Support NeoGAF

[Neoriceisgood]

Well saying that there is no such thing as consensual sex or that all sex is rape is a pretty absurd extreme though.

Well duh.

 

[Oersted]

Most people's exposure to feminism is what they see and hear online. Radical feminism on the internet is relatively prevalent, and the outrageous shit gets noticed more than the rational shit. When a lot people are exposed to ridiculous words and ideals and they're expressed by a "feminist," it's no wonder why such a stigma is attached to it.

And I wasn't saying that feminism is inherently radical or pro-male subjugation, so calm your tits, dude.

It troubles me, that after years of opression, scratch that, with still existing opression, the outrageous shit lies somehow in the womens field.

 

[kirblar]

Naturally? I'm not saying the argument can't be made, but there's more than enough noise from social expectations and differing experiences to make this a questionable assertion.

I think trying to paint the differences we see in aggression/confidence/competitive preferences as being 100% social is a fantasy, yes. Not saying social factors don't matter, they definitely play a part, but I see that sort of thing as trying to deny that at the core, we're just animals just like anything else. We just happen to be really smart ones.

 

[The Albatross]

I don't see anything wrong with this idea, as long as it's not taken to absurd extremes.

If a power imbalance suggests that consent is impossible, and therefore, all acts of consent that come from a power imbalance are actually rape, then I think that really trivializes the word "rape." It trivializes it because power imbalances are a seemingly necessary reality of social creatures.

Forgive me if I misunderstood the back and forth and suggested the wrong thing, though.

 

[Carcetti]

Feminism is still needed even in the western countries but let's face it, tumblr radical feminism is about as credible as reddit militant atheism. Internet echo chambers are pretty useless anyway, so maybe look into feminism in academia or just outside of the net?

 

[Neoriceisgood]

If a power imbalance suggests that consent is impossible, and therefore, all acts of consent that come from a power imbalance are actually rape, then I think that really trivializes the word "rape." It trivializes it because power imbalances are a seemingly necessary reality of social creatures.

Forgive me if I misunderstood the back and forth and suggested the wrong thing, though.

As I said, I think the idea itself isn't wrong as long as it isn't taken to an absurd extreme. Obviously saying all power imbalances = rape can be seen as an absurd extreme. I didn't think it was necessary to specify that.

 

[The Albatross]

As I said, I think the idea itself isn't wrong as long as it isn't taken to an absurd extreme. Obviously saying all power imbalances = rape can be seen as an absurd extreme. I didn't think it was necessary to specify that.

I can't think of a scenario where the thought that power imbalance = rape isn't absurd or reductionist to the point of absurdity. Power imbalances are a social necessity. I don't think that rape is a social necessity (reality, sure, but not necessity).

 

[Mumei]

Biologically speaking men and women definitely have different behavioural instincts. Thats something that isn't only observed in the human species, which makes it easier to factor out societal influences.

I think you're underestimating the work needed to demonstrate that an observation of a behavioral difference between men and women is the result of natural, in-born, biological differences between males and females. Even when you can point to other related species to argue that this is a consistent difference between males and females, and these observed differences are likely related to natural differences between males and females, you cannot then use that argument to assert that the exact manifestation you are seeing is the result of biology and that societal influences can therefore be factored out.

In the case of confidence, which is what we are talking about, it may be the men are naturally more confident. There is some (albeit contradictory and tenuous) research suggesting that there are some biological factors that may make a difference. But that doesn't mean that what we are seeing is uninfluenced by societal factors and that doesn't mean that women cannot improve their confidence.

And more practically, the assertion that inequalities are simply the result of natural, biological processes has the effect of exaggerating those differences and making people less concerned with those inequalities. When women are told that they naturally do worse on a given math test, they actually do worse. When they are told that there is no gender bias on the same math test, they do as well as the men. When women believe that a test of mental rotation tests them on their ability to perform stereotypically feminine tasks, they perform as well as men. When they believe that the same test measures their ability to perform stereotypically masculine tasks, their performance plummets - and the exact opposite is observed among men. I don't think of the assertion that a difference is "just natural" as one that is a value-neutral description of objective reality; it can actually have the effect of reifying those differences, and making people less likely to see those inequalities are problematic. This is why I advocate a cautious approach to claims that behavioral or aptitudinal differences are caused by biological differences.

