Gender Roles

[Jennywocky]

Egalitarian and feminist? What's the difference? Both want equality.

I think they probably define "equality" differently, though.

 

[Decaf]

Egalitarian and feminist? What's the difference? Both want equality.

I suppose the difference is focus. My beliefs about ending sexism are no stronger than my beliefs about ending racism, classism, typism or any other kind of dehumanization.

I believe that Affirmative Action is negative. I believe that any action taken by the government that differentiates between one group of people and another is a negative thing. That's not to say I don't understand cultural systematic prejudice such as what we've been talking about in this thread, but I believe ideally, government records will not include things like gender or ethnicity (one of the more pervasively misunderstood concepts of our era).

Of course if I had my way I would abolish nationalism altogether. And don't get me started on the divisions created by religion.

 

[Calamedes]

Myself as well. I see no reason for women to be treated differently in society than men. I'm not sure about elsewhere, but in the US, feminism has the connotation that women should be higher than men. THis is why decaf and I juxtapose the two terms (egalitarianism and feminism)

 

[Jennywocky]

... don't get me started on the divisions created by religion.

Oh, it's all in your head.

*whistles innocently*

 

[ElectricWizard]

I suppose the difference is focus. My beliefs about ending sexism are no stronger than my beliefs about ending racism, classism, typism or any other kind of dehumanization.

I believe that Affirmative Action is negative. I believe that any action taken by the government that differentiates between one group of people and another is a negative thing. That's not to say I don't understand cultural systematic prejudice such as what we've been talking about in this thread, but I believe ideally, government records will not include things like gender or ethnicity (one of the more pervasively misunderstood concepts of our era).

Of course if I had my way I would abolish nationalism altogether. And don't get me started on the divisions created by religion.

Generally, I see 'feminism' as fighting for equality between men and women, rather than focussing on it completely or as a main focus.
On the other hand, would you support affirmative action based on socioeconomic status? It's a reform, so I wouldn't see it as fixing all, rather that it would be better than what we have now, but not enough.

 

[Decaf]

Generally, I see 'feminism' as fighting for equality between men and women, rather than focusing on it completely or as a main focus.

I think to rightfully be a feminist you should exert some effort toward furthering this particular agenda. You don't need to be unconcerned about other areas, but if the subject in question is the dehumanization of a group of people and your arguments on the subject don't focus on gender inequality I don't think you are a feminist in the strict sense. Or at least I believe egalitarian is a more precise definition, because it more precisely describes your politics.

On the other hand, would you support affirmative action based on socioeconomic status? It's a reform, so I wouldn't see it as fixing all, rather that it would be better than what we have now, but not enough.

That's a tougher question. The inequality of class is not correctable just be changing people's perceptions as it develops quite naturally from generational ignorance (how each generation subsequently lacks understanding of how the previous generation got them there). Classism is not always a problem of dehumanization as much as ignorance and self-preservation...

... yes, I would support affirmative action based programs that focused on socioeconomic inequality.

 

[fullerene]

I see no reason for women to be treated differently in society than men. I'm not sure about elsewhere, but in the US, feminism has the connotation that women should be higher than men.

I'm glad someone else said it... I was wondering whether I was in touch with everything or not, but I got the same (strong) vibes from it.

 

[Thomas Young]

I'm an egalitarian, though I am sympathetic to the feminist.

Why?

 

[ElectricWizard]

I'm glad someone else said it... I was wondering whether I was in touch with everything or not, but I got the same (strong) vibes from it.

It originally meant equality between the sexes, and I still use it to mean such. It's a misleading term, but, at the time, women were far more oppressed than now, and thusly the movement was focussed on women's rights.
What I don't understand currently is the part of the feminist movement that is fighting for the right of women to join the army and fight at the front lines. What the heck?

 

[Calamedes]

their intentions are pure (they want women to have higher standing in society than their present situation), however there's a reason that in America some call them "Feme-Nazis"... let's just say their way of "solving" the problem is much more obnoxious than it needs to be.

To answer E-Wizard's question (cool nickname. can I call you that?), it's not just that some women actually do want to fight with men on the front lines, it's also the principle behind it, meaning if men can die for their country then so can women.

