Moral Panic
Member
Strauss-Kahn is a Socialist, and according to this thread he might even be a feminist too.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Males who identify as being feminists
- Thread starter Zekes!
- Start date
- Status
Strauss-Kahn is a Socialist, and according to this thread he might even be a feminist too.
You can't know that. All photos from back then are black and white.
Yeah you stated the truth, what's your point?
Featheredkitten
Banned
Because the only proof of something is a photo?
Edit: apparently i have no sense of humour
HarryHengst
Member
I laughed.
Vervet & Rhesus monkeys have shown the same gendered preferences for toys. Boy monkeys play with cars, girl monkeys play with dolls.
I wouldn't cast the biology angle out just because one child you know bucks the trend.
Beautiful.
shanshan310
Member
Then you would be wrong. I think we should be working to solve men's AND women's issues. This is silly, I'm not sure why you're so keen to pick a fight.
EDIT: oh boy this thread really took off.
Like I said above, there's conflicting evidence in a lot of these studies. Sometimes even the untrained eye can tell that they're complete hogwash ('we asked a group of twenty 15 year olds whether they preferred blue or pink and we discovered that there is a natural preference for pink among the girls').
Besides which, you still need a further argument to explain why society should be structured around biological gender differences. We ignore plenty of biological facts when we construct our societies. Why should gender differences be different?
I have kids, of both sexes. What do you want to know?
My daughter likes submarines and Skylanders currently.
I think that people that construct feminism as wanting "more" than equality (or at least by implication do so) are really having a hard time understanding why they're perceiving that. Why for example is the issue not just about equal pay for equal work? Where do sexual norms and sexual ethics fit in? Why does it seem like feminists are obsessed with the culture?
Well, I think actually a related comic might help this explanation.
Now I'm not making a one to one comparison (though I wouldn't be surprised if someone takes offense at this even being brought up) but I think it illustrates the point pretty well. People with privilege tend to believe that everyone is about on their level with the same opportunities and advantages they have. They're so used to having them that they construct a narrative where they achieve their success and live their life as a self made person.
What feminism is about in part is not merely the belief that everyone is equal, it's about identifying and seeking to change the structural imbalances in our society that leads to disparate treatment between the sexes. In other words, it's not enough to merely give lip service to the idea that "everyone is equal" because it perpetuates the lie that society gives equal opportunities to all.
In reality women in our society are treated as objects for male satisfaction. They do face pay imbalances and other difficulties entering certain fields of study due to prejudice but the basic problem is that the way men (and to some extent other women) are socialized to treat women is as "lesser" and THAT is the imbalance that needs to be fought against. Society has been constructed to be male dominated and in the course of that our socialization marginalizes women. THAT is why if you feel feminists want more than just "equality" there is an imbalance. Because the scales are already unequal and it's disingenuous to just pretend this is all a clean slate now.
Well, I think actually a related comic might help this explanation.
Now I'm not making a one to one comparison (though I wouldn't be surprised if someone takes offense at this even being brought up) but I think it illustrates the point pretty well. People with privilege tend to believe that everyone is about on their level with the same opportunities and advantages they have. They're so used to having them that they construct a narrative where they achieve their success and live their life as a self made person.
What feminism is about in part is not merely the belief that everyone is equal, it's about identifying and seeking to change the structural imbalances in our society that leads to disparate treatment between the sexes. In other words, it's not enough to merely give lip service to the idea that "everyone is equal" because it perpetuates the lie that society gives equal opportunities to all.
In reality women in our society are treated as objects for male satisfaction. They do face pay imbalances and other difficulties entering certain fields of study due to prejudice but the basic problem is that the way men (and to some extent other women) are socialized to treat women is as "lesser" and THAT is the imbalance that needs to be fought against. Society has been constructed to be male dominated and in the course of that our socialization marginalizes women. THAT is why if you feel feminists want more than just "equality" there is an imbalance. Because the scales are already unequal and it's disingenuous to just pretend this is all a clean slate now.
cubicle47b
Member
I think the terminology used is incredibly off-putting from the start. Feminism as the great force working for equal rights for all while Patriarchy is the cause of every problem. Without knowing anything about either concept you have the idea from the start that men fuck everything up and only women are able to actually make us better as a society. Privilege thrown around all the time. Rape culture. Etc.
Without actually taking an academic approach your most common interactions with "feminists" are likely to be a really annoying conversation at a bar with a woman who throws around these words in every other sentence (and frankly, without knowledge of it you start to think they're in some sort of cult or something) or you get shit on for making jokes every once in a while and start to resent the people who do this (because you're a conscientious guy, you just like making jokes, and why can't they just see that?).