 

[Interframe]

I'm a woman, and a feminist, and basically, it breaks down, to me, to being about choice.

For example: Women and men should be able to choose what to do with their own lives without having to worry about gender roles dictating their place in society. If a woman want to be a stay at home mom, she should be able to. If she wants to be a CEO, she should be able to. On the flip side, if a man wants to be a stay at home father, a nurse, a kindergarten teacher, a CEO, etc he should be able to as well without pushback from society.

It's about sexual freedom and breaking away from the 'promiscuity=slut' for women, virginity/few partners=emasculating to men. It's about being inclusive of all sexualities and the lack thereof. As long as everything is safe, sane, and consensual, people should stay the fuck out of other people's sex lives.

It's also about (again for me) the way our law enforcement and society treat victims of sexually based crimes and the people who commit them. Educating people on the issues surrounding rape is sort of a personal crusade of mine. We can't change how society deals with it without speaking up and talking about it. Might not happen in my lifetime, but hopefully I've been able to change a few minds here and there.

This sounds like exactly the way the world and society should be like.

 

[addik]

It's something that people argue about on the internet.

There are "standard" feminists who just want equivalent rights between genders (and thus ironically pretty much share the same ideology to the more liberal MRAs)

I haven't really read much in to MRA, but in essence, yes, this cannot be said enough. Feminism also deals with Men's Rights, especially since the standards of masculinity is still set by a select few elite. Feminism essentially deals with the empowerment of people regardless of their sexuality or their chosen gender. As Fiction says it, it is about giving people the power to choose what they want to do.

While it deals with changing the notion that girls, for example, cannot do Engineering for example, because they are girls, it also deals with the notion that boys cannot go in to Teaching because it is a girls' job (which is the case in my country, or at least in my province). It's just that women had it worse, and they are still regarded lowly in some areas in the world, and their oppression is systematic in nations that are patriarchal.

 

[Neoriceisgood]

I can't think of a scenario where the thought that power imbalance = rape isn't absurd or reductionist to the point of absurdity. Power imbalances are a social necessity. I don't think that rape is a social necessity (reality, sure, but not necessity).

I'm pretty sure we're using different definitions of what the term "true consent" means/implies within the thing I replied to.

But I'm actually not that interested in continuing this particular discussion, sorry.

 

[Mr. E. Yis]

They aren't unrelated ideas! But feminism is specifically about gender equality - it says nothing about racial equality, class equality, etc.

This. There is a bad stigma making it an exclusively extreme word from corporate media and the right wing, but really, the majority of people are feminist. They just have never used the word feminist for that idea.

 

[Mumei]

I think trying to paint the differences we see in aggression/confidence/competitive preferences as being 100% social is a fantasy, yes. Not saying social factors don't matter, they definitely play a part, but I see that sort of thing as trying to deny that at the core, we're just animals just like anything else. We just happen to be really smart ones.

I don't think it's a denial that we're animals; I think it's a recognition of the limitations of our ability to demarcate where biological differences end and socially-influenced differences begin, and the observation that historically we've consistently overestimated the former and underestimated the effects of the latter. There are areas where there do seem to be indisputably biological factors (e.g. male propensity for violence), but even seems to be even further exaggerated by societal factors, and the exact degree of male violence can vary wildly from place to place and time to time, even as it is consistently higher than female violence.

 

[Tawpgun]

Feminism is about gender equality, but it focuses on women. Any sane person should be considered a feminist.

Unfortunately the name is tainted by the people who take it too far. Luckily they tend to stay on the internet. Unfortunately their prescence is still felt so when people claim they are feminists a lot of people feel uncomfortable.

I used to be a part of this "progressive club" on campus and it had some of those radical feminists in it. Like the type of people that will be offended at everything. I remember one of them posted an FB status like "I hate it when people say I'm too alienating, its bullshit they can't police me like that" But the truth is radical feminism is alienating and its only hurting feminism as a whole. :/

 

[Platy]

That's just bullshit.

