Feminism, Gender Conflict and Equality Movements

[Kalypso]

There are quite a few issues at hand here, so I'll address them separately.

Now, this has greatly to do with 'Equality.' I don't think there can ever really be 'Equality' between women and men, allow me to explain why.

Physically, men are stronger than women. This is not an opinion, but an expression of statistics and biology. Men grow more muscle mass and are more adept at physical tasks, I guess you can call it sexist but it's also true. Am I saying all women are weaker than men? No, just on average, women are weaker than men, and the majority is what matters (To discuss a topic like this, you have to speak in generalities, getting into specifics of people and statistical comparisons would lead us to a conversation long enough to publish a doctorate thesis).

Due to the fact that men are stronger than women, inequality is established. Let's look at this in terms of a relationship, starting with pre-feminism.

Man and woman are in relationship. Woman gets angry with relationship, she cannot fight back, or speak out, for risk of being battered. The best she can hope for is to divorce and escape the relationship, often complicated by kids. Men have all the control. Heavily imbalanced in favor of the man.

Fast-forward to feminism. Now, 'Women have all the rights of men.' Everything is 'equal.' But let's look at the same example.

Man and woman are in relationship. Man gets angry with relationship, he cannot fight her. He can speak out against her, but she might get physical, and he can't really respond to that. After all, he hits her, lawsuit. She hits him, nothing. Technically women are as accountable for physical violence as men, but it's not enforced. Women get the upper hand in the relationship. Because men tend to have the wealth in the relationship statistically, men also have more encouragement not to leave, because they will have their monetary wealth taken away from them in the divorce. Kids further complicate things, because if there are kids involved, they stay with the mother, and the father is stuck paying enormous sums of money.

Instead of equality, there is COMPLETE reversal. Today, women have all the power in the relationship. They can 'trap' men by getting pregnant, they can berate their husbands and get away with it, and men are in a much less powerful role to do the same. This starts to manifest itself in personal relationships.

Often the 'pussification' of men is spoken of. I have a theory that this is a result of a power shift. Now we have '***** on a pedestal,' women are in an empowered position in society, just look at how parents teach their kids. A daughter is treated like a god, a son is not. From early on in life, women are catered to. The men who become ******* are those submitting to the power switch. I can cite many specific examples from my life, men who treat women like gods instead of equals. We all can.

Now- the cause of this, I believe, is that 'Equality' movements give women all of the advantages men have, but not as many repercussions, such as punishment for physical abuse. It DOES mean something that women can jokingly hit men as hard as they can and it means nothing, however the other way around... you know.

This is bad for women when it comes to power in Fiscal settings. Similar things have happened to some minorities. And what is bad? They are being treated like they need special treatment, without asking for it. And they don't. No one does. It cheapens you as a person to be raised with special treatment, example being a spoiled child. They never accomplish things for themselves because they didn't need to in the past or learn how to, they have always been spoiled. It cheapens life experience.

This is bad for men in relationships, due to a complete shift in attitude, women have the power, and this is endorsed by common society. Think about this situation- A woman walks up to a man and says 'Nice ***, wanna ****?' What do you think happens? Now, a man walks up to a woman and says 'Nice ***, wanna ****?' What happens? Is it the same thing? No. There is a MUCH higher chance that when a woman solicits a man, sex happens, because mens standards are cheapened by the idea that women are superior to men, and some men submit to the idea. And if a man does it, there's a much higher chance that the woman takes action against him, because she is empowered.


The answer to all of these issues, in my opinion, is real equality. Particularly in the areas of legislation and parental-ideology. As long as women are revered as children and men are demonized the problem will exist. Children need to be treated the same regardless of gender, and legislation needs to treat everyone equally, regardless of race, gender or whatever.

An interesting thing I notice is that in the past, women had the short end of the stick because of oppression and sexism. It's gone for the most part today, but the after-effects of feminism I've discussed here pose the EXACT same problems for their gender that the oppression did, the only difference is that it's less obvious.


Anyway, this isn't an absolute belief I have, just some observations, I'd like to know what other people have to say about it. I'm more than willing to concede points and change what I've written here, it seems like fertile ground for discussion. What do you think?

 

[Dark.Pch]

I would have to a gree with this. I beleive both genders should get treated the same. cause in some of the causes you stated here, a woman can take advantage of a man and get away with it.