Gay rights are only really challenging to people who have a sacred view of traditional marriage (or just can't deal with the idea of guys having sex) which is why (certain) religious people get all up in arms. Feminism is confrontational to virtually every established system we have. I think it's pretty obvious why feminism has a PR problem when you put all this together.
Changing the terminology so it's inclusive and less off-putting and exposing people to it earlier (as a part of middle/high school, not a women's studies class in college) would go a long way.
Without actually taking an academic approach your most common interactions with "feminists" are likely to be a really annoying conversation at a bar with a woman who throws around these words in every other sentence (and frankly, without knowledge of it you start to think they're in some sort of cult or something) or you get shit on for making jokes every once in a while and start to resent the people who do this (because you're a conscientious guy, you just like making jokes, and why can't they just see that?).
Gay rights are only really challenging to people who have a sacred view of traditional marriage (or just can't deal with the idea of guys having sex) which is why (certain) religious people get all up in arms. Feminism is confrontational to virtually every established system we have. I think it's pretty obvious why feminism has a PR problem when you put all this together.
Changing the terminology so it's inclusive and less off-putting and exposing people to it earlier (as a part of middle/high school, not a women's studies class in college) would go a long way.
I love when people bring up "biology". If you know something, the scientific community would like to hear it.
I am a male who identifies as a feminist. In fact, it is one of the first things that I would describe myself as if I were describing the things that I believe, as I consider it such an easy and obvious position to hold.
I've discussed this with my friends before, and I've come to the conclusion that for an individual to specifically identify as "not a feminist" is just downright embarrassing, as the "non-feminist" label carries much more consequence than the "feminist" label. It indicates that you aren't actively interested in the betterment of the condition of women, and/or are so threatened by the tiny population of separatist feminists that they feel it necessary to avoid a wide-encompassing label that has been used by millions in the past.
However, I am more concerned with the opinion that women aren't being oppressed or are where they are in society for some other mystical reason ("biology") than I am with the opinion that women should be oppressed (misogyny). While the latter is more outwardly offensive, the former opinion is more rancid in that its anti-scientific nature actively stalls progress.
I am a male who identifies as a feminist. In fact, it is one of the first things that I would describe myself as if I were describing the things that I believe, as I consider it such an easy and obvious position to hold.
I've discussed this with my friends before, and I've come to the conclusion that for an individual to specifically identify as "not a feminist" is just downright embarrassing, as the "non-feminist" label carries much more consequence than the "feminist" label. It indicates that you aren't actively interested in the betterment of the condition of women, and/or are so threatened by the tiny population of separatist feminists that they feel it necessary to avoid a wide-encompassing label that has been used by millions in the past.
However, I am more concerned with the opinion that women aren't being oppressed or are where they are in society for some other mystical reason ("biology") than I am with the opinion that women should be oppressed (misogyny). While the latter is more outwardly offensive, the former opinion is more rancid in that its anti-scientific nature actively stalls progress.
Awesome Animals
Member
Where are the Misandrists? I totally expected this thread to turn into men crying that they're the one's who have the short end of the stick by now. Sort of like Reddit.
kurtrussell, you speak about how boys and girls begin leaning towards things generally considered to be boyish and girlish respectively, but did you ever consider that it isn't anything more than kids being able to differentiate genders and notice that their mother is cooking dinner while their dad is in the garage? I'd like to see a study that would prove or disprove that idea. Maybe we would find that when you have a set of parents who don't follow the traditional gender roles, their children end up not following those roles either and vice versa. Maybe we see children with two fathers or mothers shed those traditional gender roles as well.
I'd imagine that would shed some light on the topic at hand (but I could be wrong). I also think that that because kid's aren't expressly raised by their parents alone it would make it difficult to shatter the perception of the traditional gender roles as well. I'm sure the ideas reinforced by society through teachings at school, what you see in movies and television, or even the fact that there is a strong chance you're only seeing mommys at the park with their kid would make it even more difficult for a child to not automatically assume that these roles are just how it should be.
But maybe I'm not making any sense.
kurtrussell, you speak about how boys and girls begin leaning towards things generally considered to be boyish and girlish respectively, but did you ever consider that it isn't anything more than kids being able to differentiate genders and notice that their mother is cooking dinner while their dad is in the garage? I'd like to see a study that would prove or disprove that idea. Maybe we would find that when you have a set of parents who don't follow the traditional gender roles, their children end up not following those roles either and vice versa. Maybe we see children with two fathers or mothers shed those traditional gender roles as well.