For example dental assistants - the vast majority of those are female. Not because males don't want to do that job, but because patients prefer female assistants, thus males are discriminated against for wanting to do that job. You want a male fingering around in your face or a female?

Then there are all sorts of jobs related to children - the vast majority of people taking care of children are female. Not because males don't want to do that job, but because males are always and always potential child molesters + rapists nowadays. Thus males are discriminated against as well. You want 3 males taking care of your 5 year old daughter or 3 females?

Same for nurses. Having female nurses seeing male and female adults + children naked is not a problem at all. Male nurse washing a female patient? Oh Oh Oh. Big red warning sign. Male nurse washing a female child? Oh Oh red flag, potential molester. That's probably the cause why especially in pediatric care, there are almost always 100% female nurses.

Are there actual male delivery nurses? I surely don't think so.

It's kinda disgusting that you want to change this definitive and systematic discrimination against males into a "Patriarchy" issue and even change the gender of the victims from male to effectively female.

But it IS a Patriachy issue.

Without rape culture and the idea that it is the JOB OF A WOMAN to stay at home and care for the kids and fuck jobs there would be NO problem about a male teacher.
If it is not the job of a male to educate a children, WHAT HE FUCK is he doing with little kids ?
OBVIOUSLY a pedophile.

Children should be educated, cared,washed, played, feed and etc by BOTH parents.

YOU don't want a male dentist because you have problems with a male hand penetrating your mouth =P
I never had problems with the gender of my dentist.

 

[.GqueB.]

That's just bullshit.

For example dental assistants - the vast majority of those are female. Not because males don't want to do that job, but because patients prefer female assistants, thus males are discriminated against for wanting to do that job. You want a male fingering around in your face or a female?

Then there are all sorts of jobs related to children - the vast majority of people taking care of children are female. Not because males don't want to do that job, but because males are always and always potential child molesters + rapists nowadays. Thus males are discriminated against as well. You want 3 males taking care of your 5 year old daughter or 3 females?

Same for nurses. Having female nurses seeing male and female adults + children naked is not a problem at all. Male nurse washing a female patient? Oh Oh Oh. Big red warning sign. Male nurse washing a female child? Oh Oh red flag, potential molester. That's probably the cause why especially in pediatric care, there are almost always 100% female nurses.

Are there actual male delivery nurses? I surely don't think so.

It's kinda disgusting that you want to change this definitive and systematic discrimination against males into a "Patriarchy" issue and even change the gender of the victims from male to effectively female.

Well when you put it like that...

 

[BocoDragon]

I definitely believe in a lot less hard differences between men and women at 29 than I did at 19... and I read a LOT of books on sex, gender, biology back then. My opinions then were "informed".

I definitely bristle at the "all gender differences are societal" set, but I am certain that a lot of "truths" about male/female psychology will be seen as pseudo-science down the line. Men and women are capable of a lot more diversity in personality and habits when they are "lived up" to those possibilities.

And to the "animals/nature/biology=fact" set, look at chimps alone, and how much variation there is in male/female relations amongst the various species. This stuff is incredibly malleable. We "evolve" one way, we "evolve" the other way....

 

[Infinite]

The problem is that those differences do exhibit themselves in the two sexes having different overall patterns of behavior. Violent crime is nearly all guys. Men appear to be naturally overconfident, women, under. Gay men and lesbians have radically different social communities (and completely different dating apps!)

Those structural factors are in play, and are important to consider when thinking about how these issues originate. (Albatross's Freakonomics excerpt does a good job of highlighting the problems that come with excising/ignoring them, actually.) The broader behavior patterns that we've been illuminating with studies (and not just anecdotal evidence) can bring a much needed perspective to issues- some may be less able to be addressed than we'd think, while others may require a much different approach than what we've been attempting up until this point.