 

[ElectricWizard]

Well, Electric Wizard is the name of a band, so...
Nobody dies 'for their country' unless they're being invaded. The people fighting against the US army in the Middle East are dying 'for their country'. Nobody in the so-called 'First World' has died 'for their country' for ages. Hell, countries are just meaningless boundaries, I'm sure people can think of something else to die for.
Instead, women die for their government. Scrap that, they die for their owners, who have the government in their back pocket. Why? The owners want their property to be safe, and they want their profits. Now.
Feminazis? You realize that the term was popularized by misogynists like Rush Limbaugh, I assume? Crud, it's also an insult to the people who died in the Holocaust. They probably won't mind, sure, but... If they're up there, the feminists who were sent to concentration camps for being feminist might be pretty pissed off.

 

[Thomas Young]

War is no place for women. Nor is it a place ror anyone but If I wanted fighters I'd choose the men obviously.

 

[Calamedes]

OK Thomas, I ask you to either present an argument with backing instead of merely angering those like us with useless (defined here as unsupported and therefore rendered useless in debate, such as this) statments.

E-Wizard (yes, i'm adopting that ). I disagree on your definition of 'dying for one's country'. Many, myself included, denotate that as dying in pursuit of the goals of the State, be they defense or assisting others. Define those however you please, but my opinion will always stand (one of those things that i'm passionate about is patriotism, as many of you could have told by one of my earlier posts... :P).

 

[Thomas Young]

Women can't fight. They don't have the testosterone for the necessary aggression. How do you like them apples?

 

[ElectricWizard]

So Thomas is basically saying that the world would be better if women were in charge.

 

[Calamedes]

I eat them and throw the core at you.

Cite:
Lara Croft (although a fictional character, she kicks more ass than anybody who is not Chuck Norris)

My flatmate's current date (as in they're on a date now XD): 5 years in the Israeli military, has seen action and likes serving her country.... come to think of it, there are many girls who serve on the front lines of the Israeli army. Almost all of them could whoop my ass in a heartbeat (and that's besides the use of Krav Maga).

Several of my family members: legend has it that one of my very distant relatives (female) helped Mordecai Anelewicz (sp?) with the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising in the 1940's. Another physically beat a Cossak (we have proof, though not with me personally) and stole his tag.

Women are much more powerful than you think. Just because men, biologically, can build muscle faster and contain testosterone doesn't mean that women can't also be a force to be reckoned with.

 

[Thomas Young]

So Thomas is basically saying that the world would be better if women were in charge.

Interesting that you say that... Maybe if women were the rulers we wouldn't have any wars at all. Hmmmm...

Women are much more powerful than you think. Just because men, biologically, can build muscle faster and contain testosterone doesn't mean that women can't also be a force to be reckoned with.

Sure they can do weights and be like men if they really put the effort in. But why? Why not leave that to men and you do your womanly thing rather than be a freak of nature.

 

[ElectricWizard]

Men naturally become strong. They don't have to do any excercise or hard work at all.

 

[Thomas Young]

That's the point I'm trying to make the key word being natural.

 

[Jordan~]

"Natural" is the key word in the fallacy of appeal to nature, too.

 

[Jordan~]

Interesting that you say that... Maybe if women were the rulers we wouldn't have any wars at all. Hmmmm...



Sure they can do weights and be like men if they really put the effort in. But why? Why not leave that to men and you do your womanly thing rather than be a freak of nature.

Here's a fun activity to test your theory. Find a woman with a baby, take the baby from her, and refuse to give it back.

 

[Thomas Young]

"Natural" is the key word in the fallacy of appeal to nature, too.

In english please

Here's a fun activity to test your theory. Find a woman with a baby, take the baby from her, and refuse to give it back.

Haha, no I shouldn't. Cos if I refused to give it back, she wouldn't get it back.

 

[ElectricWizard]

DNFT?

 

[Fleur]

Haha, you don`t know what woman can do if she`s angry - in situations like the one mentioned above, the mother most likely will kick your ass - in affection of adrenaline an average woman can develop extremal strenght (I`ve heard a story of mother easily breaking door out, while she`s worried about her sick kid, who`s locked inside the house).