I'd imagine that would shed some light on the topic at hand (but I could be wrong). I also think that that because kid's aren't expressly raised by their parents alone it would make it difficult to shatter the perception of the traditional gender roles as well. I'm sure the ideas reinforced by society through teachings at school, what you see in movies and television, or even the fact that there is a strong chance you're only seeing mommys at the park with their kid would make it even more difficult for a child to not automatically assume that these roles are just how it should be.
But maybe I'm not making any sense.
HarryHengst
Member
'But what about the MEN?!'. Men have problems, yes, but claiming they are equal to the problems women are facing is just silly.
There is nothing preventing men from focussing on their problems. Shame they mostly turn into Male Rights thing which is just misogyny in a new form.
So you taught him to love My Little Pony?
Submarines and whatever Skylanders are, are gender specific?
They can easily do this thing, except it is a cover for this hateful thing. Yeah, useful advice there. Yes, there are radical mens rights loonies, just as there are feminist ones. Your statement that they mostly tun into misogyny is as silly as those claiming feminists hate men.
This doesn't at all describe my likely encounter with feminists ("I'm a feminist" "me too"). I don't necessarily doubt that this is what someone who is an adult and isn't a feminist would get out of a likely encounter with a feminist, however.
I would venture a guess and say that it's more accurate to describe it as him not pushing him into disliking it. I can't really tell if this is a serious post.
gutter_trash
Banned
I am for equal pay for equal work and equal voting rights and civil rights and I am super pro subsidenced maternity leave
but I do not agree on equal behaviorism. Men and Women behave, think and act differently and feminists must recognize that
Let your man just be himself and don't suppress him.
but I do not agree on equal behaviorism. Men and Women behave, think and act differently and feminists must recognize that
Let your man just be himself and don't suppress him.
FeedMeAStrayCat
Member
...I actually fully expected this as well. My friends and I were just having this conversation the other night. Along these lines anyways. Some douche on facebook posting "straight pride" photos. :/
Featheredkitten
Banned
I know some men's problems could be solved by equal rights for all, and equal perception (is that a thing?). If women were paid the same for the same job, more men who WANT to stay home could, the more stay at home dads there are the less people will treat them like some sort of hero. Or be suspicious of them when alone with their kid. just as an example.
shanshan310
Member
All of the feminist threads eventually devolve into either men's rights threads or arguments about nature vs. nurture. *sigh* As if we can solve anyone's problems like this. This was way away from my original point: feminism is about equality. I hope I haven't become what I hate...
EDIT: Also what Featheredkitten said.
Those monkeys have obviously been watching too much TV.
Question though: Why would a monkey study that showed some supposed gender preference for toys have any influence on the gender debate among humans? I'm not doubting you sincerity but am genuinely curious. Have other monkey studies shown a different preference? Why don't chimpanzees show gender preference seeing as they are closest to us in the broad terms of biology.
A couple of groups of monkeys showing a preference for toys does nothing to prove an in grained gender bias based on biological differences. The toy preference shown in toddlers in our present time is completely based on toy availability, toy manufacturers have spent hundreds of years targeting parents and children and refining the process of selling a toy to a kid. And we take those hundreds of years of refinement, throw it in front of a monkey and expect there to be some kind of proof of preference based on gender? Is it because monkey's are pure?
I say we gather up all the species of monkey and ask them to choose between pink and blue. That would
cubicle47b
Member
Yeah, that's the point. You'll encounter feminists all the time but won't identify them as feminists because they're just normal people with rational views on things (equal pay for equal work, things like that). Generally the ones that go out of their way to make sure you know they're feminists are the ones you're having awful interactions with.
Why do you assume that?
Because I'm vocally against gender inequality?
It's insulting to my son to believe that he cannot choose for himself what shows he likes.
Kindly shut the fuck up about me teaching him to love anything and assume that, like all things kids do, they do it because it interests them.
So you're saying gay men should be free to be men and treat any man (regardless of sexuality) the same way straight men treat women (since they don't really care about their sexuality either)? Cool. I think the fact that most people would acknowledge there IS a difference in the way gay men are socialized to treat other men for fear of offending a straight man shows the flaw in your position and I would suggest it is indicative of the privilege you're trying to protect.
Angry Fork
Member
There's a youtube channel/blog by a woman called 'girlwriteswhat' that I'd love to hear gaf talk about (particularly devolution). She basically defends men and see's feminism as something that was necessary at first for obvious reasons but now has gone off the tracks into something more (worse) and so on.
I assumed she would be someone who was just weird and defended everything man for some secret reason, but if you watch her videos she's very logical and consistent. She's fair and breaks down/provides reasoned arguments. She's a mother, has been married before and has admitted she's been sexually assaulted in one of the videos (although I don't remember what happened).