Well I'm not necessarily saying that our biological differences don't have any influence at all in our behavior and what the we gravitate towards. I wouldn't argue that at all. I am saying that for example if women are less likely to enjoy watching the sport football than men due to the differences between how our brains perceive space then we shouldn't make women who do enjoy the sport feel unwelcomed at football games.

 

[Mumei]

That's not feminism, that's egalitarianism.

No, that's actually feminism, particularly feminism that has been influenced by the critiques of anti-colonialists, feminists of color, lesbian feminists, and queer theory. If feminism is concerned with achieving equality for all women, that means that race has to be a part of feminist discourse. If it isn't, feminism isn't complete. This doesn't mean that racial justice movements are unnecessary; it simply means that feminism must incorporate race in its analysis of feminist issues and that movements for racial justice and women's equality should be natural allies. I think the same is true for other marginalized communities. This is why feminism has to be concerned with issues of class, for instance.

And if you go on feminist blogs, you'll see posts about issues you might not think of as "feminist" - fatness, class inequality, racial inequality, Native American rights and cultural appropriation, gay rights, trans bigotry, affirmative action, and so forth - but are things that feminists who take feminism to its logical conclusions should be concerned with.

 

[Ikael]

There's biological differences between men and women, for sure. However these differences playing a role in modern day social, political, and economic equality between the sexes is ridiculous to me. We are different but these differences shouldn't have any bearing on equality and our own social constructs.

I think that individuals are influenced by both society and biology, with Ortega y Gasset being my philosopher of choice: "I am but myself and my circumstance".

With that being said, I think that we are currently living in a time that it is giving to external preassures far more weight than before, a kind of an "everything is social" penduluum movement born as a reaction to the XXth century's "everything is biological". I believe that both are reductionist perspective, and that in the end, it lead to bad analysis of problems and their perpetuation, with feminism being the prime example in point.

Keep in mind that for all the talk about culture influencing individual's psyche, even at a subconscious level, people often forgets that this is a two way street: our psyche and subconscious also influenciates our culture back, with many of our cultural artifacts being attempts at rationalizing or justifying a deep seated biological impulse. For example, protective attitudes towards women are born to a certain extent, out of the very biological impulse of keeping in good health the only members of our species that can bear children, but once we try to rationalize it, we start to twist it into sexist cultural beliefs ("I feel instictively protective towards women, that must be because they are less capable than myself...").

A certain degree of different behaviour between males and females is to be expected, the question is to be aware of when "benevolent sexism" looses the "benevolent" part and what makes us do that type of cognitive jump.

TL DR: We're social animals, but animals regardless. It is good to not loose sight of that fact, I believe.

 

[kirblar]

Well I'm not necessarily saying that our biological differences don't have any influence at all in our behavior and what the we gravitate towards. I wouldn't argue that at all. I am saying that for example if women are less likely to enjoy watching the sport football than men due to the differences between how our brains perceive space then we shouldn't make women who do enjoy the sport feel unwelcomed at football games.

Ah ok, yeah, I have absolutely no disagreement there- everyone should be able to do what they want (within reasonable ethical limits.)

 

[firehawk12]

You know, I've TAed an intro to feminism course for three years now and every year, even though the course is about 95% women, I find that most of the students are skeptical. One thing I find difficult is that it's hard to frame a course that is both actively political and also educational, because it feels like proselytizing at some point.

But I think part of that is the way that feminism is demonized in the public, where being a feminist essentially means you are a lesbian, and being called a dyke for a 17-year old girl is probably about as bad as being called a fag is for a 17-year old guy. So it's very much easier to either willfully ignore the issue, because most of the time it is in their best interest.

I've found using news and culture to be an easy way to try to at least teach why the issue is still relevant today. So with issues like rape, it's easy to bring up statistics, but once you talk about Steubenville, the students immediately understand what it means for a pervasive rape culture to exist. Last year two girls in Canada committed suicide due to photos taken of them, one also stemming from a gang rape where the perpetrators essentially have walked away scot-free.