 

[ElectricWizard]

Again, Thomas just seems to be flame-baiting now...

 

[Fleur]

He`s already flaming.

 

[Calamedes]

not only that, but i'm a guy and i'm not strong (i obviously don't lift weights). theory disproved, E-wizard :P

 

[Decaf]

I'm an egalitarian, though I am sympathetic to the feminist.

Why?

Why am I an egalitarian or why am I sympathetic to feminists? I suppose you mean the latter...

Frankly, the reason why the "feminist" movement is still in progress is because of people like you. The fact that people like you exist makes life more difficult for women in general to accomplish the things they wish to accomplish. To that end I spend my energy trying to show people the flip side of their view points. Obviously some people are not affected by the view, and some are offended that I would attempt to change their viewpoint at all. <shrug> I feel like its the responsibility of anyone who sees the light to show the light to others.

Women can't fight. They don't have the testosterone for the necessary aggression. How do you like them apples?

You really don't know many women do you...

Also, I can fight and I'm not an aggressive person.

 

[Thomas Young]

DNFT?

?

He`s already flaming.

Flame baiting?

Why am I an egalitarian or why am I sympathetic to feminists? I suppose you mean the latter...

Frankly, the reason why the "feminist" movement is still in progress is because of people like you. The fact that people like you exist makes life more difficult for women in general to accomplish the things they wish to accomplish. To that end I spend my energy trying to show people the flip side of their view points. Obviously some people are not affected by the view, and some are offended that I would attempt to change their viewpoint at all. <shrug> I feel like its the responsibility of anyone who sees the light to show the light to others.



You really don't know many women do you...

Also, I can fight and I'm not an aggressive person.

Nah I was just clowning around a bit on this but i do find feminism annoying, you've got your equal rights so what is it all about?!

 

[Ermine]

Nah I was just clowning around a bit on this but i do find feminism annoying, you've got your equal rights so what is it all about?!

Not entirely. Having the right to vote is a tiny part of the battle. I'm no feminist, but I know that women have a ways to go. Salary differences (even in jobs requiring no manual labor) between men and women are still as much as 20 and 30 thousand dollars apart for the same jobs. That's hardly equal. Also, there's social perception issues. Many people simply don't take women seriously for no reason. Sounds like you might be one of them.

FYI I'm female but resort to a male name on the internet because I've discovered many times that people are condescending to women on the internet.

 

[Auburn]

FYI I'm female but resort to a male name on the internet because I've discovered many times that people are condescending to women on the internet.

hmmmm... that explains it!
I agree, there are lots of people on the internet who still look down upon women...

However, I think such a defense as this may be unnecessary on this INTP forum. I may be wrong, but most everyone here seems to understand that males and females both have equal minds - from what I've seen so far.

EDIT: I actually like the fact that the "genders" indicators were voted out here. I prefer to get to know a person by their thoughts first. This way no preconcieved ideas exist in regards to gender.

 

[Artifice Orisit]

Can women fight

I'd like to define the difference between the various forms of fighting.
(Below theories are based on the statistical trade-offs between the genders)

In a brawl I'd bet on a guy, brawling is simply trying to use brute strength to incapacitate your opponent.

In a proper fight between trained fighters the situation is quite different; strength is a useful tool, however it is normally the faster more dexterous fighter that wins. So my bet would be on the female fighter, with the odds being further stacked in her favour, the better trained the fighters are.

In armed combat the situation really depends upon the weapons and armour used; medieval knights clad in armour are brawlers par excellence. However in countries like Japan for example it wasn't unusual for women to actively train in the use of fast, light weapons like a tanto or spear. Against unarmoured or lightly armoured troops they were very effective.

Modern combat doesn’t really favour any sort of physical stature; however the ability to carry heavy loads over a long distance is preferred.

FYI I'm female but resort to a male name on the internet because I've discovered many times that people are condescending to women on the internet.

I can't understand the hostility; I used to think that it could be the result of friendly guy-to-guy hostility being misinterpreted. But after having witnessed it on other forum and online games it seems almost like some sort of tribalism.