Like if a 16 year old girl was to go out with a 19 year old guy. Everything is cool, then thee girl gets angry at the guy for some reason, then she reports him saying that he was trying to **** her or harrased. Cases like this girls can take advantage of. Same for hitting a female. they hit us, its normal, nothing big happens, we hit them, and us males get in trouble for it.

For the fact that men and woman dont get the same rights means advantages will be carried out into play. In a marriage, the guy at times would be more controlling cause he is stronger than the woman and if the guy does not like what the woman is doing, he will hit her cause she is weak and cant fight back in fear the beatings would get worst. Now this is where the men take advantage of. Thus want their wives to cook and clean for them and if they dont, they will get beat.

Its a clear fact that woman and men are not equal cause of these cases. I also find it funny how it was stated "All men are created equal" How can that be true when we have still like this going on? And if they really beleive that quote, why did they not say "All men and WOMEN are created equal"

It seems like the balance will never be stable. For it will continue to go on. The only thing I say that is equal around here is that men and woman are equal when it comes to taking advantage of each other.

 

[cF=)]

Since when do women have the right to vote ?
Since when can women have jobs men had for centuries ?
Are women and men always equally paid for the same job ?
Are women still treat like dogs in middle-east's countries ?

I think your are a misogynist for not acknowledging the problems women fight for in our centurie. You also speak of divorce like stupid men do, without thinking of the astronomic task it is to educate and carry the well being of a child (and I won't take the time to explain to you how hard it is to get divorced for a woman). You also speak of complete reversal, but perhaps you forgot men still have political power to themselves.

Feminism is like everything. Some people take it to the extreme, and that's what you've rant about. But I hope you're not gullible enough to believe everything you have written. That's ludicrous.

 

[Kalypso]

Since when do women have the right to vote ?
Since when can women have jobs men had for centuries ?
Are women and men always equally paid for the same job ?
Are women still treat like dogs in middle-east's countries ?

Uhm, I am clearly speaking of post-equality feminism, where Women have all the rights of men, but still feel the need for 'empowerment,' and the context for my post is clearly America, more specifically America in 2007.

(and I won't take the time to explain to you how hard it is to get divorced for a woman)

It's as easy as getting a lawyer or signing some forms, same as a man.

You also speak of complete reversal, but perhaps you forgot men still have political power to themselves.

_____ Clinton is running for President. I'll give you a hint, it's not Bill.

 

[cF=)]

And that's why you feel the need to bash feminism ?

Equality has yet to be attain, because there still is sexism and society rules which hinder women. Like I already said, women are not always paid the same as men in different jobs as of today, and it's also harder for them to get hired when a sexist is a the top of the compagny.

You also can't speak in favor of men justice when we had control in every single house of america over the past decades. I would like to see proof of 'the need for empowerment' since your first post talks about relationship/family issues which you can't site source for. You should understand the fact men have never been able to walk up to a women and explicitly ask for sex, 2007 or not.

 

[Kalypso]

And that's why you feel the need to bash feminism ?

Yes, because social equality in America has been reached, and it is more harmful than helpful in this day/age.

Equality has yet to be attain, because there still is sexism and society rules which hinder women. Like I already said, women are not always paid the same as men in different jobs as of today, and it's also harder for them to get hired when a sexist is a the top of the compagny.

Get a fraction of a shred of evidence and you can sue for enough money to live the rest of your life on. These biases largely don't exist because no one wants to risk lawsuits.

You also can't speak in favor of men justice when we had control in every single house of america over the past decades. I would like to see proof of 'the need for empowerment' since your first post talks about relationship/family issues which you can't site source for. You should understand the fact men have never been able to walk up to a women and explicitly ask for sex, 2007 or not.

In the days you are referring to, sex was taboo, and no one explicitly talked about it, unless they were doing so to break social norms, in the same way that white people don't say 'ni**er' unless they want to get a rise out of people.

Very basic social observation leads to the conclusion that women are raised with more reverence than men. Examine father/daughter relations, fathers treat their daughters like a physical embodiment of purity, not a person, disallowing them from going out/doing what they want because they know the consequences of such actions can ruin their life. These actions are much less practiced with men. I'm not exactly sure why, but it is very present in our society. You can't 'prove' something like this, so to say I can't prove it doesn't really mean anything, you either agree with it or you don't.