I guess that's a long winded way of saying that feminism should be seen as simple awareness of the systems in the world that can privilege one gender over another. So when I talk about cosmetics, and students note that men use cosmetics as much as women, I can state statistically that women on average spend much more on cosmetics than men and ask them why that is necessarily the case. The same goes for body dysmorphia, and the why it is overwhelmingly women who feel the need to control their body image to such excessive extremes that they will threaten their own health.

In the same way that being aware of global warming and its causes doesn't necessarily mean you're going to start bombing oil refineries, being aware of the issues that affect women doesn't necessarily mean you will hate men and so on and so forth.

 

[kame-sennin]

Came for the glorious Mumei post. I leave satisfied.

Also, this:

is quantifiably false. Like, the other scribbles were ignorant as shit, but saying "women aren't a target of violence" can be proven wrong by a fucking mountain of data. You have to be a reeeaal idiot to believe some shit like that.

 

[Suite Pee]

You know, I've TAed an intro to feminism course for three years now and every year, even though the course is about 95% women, I find that most of the students are skeptical. One thing I find difficult is that it's hard to frame a course that is both actively political and also educational, because it feels like proselytizing at some point.

But I think part of that is the way that feminism is demonized in the public, where being a feminist essentially means you are a lesbian, and being called a dyke for a 17-year old girl is probably about as bad as being called a fag is for a 17-year old guy. So it's very much easier to either willfully ignore the issue, because most of the time it is in their best interest.

I've been very lucky to avoid some of those classroom difficulties, as I've only TA'd Soc. 101 and Methods. From my experience as an undergrad and all the stories I hear from my colleagues in the department, it can be quite difficult to engage with a lot of students who already have their line drawn in the sand. Our 102 class is a social problems course that essentially deals with most of the major "-ism's," and it being a GER brings in a lot of people that stress out our TA's. The "bra-burning" stereotype is still quite strong in the younger generations.

I swear, some students take our women-focused courses just so they can be contrarians.

 

[depths20XX]

is quantifiably false. Like, the other scribbles were ignorant as shit, but saying "women aren't a target of violence" can be proven wrong by a fucking mountain of data. You have to be a reeeaal idiot to believe some shit like that.

I mean I think that girl is misguided but what is a "target for violence" anyways? I thought men were more likely to be the victim of a violent crime?

 

[kirblar]

So when I talk about cosmetics, and students note that men use cosmetics as much as women

This actually exploded my brain in laughter/disbelief. With most misguided beliefs I can get my head around why someone would be led to a bad conclusion.... but that one is just incredible to me.

One thing about the Male->Female image/sexuality dynamic that I feel doesn't get looked at enough is that if you compare it to the gay community, you see a ton of parallel behavior, only targeted at other males instead of women, since they're the object of attraction. It feels at times that when this behavior's viewed as exclusive to the male/female dynamic (since our society is understandably heteronormative and doesn't have that frame of reference) it can lead to problematic conclusions regarding the motivations behind the behavior.

I mean I think that girl is misguided but what is a "target for violence" anyways? I thought men were more likely to be the victim of a violent crime?

Rape is a violent crime aimed primarily at women (and one of the thing's we've been learning is that it's not a unique snowflake- it's sharing many patterns with things like murder and robbery.)

Men are more likely to be murder victims by about a 3x ratio- that's the stat you're thinking of.

 

[Famassu]

Basically it seeks gender equality between men and women. On homes, jobs, politics, and in general. But here comes the tricky part:

Feminism is mainly focused on women's issues, but author bell hooks and others have argued that, since feminism seeks gender equality, it must necessarily include men's liberation because men are also harmed by sexism and gender roles.

And sometimes, not always, but sometimes, feminists take it too far, seeing men as lesser people.

The thing is, women are mostly the sex that has it a bit harder, but that doesn't mean men don't also benefit from a more equal world where women's stature has been improved. As the world has become more equal, a lot of stuff related to men has improved as well. Men aren't assumed to be the sole breadwinner of the family, which takes a lot of stress off from men's shoulders. Men also have a bit better rights when it comes to taking care of children and men aren't assumed to be the typical Man caricature, but are allowed to feel and be whatever they want.

 

[TUROK]

It troubles me, that after years of opression, scratch that, with still existing opression, the outrageous shit lies somehow in the womens field.