In my gender's defence (why am I doing this?), I've read an article somewhere about the loss of "gender territory". Apparently some guys feel that they're losing the places where they could just-be-guys. This issue isn't restricted to the internet, when women first started frequenting bars there was an outcry against it; on the basis that guys need male-only venues.

From a scientific perspective early cultures have been know to have gender specific "sacred" places. These places served as a private area where gender specific issues could be discussed, privately. Discussions like: birds/bees, relationships/feelings, history/culture, knowledge/secrets and just general free social interaction (burping and farting competitions included).

It's quite a shame that modern societies no-longer have these "gender sacred" places, it was an important stabilizer for early society. Now relating this to internet forums, although they aren’t used to quite the same extent they were one of the last places for specifically male-to-male interaction. Thus hostility is generated by the "intrusion" of female members, disturbing the unconscious "sacred" place.

 

[Waterstiller]

Ben Barres, a female-to-male transgender neuroscientist at Stanford, found that his work was more highly valued after his gender transition. “Ben Barres gave a great seminar today,” a colleague of his reportedly said, “but then his work is much better than his sister’s.”

Dr. Barres, of course, doesn’t have a sister in academia.

From an interesting article on salary differences before and after gender transition.

Things are hardly equal.

 

[Hammett]

^ Very interesting. Things are not equal.

It's particularly interesting how pays increase and decrease depending on gender.

If you're super lucky you could snag yourself a good un Thomas.

 

[Thomas Young]

Not entirely. Having the right to vote is a tiny part of the battle. I'm no feminist, but I know that women have a ways to go. Salary differences (even in jobs requiring no manual labor) between men and women are still as much as 20 and 30 thousand dollars apart for the same jobs. That's hardly equal. Also, there's social perception issues. Many people simply don't take women seriously for no reason. Sounds like you might be one of them.

FYI I'm female but resort to a male name on the internet because I've discovered many times that people are condescending to women on the internet.

Not me twts! Hold up on the wage thing this whole job, work thing like it or not, was structured and built by men, we can't give you the same wage as us if we're the masters of the house!!

 

[Calamedes]

*starts singing from Les Miserables: "Ruler of the Roost, Master of the House"*

 

[ElectricWizard]

not only that, but i'm a guy and i'm not strong (i obviously don't lift weights). theory disproved, E-wizard :P

I already disproved that theory. In fact, disproving it the only reason why I don't work out more.

As for internet sexism? Yup, it sucks.

 

[Thomas Young]

I already disproved that theory. In fact, disproving it the only reason why I don't work out more.

As for internet sexism? Yup, it sucks.

A very sexist joke...

Why do women live longer than men?
Because God adds them the time that they wasted on parking.

 

[Ermine]

Not me twts! Hold up on the wage thing this whole job, work thing like it or not, was structured and built by men, we can't give you the same wage as us if we're the masters of the house!!

What I was talking about was not bosses vs. subordinates, but men and women in the exact same jobs doing the exact same thing, yet still $20,000 apart.

 

[Thomas Young]

On the flip side what makes you think that we shouldn't get more than you? We let you in so you should be thankful. (Fernando_the_weasel kneels, puts her hair up, and performs aggressive fellatio on Thomas Young).

Wow, now I know how all you young women get all these high profile jobs!

 

[Loraella]

I tend to believe that souls don't have genders.
And that all stereotypes about "masculine"/"feminine" are merely constructs of the society. Except for biological differences.
And after understanding that the "gender charecteristics" are just social constructs, I feel freer because I see there are large possibilities for me what to be, without any such limitations, and that I'm who I am and can be who I want to be, without any need to conform.

@Fernando - your username (well first part of it) is the same as the real name of my bf

I'm going to read this thread yet more carefully to see if I get more ideas from it; as so far I have just skimmed the first and last page :P

 

[fullerene]

On the flip side what makes you think that we shouldn't get more than you? We let you in so you should be thankful. (Fernando_the_weasel kneels, puts her hair up, and performs aggressive fellatio on Thomas Young).

lol, how long, by the way, were you actually posting seriously when you got here as opposed to when it switched over to jokingly for the fun of it? I mean, obviously this was a joke, but I thought you started joking quite a while ago, when everyone was ganging up against you... haha i'm just curious, is that accurate?

oh, and welcome loraella

 

[severus]

Jesus, what a mess. Is someone here arguring that women should not get equal pay for equal work? Maybe I misread...