 

[cF=)]

Yes, because social equality in America has been reached, and it is more harmful than helpful in this day/age.

It has not. If I take your reasoning and apply it to racism for example, you must think black and white are equals. Worst, you could probably be against a 'black people recognition' group because, judging from the minority, you're the one thinking there is no injustice.

Get a fraction of a shred of evidence and you can sue for enough money to live the rest of your life on. These biases largely don't exist because no one wants to risk lawsuits.

Oh sure, the woman with no job will waste money on hiring a lawyer while corporations have dozen of those. I couldn't have figured this out myself.

Very basic social observation leads to the conclusion that women are raised with more reverence than men. Examine father/daughter relations, fathers treat their daughters like a physical embodiment of purity, not a person, disallowing them from going out/doing what they want because they know the consequences of such actions can ruin their life. These actions are much less practiced with men. I'm not exactly sure why, but it is very present in our society. You can't 'prove' something like this, so to say I can't prove it doesn't really mean anything, you either agree with it or you don't.

I love how 'basic social observation' seems to be pulled out of nowhere, without any sources, and being developed on. If you want to actually prove your point and 'speak in generalities' if I quote your first post, show me evidences. When I can't show facts, I don't recall personal experiences to replace it.

Now, after you're being proved wrong on your example, you throw me the 'this topic can't be debated' card. Way to dodge the on going brawl when you start smelling the burn.

 

[Kalypso]

It has not. If I take your reasoning and apply it to racism for example, you must think black and white are equals. Worst, you could probably be against a 'black people recognition' group because, judging from the minority, you're the one thinking there is no injustice.

...um...there's no injustice...

There are so many laws protecting racial and sexual biggotry that those who feel racist or sexist keep it to themselves so they aren't sued back into the stone ages. I don't know where your ideas of biggotry are coming from, they are largely imagined.

And many of the 'black advocation' groups do just sue random people. I mentioned in another thread that the NAACP tried to sue the state of Florida for 'racist standardized tests' because black students did worse on average. The only conclusion that can be drawn from that is that black students on average do worse on standardized tests, not that the test is racist. It can't even be racist, it's questions on a page.

Oh sure, the woman with no job will waste money on hiring a lawyer while corporations have dozen of those. I couldn't have figured this out myself.

Don't propagate this bull****, at work I have 2x as many female coworkers as males. Women have no problems getting jobs. If the woman was a housewife, and had no work experience, she could find a lawyer who has no startup fee and only charges after settlement (Taking a ****load of money from the husband) is reached.

I love how 'basic social observation' seems to be pulled out of nowhere, without any sources, and being developed on. If you want to actually prove your point and 'speak in generalities' if I quote your first post, show me evidences. When I can't show facts, I don't recall personal experiences to replace it.

It's a common theme in America. I don't know if you live here, but it is a permeating theme to our culture. I don't need to prove it, and even if I did I couldn't. If you choose not to believe me, fine, whatever.

Now, after you're being proved wrong on your example, you throw me the 'this topic can't be debated' card. Way to dodge the on going brawl when you start smelling the burn.

...wow, this is just 100% ignorance. I NEVER said anything here couldn't be debated, in fact I encouraged it, but you are the one presenting false facts to propagate your cause. There is no proof of sexism/racism in the modern American workplace, as previously stated, due to enormous risk of lawsuit. Women/Blacks are MORE LIKELY to get a job to avoid a lawsuit. Heard of Affirmative Action? The only 'false' argument I present is one I don't present as fact. I clearly say if you don't believe it, that's fine, just ignore it.

 

[cF=)]

'I' posted, I shall respond.

 

[Evil Eye]

Since when do women have the right to vote ?
Since when can women have jobs men had for centuries ?
Are women and men always equally paid for the same job ?
Are women still treat like dogs in middle-east's countries ?

Oh God somebody call the hyperbole police and get Diapers fitted for an EXTREME straight jacket. For a guy about to complain about bigotry, it's pretty ironic that you reveal little to no knowledge about the Mid-East. Every nation in that region is wildly different, and in some of them all women are treated like royalty.

I think your are a misogynist for not acknowledging the problems women fight for in our centurie.