See? This is why people think feminists are crazy. These knee-jerk, context avoiding reactions that do little to further the conversation, and are just throwaway comments with exaggerated indignation.

The point was that the general public is ignorant as to what feminism really is because they see radical feminists adopt outrageous stances under the guise of feminism, so the general public equates that with actual feminism.

 

[Arksy]

MASSIVE BOOK LIST

You are so unfair. I've already gotten a reading list from you that's a few dozen books long.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

They aren't unrelated ideas! But feminism is specifically about gender equality - it says nothing about racial equality, class equality, etc.

No, feminism covers all the same bases (intersectional feminism). Which is why people into redefining it as humanism or egalitarianism or anything else appear to have an agenda to some.

 

[firehawk12]

I've been very lucky to avoid some of those classroom difficulties, as I've only TA'd Soc. 101 and Methods. From my experience as an undergrad and all the stories I hear from my colleagues in the department, it can be quite difficult to engage with a lot of students who already have their line drawn in the sand. Our 102 class is a social problems course that essentially deals with most of the major "-ism's," and it being a GER brings in a lot of people that stress out our TA's. The "bra-burning" stereotype is still quite strong in the younger generations.

I swear, some students take our women-focused courses just so they can be contrarians.

Yeah, it's rather unfortunate. The other thing is that they think it's not an issue that's "relevant" - ie, bad things happen to women "over there", but here things are fine. I'd like to think that some people are dispelled of that by the end of the course, but I'm not really sure. Part of the problem is that it's a big course, and it's a required course for many people in programs not related to women's studies (the actual major was cancelled a couple of years back due to budget cuts :/), so you already have people who aren't going to be convinced.
The funny thing is that a lot of athletes (male and female) take the course as well because it's seen as one of the easier courses to take. Go figure.

I think between the lack of education in high school and just general cultural anathema - imagine being called a bitch because you don't feel like being hit on one night - and you have conditions that make identifying with feminism extremely difficult.

This actually exploded my brain in laughter/disbelief. With most misguided beliefs I can get my head around why someone would be led to a bad conclusion.... but that one is just incredible to me.

Yeah, I've read some "amazing" essays. I find that when students feel that their own identity is directly "attacked", students will get immediately defensive. But of course there are many issues at play that require unpacking - women tend to cater their appearance to other women, which is sociologically true, so the natural conclusion is that they're not doing it to attract men. But the next step is to ask why? And how are standards of what is considered "beautiful" or "sexy" defined in the first place? It's basically impossible to get that deep in an intro course though.

One thing about the Male->Female image/sexuality dynamic that I feel doesn't get looked at enough is that if you compare it to the gay community, you see a ton of parallel behavior, only targeted at other males instead of women, since they're the object of attraction. It feels at times that when this behavior's viewed as exclusive to the male/female dynamic (since our society is understandably heteronormative and doesn't have that frame of reference) it can lead to problematic conclusions regarding the motivations behind the behavior.

Well, it at least reveals how gender is a social construct. The other big example that people like to use is the society where men are veiled and women are the ones who perform most of the manual labor and make the decisions.
Of course with gay men in particular, you have varying standards as well. I mean, I don't think there really is an equivalent of "bear" culture among women. At least, not in the same way. lol

Rape is a violent crime aimed primarily at women (and one of the thing's we've been learning is that it's not a unique snowflake- it's sharing many patterns with things like murder and robbery.)

Men are more likely to be murder victims by about a 3x ratio- that's the stat you're thinking of.

I will say, there was a report about the Canadian military that is going to come out soon, but one of the conclusions they came to was that statistically, every day five people are raped in the Canadian military and one out of every five involves a male victim.

 

[Pryce]

Like anything, it can mean one thing to one person and mean something completely different to a person standing two feet away.

 

[equippedwithtowel]

They don't have to be but to me current wave feminism doesn't seem like it wants stop at equality. Maybe I'm just seeing too many tumblr screencaps.

I think gender equality is a real problem and a big one but only in developing countries.