 

[Kuu]

You know what disturbs me the most? That a good amount of the population is comfortable in their gender stereotypes (a good amount of the population being SJs)... both men and women. Women here seem to have a post-feminism inherited belief that they are empowered and equal, and yet still they embrace and even enforce sexism and limit themselves to fit gender roles, even going so far as to trying to impose them unto others. WTF?

 

[ElectricWizard]

lol, how long, by the way, were you actually posting seriously when you got here as opposed to when it switched over to jokingly for the fun of it? I mean, obviously this was a joke, but I thought you started joking quite a while ago, when everyone was ganging up against you... haha i'm just curious, is that accurate?

Don't encourage them.

 

[Ermine]

If the same effort is being put into the same job, it should give an equal salary, regardless of who's doing the job.

 

[fullerene]

...any chance you could change "effort" to "amount of productivity" or something? I don't care if the janitor would try just as hard as my surgeon--I wouldn't pay him the same amount for cutting me open because of the difference in ability.

I'm not sure if that's actually what you meant...if effort had the "precise" definition you meant, I couldn't disagree more... but if you just meant "if they're as good at doing the job," then I doubt anyone here would disagree (assuming I was right assuming Thomas was joking)

 

[grey matters]

Gender specific abilities and inabilities are almost purely invented by humans and enforced by society. If you were to go back in time in a mental time machine (perhaps a time portal would be less fussy) and visit various decades over the past 120 years you would see how ludicrous some of their notions of gender ability were.

Do you believe that people actually believed that women should stay home and take care of the children because men were not capable of being nurturing? We have now discovered that men are capable of changing diapers and kissing and hugging their children. I have a friend of mine who's spouse is a house husband. He is far more nurturing then her, and can also kick ass in the kitchen (he has a peach cobbler to die for).

It was a common belief that women should not be fighter pilots because their hormones make them too mentally unstable for such a job. Don't men have hormones too? Don't those hormones get them in trouble also? How about this idea; we are human, not animal, therefore we can choose not to be controlled by our hormones (although there are times when allowing our hormones to take their natural course can be exciting and fun). The point is that hormones don't make one capable or incapable of doing things, but self control is the key.

Now lets take that time machine into the future and see how our stupid ideas of gender ability have handicapped society.

As for gender sacred places, those reserved for females feel like purgatory to me. If I were to add up the hours that I have had to endure these places I suppose I could do whatever I want for about 4 years because my purgatory time has already been served here on Earth. This thought is a comfort to me.

 

[Kidege]

On the flip side what makes you think that we shouldn't get more than you? We let you in so you should be thankful. (Fernando_the_weasel kneels, puts her hair up, and performs aggressive fellatio on Thomas Young).

Wow, now I know how all you young women get all these high profile jobs!

This, "sir", is an insult to all the readers. I would explain how but I will not. All the lenght of this thread you have proved you

1. Have no actual grasp of the concept of rational discussion
2. Have no grasp of the procedures of rational discussion
3. Have no operational metacognitive criteria
3.1. Wouldn't identify a fallacy if it bit you in the ass
3.1.1 Stoop to ad hominem attacks
4. Disregard basic ethics


In another thread I decided to give you the benefit of doubt. It being on spiritual matters, and knowing spiritual matters are rarely explored in a logical manner, I asked you to expand on your ideas. I take it back.

I think I'm justified in thinking that the statements of somebody with such a skewed view of his own thinking processes, and with such obvious problems analysing theories and applying them to reality, have to be taken with more than a grain of salt. And frankly, after what you said to Fernando, after the way in which you insulted women and the whole readership, I'm not going to bother to read your posts.

 

[Ermine]

Slightly off topic, but I can't believe I actually found this in this forum's terms of use: "You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is annoying."

On those grounds, and many more, he can easily be banned. Wouldn't be within a forum's authority to ban him? Not only is Thomas Young's "material" annoying, it's repulsive, insulting, stupid, and frankly, this willful ignorance is the root of most, if not all evil.