A bullshit point. It's pure ad hominem, regardless of whether it makes a reasonable point. While women still have struggles today, they're nowhere near as monumental as in the past. And a lot of his dissection of the power shift is very accurate.

You also speak of divorce like stupid men do, without thinking of the astronomic task it is to educate and carry the well being of a child

Ugh. Do you have some kind of reason for bias, here? Have you recently divorced a husband or something (I know you are a fellow fella, I was being ironic)? Because, contrary to popular belief, men do contribute to the upbringing of their children. I know, when did this start happening!? This point is null because it stinks of a misguided speaker and an, ironically, equally misogynist ideal that only women take care of the kids.

(and I won't take the time to explain to you how hard it is to get divorced for a woman).

Hahaha. Maybe in the fifties, bub. When men kept all the property and women got the kids and nothing else. Maybe before things like legal aid. Maybe before the courts decided that men shouldn't get the kids -- are you going to tell me they usually do? Because that's horseshit unless you're a washed up actor. Maybe before courts (this is in Canada) passed rules that women can claim they have no ability to work anymore because their husband cheated on them. I'm not sure if there is reciprocal laws in this case, but can you really picture a man successfully using the same claim? Maybe before the legal system started to contort to the point that between two seemingly reasonable individuals, the woman's word is gold and the man's is not.

You also speak of complete reversal, but perhaps you forgot men still have political power to themselves.

Wow. Is that straight jacket too loose? While men do have a large majority of political power to themselves, it's not even close to total dominance. And he's talking about suburbia -- the household, not the Senate! This is a pointless diversion.

Feminism is like everything. Some people take it to the extreme, and that's what you've rant about. But I hope you're not gullible enough to believe everything you have written. That's ludicrous.

Well, I support feminism to a point. But the ones that think society is completely patriarchal and that women have no power, particularly in the home, are equally ludicrous. I hardly agree with everything Kalypso said -- I disagree with the idea of daughters being held over sons, that's all about the parents on a case by case level -- but he did say a lot of things that are true and then some. I don't want to hit a woman, but the fact remains that if one attacked me and I defended myself, I would end up in jail. You can say there's no bias in a case like this, but are you going to take the word of a five-foot-two-eyes-of-blue lady with a well of water rivalling the Hoover Dam? Or are you going to take the six-one big lug with a stoney expression, five o'clock shadow and scratches on his face? If you can say there wouldn't be any bias against me in that case, I think you're infinitely more biased than Kalyspo... just insidiously so.

And that's why you feel the need to bash feminism ?

I'll stay out of this one, since it's not directed at me, but I took Kalypso's original post more as a his own observations than a bigoted rant.

Equality has yet to be attain, because there still is sexism and society rules which hinder women.

While that is true, it's nothing like it was years ago. And I don't think the fact that inequality remains in some areas should discount the fact that there is inequality against men, as well. You should both stop looking at things in a black and white fashion. Society doesn't have to inherently enslave one group or the other -- it has biases against either gender in different areas. Courts are more favorable to women, while the career world is [slightly] tilted for a man. The household, as Kalypso dissected, is a woman's domain, while the political world is still very much patriarchal. You can't ignore one thing just because its opposite exists.

Like I already said, women are not always paid the same as men in different jobs as of today, and it's also harder for them to get hired when a sexist is a the top of the compagny.

Well, given my comments above, that does nothing to discount my points. And thank you for saying "not always" instead of "never". But I should add that it's quite hard for a man to get a job if a feminist is doing the hiring, and nigh-impossible for him to get a job at the whim of a radical feminist. Like I said, the world is shades of gray. There is sexism against women, but that doesn't mean men are free and all powerful.

You also can't speak in favor of men justice when we had control in every single house of america over the past decades.

Alright, that's just reverse misogynism. That is the most ridiculous bullshit I have ever heard spewed from an intelligent person's mouth in my entire life. The fact that prejudice existed in favor of one group for a while means that prejudice against it should be allowed if not embraced? What the hell is the matter with you? Are you familiar with the recent case where a man and a woman, both white, were kidnapped, *****, and tortured by a black gang? This is the kind of thing you are endorsing, or at least telling us we should ignore. For an example in another culture, the Sunni Muslims had precedence over others in Iraq while Saddam, himself Sunni, was in power. The other groups are now crying out that the Sunni should be under their heel, and that laws as such should be entrenched in the constitution. Don't tell me I'm being extreme. If you want equality, you should seek equality, not advantage. The moment you start letting crap like that slide is the moment that society reverts to its old ways, just with a new patsy.