Congrats on being wrong then. I'd hardly call issues like pay equity and reproductive rights small problems.

 

[TUROK]

Congrats on being wrong then. I'd hardly call issues like pay equity and reproductive rights small problems.

Pay equity, eh? What about shareholders equity, is that also one of them big feminist issues?

 

[Deified Data]

Feminism is the reason all the girls laughed at you in high school. It's pretty bad from what I hear.

 

[BigDug13]

It's wanting to be paid as much as a man while still expecting the man to pay for a date.

Spoiler

just kidding

 

[Dice//]

(post)

Mumei is one of my favorite people on a forum.

As usual, great recommendations for books there.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Pay equity, eh? What about shareholders equity, is that also one of them big feminist issues?

What is this? How does your brain go there?

 

[TUROK]

What is this? How does your brain go there?

Equity=/=Equality...

 

[Wazzy]

A lot of great posts in here have already covered the OP's question so I'll just say that it's a great movement seeking equal rights and I would think any sane person should be a feminist.

The problem lies with how it's viewed by many in society as something that doesn't seek to achieve equal rights but instead attacks men and attempts to make them beneath women. It's a false and saddening belief and I wish more people would educate themselves about feminism.

 

[Anton Sugar]

Equity=/=Equality...

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

I mean I think that girl is misguided but what is a "target for violence" anyways? I thought men were more likely to be the victim of a violent crime?

I heard more men get raped if you count the prison rapes, because it goes on there all the time. And that's a great point. Men are also victims of violent crime done by other men. Hell, I'll argue that many women could beat up lesser men. My ex was 6'4, which is still unusual tall for a girl (even in Sweden).
It's just wrong to say that girls can't be strong. Some of the girls in my MMA gym will wreck your shit into the next world son, haha. A lot of guys are total whimps and victims of a lot of brutal assaults.

But I have no idea if women get assaulted as much on street and at clubs as women. I've never seen any woman getting assaulted, but I have seen doorman a dozen or so guys curb stomping people, or people who wore the wrong clothes several times.

But people rarely have sympathy for stuff like this which is weird. It doesn't take that much to fuck you off for life if you get smashed on concrete, or like my friend, gets burned with firecrackers on new years eve.

weak men are a target of brutal violence for sure as well. But we can't generalize because there is different between where you are. I agree that women are hunted in a place like India or Pakistan, but not in a place like Sweden or Finland. It doesn't feel that way here.

 

[Dude Abides]

Forget equity, what about secured bondholders? What is feminism doing for them?

 

[anarchy_panty]

Feminism gave the world Bikini Kill, ergo feminism is awesome.

 

[ishibear]

I've never really defined feminism by the book. I'll just give you what I've come to identify it as since this is what it means to me:

Feminism is about giving women like ourselves the right to make CHOICES and not be judged for it. It's the fight for freedom of control over our own lives without having to worry about being criticized, demeaned, or afraid.

If we want to work for the rest of our lives, or dress a certain way, or be independent, or never marry, or even if we do decide to be housewives or sleep with as many guys as we please, feminism will give us the freedom to do this without being told we shouldn't or we're making mistakes or deserve to be assaulted because of reasons.

Feminism will provide us with a future where we are not only equal by the book to men, but it will be a known fact. It will be first nature to know that if a girl works in the office, she will get paid the same as her peers. It will be first nature that if a woman is dressed a certain way, she has every right too and that didn't warrant her as "asking for it" if she's assaulted.

Some try to paint feminism as just looking out for only women and bumping us up to be above men and that's a load of bullshit. There's no reason that women gaining equal ground as men is going to hurt anyone. In a way, it helps out others too. It gives women freedom to pay for a date if she wants to without making the guy look like he's "not manly" among other things - thus less pressure to meet traditional standards. Or be the bread winner while the man takes care of the children. Everyone gains freedom of their own choices through feminism.

Feminism, again, to me is about giving us a choice. Whether we want to cut our hair or never have kids, or even go a week without shaving, feminism helps us along the way.

EDIT: I see others have already basically covered most ground now, so I hope my little contribution just helps to further the message.

