: Women and fundamentalist religions (1/17/2012 1:19:08 PM)

Oh my god, I knew a bunch of seperatism fanatics in college. Jesus, those chicks were annoying. I wonder if they are still spouting their nonsense 35 years later.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125