I would like to see proof of 'the need for empowerment' since your first post talks about relationship/family issues which you can't site source for.

If you want a source, I could point you to myself and every person I have ever known with parents who got divorced. In all of these cases but one (roughly a dozen in total), the kids stay with mom, mom gets half of dad's money and pension, dad movies into a crappy townhouse and pays taxes on his gross income (ignoring that child support for two or more kids and alimony are no small sums), and that's the end of that chapter. In the one different case, things were a bit more amiable because the wife made more than the husband. I explained above that women have the advantage in courts, and it's almost always a fact.

As a sidenote, I wasn't complaining about the half-of-the-savings-and-pension thing, but I do think that the marital assets should be split equally, meaning the husband gets a share of the wife's pension as well. I understand that courts try to balance things out, and in this regard, between two working spouses of roughly the same income, they are usually at least mostly fair. However, it's not quite balanced.

You should understand the fact men have never been able to walk up to a women and explicitly ask for sex, 2007 or not.

Well, they could slap their asses when they're busy filing tax documents, not that I find that to be a good thing. Although I disagree that men say yes to sex because of female dominance -- if that were true, they'd "submit" to unattractive women, too -- he has a point that a man soliciting sex would probably end up with legal action, while a woman could get away with it.

Again, I don't think it's based on any genetalia-based hierarchy, but women do have the advantage in disputes of that nature, and it's because society still treats them like weak non-persons that cannot be held accountable for their actions. A woman can get away with hitting a man. A woman can get away with things men can't. But there's inequality against both genders. That's what I hate about feminism, and about... well, men don't have a formal representation, but you get me. They see everything as some kind of societal entrapment, and twist the world and its inner workings to fit their ideologies. It's ludicrous. But so are both of you.

-I

 

[cF=)]

Heading to my girlfriend's prom, but I shall have my revenge.

*for tonight, changes the straight jacket for a shirt & tie*

 

[Eor]

The only real inequality I see for women is the common use of the word "*****" instead of "Women", or "Girlfriend". That, and the sexuality. People seem to think women are either Virgins, and if they're not then they're whores. They act like their is a dichotomy of it. A sexually active women is a *****, but a sexually active man is normal. Women constantly being in commercials as a sex object (such as commercials where a girl is only there to wear revealing clothes to try and sell something) could also be seen as discrimination, though that is more up to each individual one (no one would say Abercrombie is discriminating against men because their ads have ripped abs everywhere).

There are still people who think that women belong inside and are inferior to men (I once had a girl tell me that women shouldn't vote and that men where superior because "God invented Adam first"), but they are so small that they are nothing to worry about.l

 

[The Mad Hatter]

Well, if you do believe in the bible I don't see how you could see men and women equal. "The head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man" (1 Corinthians 11.3). Took me a while to find it but I knew it was in there somewhere.

 

[Kalypso]

The only real inequality I see for women is the common use of the word "*****" instead of "Women", or "Girlfriend". That, and the sexuality. People seem to think women are either Virgins, and if they're not then they're whores. They act like their is a dichotomy of it. A sexually active women is a *****, but a sexually active man is normal. Women constantly being in commercials as a sex object (such as commercials where a girl is only there to wear revealing clothes to try and sell something) could also be seen as discrimination, though that is more up to each individual one (no one would say Abercrombie is discriminating against men because their ads have ripped abs everywhere).

There's a good reason why it's like that. Women decide whether or not sex happens. (I am not saying this double standard is right).

Again, I bring up my last point. Examine the odds of sex when a man says to a women "Let's f*ck" and when a woman says to a man "Let's f*ck." No further explanation is needed, the results of those two seemingly controlled actions are wildly different. A man would almost always be inclined to have sex (Assuming they are single, if not there's a moral dilemma), whereas the woman is almost always going to be 'offended' and take some sort of action against the man. It turns into an empowerment movement.

Men have to manipulate women into sleeping with them for the most part. Women who want sex can get it, easily, as much as they want. That's why a man is 'skilled' and a woman is 'a *****.' Not to say it's right, but there's good reason the stereotype exists.

Which just loops back around to my shift of power point.