 

[TheLight]

Feminism is dope, but the more popular it gets, the more it seems it becomes more about being mean or condescending to anyone with a dick. It's also annoying when things that aren't inherently sexist are just made that way.

The main problem facing feminism, or any movement is also the thing they are kind of fighting for: group think. The civil rights movement was fighting for racial equality to be group think. Feminism obviously, wants equality to be the norm, but when idiots who call themselves feminists promote the matriarchal domination of women under the holy moniker of feminism, that shit can spread to the impressionable like wildfire now due to the internet. That is where a lot of the ridiculous feminist ideologies mentioned in this thread come from, and it only hurts what feminism actually IS.

Contrary to popular belief, this isn't anyone who is currently livings fault, male or female. The patriarchy has had centuries and centuries to become what it is, and it isn't going to get dismantled by tumblr feminist bloggers who think a girl being in a bikini in an ad is poison and radicals who thinks I'm stupid because I'm a guy.

 

[SquiddyCracker]

Chris Ryan had an interesting talk on his podcast a while back ( http://chrisryanphd.com/tangentially-speaking/ ) where he talks about the argument for human violence.

He pinpoints, because chimps are our closest cousin of the primates (with a 98% identical genome) and because chimps are the most violent, territorial and aggressive of all primates, that some people believe that rape, opression, domination and violence are natural parts of being human.
He however argues the fact, which is much less known publicaly, that human beings also have a 98% identical genome with a different type of primate... The Bonobo.

The Bonobo is the complete opposite of the chimp. Non-violent, non-territorial, doesn't rape. is orgiastic, which means, that the Bonobo solves all it's conflicts through sex. Also incest in all configurations with the exception of mother-son sex. Bonobo have been forgotten in science since their discovering because their deep sexual orgie lifestyle reflected bad as a cover for promoting theory of evolution. The chimps violent rape lifestyle is a much more easy and sensational headlines for everyone to accept.

The whole point being - If you want to argue that the reason men have been so dominate and oppressive towards women for the last 10,000 years since the dawn of agriculture (guns, germs, and steel < please read this book by Diamond. explains everything: http://www.amazon.com/dp/0393317552/?tag=neogaf0e-20 ) because men's faith is linked biologically to that of the chimp, you are only looking at one side of the coin.
The other side being the bonobo which haven't gotten the mainstream press and exposure they deserve. We know that many pagan cultures and pre-Christianity sects and groups and tribes have lived in orgiastic tribes as well. There are theories about smaller groups of human beings living like this in almost all parts of the world, and almost always oppressed. Small native Indian tribes being enslaved by the powerful and warlike Aztecs, being a good example.



People like to pull out specific examples or studies or statistics, but as time goes by I feel these become and more meaningless, and they almost unanimously and can be twisted and turned to serve an agenda or position. The bottomline for me is this: Women have suffered oppression along with many other groups, like gays, trans, left-handed people, dyslexics and so on. Oppression has been in the game for a long time.

What feminism has been good at, is creating a helpful community for women to help them. Something men are not good at it because there lingers a stigma in male society that says "dont talk about your problems, be john wayne". Men suffer too, and little attention have been given. It's not being taken serious, even though it though it should. this has nothing to do with women or womens rights, but rights for all. We are all just people, and just like the misdeeds of our ancestors and their oppression, so is it important to recognize mens issues, like treating fathers in court with the same equality as mothers during a divorce or separation, or making sure that boys are not getting 5 times the ADHD medications as girls because they have too much energy to fit within the norms of society, or the circumcision of baby boys due to old jewish propaganda.

About 18% of this post is on point.
We are not our biological relatives, we are human in behaviour.

 

[Miguel81]

It's about men and women respecting their differences, but knowing that they have equal status. We're bound together, and there is not one without the other. My Mother and Father are what I view as ideal feminism, as they work together as a team and their marriage has lasted 35 years so far.

I wouldn't want to witness past brutality, and when many women lived in fear because they had no power and no one to vouch for them. I can deal with some man-hating bs because they're just words from miserable people.