Here's her videos if anyone cares to comment on one of them:
http://www.youtube.com/user/girlwriteswhat/videos?sort=p&view=0
I assumed she would be someone who was just weird and defended everything man for some secret reason, but if you watch her videos she's very logical and consistent. She's fair and breaks down/provides reasoned arguments. She's a mother, has been married before and has admitted she's been sexually assaulted in one of the videos (although I don't remember what happened).
Here's her videos if anyone cares to comment on one of them:
http://www.youtube.com/user/girlwriteswhat/videos?sort=p&view=0
Moral Panic
Member
The problem with that comic strip in comparison to real life is that the simplification gets rid of all the realities of life. There isn't one homogeneous woman and man where the man has wronged the woman and refuses to make correction to it. In reality there is a whole bunch of women up there alongside a whole bunch of men, and at the bottom there are the hordes of men and women at the bottom.
I'm finding it hard to explain, but it goes like this: I believe that being male or female has less consequence on where you are on the ladder than other things, yet it is wrongly being seen as the main focus. Why should anyone care if 50% of CEO's are women, if they all had the same rich privileged background, went to the same private school funnelled into the best universities? Should I say: Success! Women have made it? I'd rather have it 100% men (or women), from a varied social starting points that have some fake equality, which is just the same old guard looking out for themselves. I'd rather concentrate on true social mobility before looking at gender mobility. Do you really see ANY of those kids in the illiteracy thread making it anywhere? That is the real issue.
gutter_trash
Banned
I am talking about relationships bro, lots of problems arise when one half of the couple suppresses the masculinity or the femininity of their better half
WorriedCitizen
Member
I'm not a feminist. I'm for equality.
I would ask you to prove that, but that would be a disingenuous request as I know that that's actually impossible. Feminism doesn't acknowledge that as fact, largely because there are too many social and economic barriers for anyone to make that statement conclusively.
But feminism doesn't just stop at "normal people with rational views on things"; the discussion of feminism has moved on to things like rape culture and gender behaviour conditioning, which are more difficult to see as issues but are no less imperative. And feminists are obligated to make these opinions clear as there's still a lot of opposition to them.
cubicle47b
Member
In the future, though, when we've sorted this shit out and gay men are just normal people to everyone it's going to be awesome. I think the only non-family physical compliments I get are from gay guys so bring on the catcalls. I need some validation about something other than my brain sometimes.
Omegasquash
Member
I am a feminist until actual equality has been achieved. Thereafter, I will support the status quo. Fairness and equality on a societal and personal level are things that we all should strive for.
Maybe once the genders actually have any kind of equal footing we can look at what the actual differences are. Until then though, there's no point.
ErasureAcer
Banned
I am impressed. This was a ridiculous even for an internet post. Toy companies effect monkey choices due to marketing. Bookmarked.
In any case, people are giving examples like the color pink or some specific childs choices. The fact is that generally speaking, boys tend one way and girls another in terms of how they play, think, navigate and learn. It is not right or wrong, superior or inferior. It is not drastic, there is plenty of overlap.
On the nature vs nurture debate I believe the best evidence falls somewhere in the middle. It's certainly not Locke's Tabula Rasa, kids come out with their own personalities and proclivities. It's also clearly not just genes, as home life and environment is also a factor. The question is how much of each and that seems to vary.
Feminism, then, needs to accept and account for these differences when the discussion of what is fair is brought up.
My point wasn't a 1 to 1 comparison. The purpose I'm using the comic for is merely to suggest that the scales are currently imbalanced and people who suggest that the only important thing is equal treatment are missing the fact of the structural inequality of opportunity between people.
I would say that both are problems and they're BOTH real issues. It's not merely about the number of CEOs btw. Access to institutions is an important concept but until we fundamentally shift the male privilege pervasive in society the surface changes you were mentioning will only take us so far. There is a reason, not to put too fine a point on it that calling a black man "boy" although certainly a tertiary issue, was a major focus as well and important to develop a taboo for. And that's because the words we use and the way our society constructs interactions with marginalized people matters in ways that are difficult to understand by those that don't have to deal with it.
Awesome Animals
Member
That's like saying you want to shoot off into space before learning how to fly a plane. Gender mobility is part of true social mobility.
You aren't great at reading are you? That's cool, keep practicing.
No. Because you said it shits on biology suggesting you believe biology to be irrelevant.
FO-totality
Poet Centuriate
I just want every one to be equal. Can I be an equalist?
Well, what are you trying to say. You said
To someone who commented on gender-specific toys and that age-old pink color debate. Do you have something you want to say? Don't dance around with that weak-ass 'do you have kids' question. I have kids. Speak.
Featheredkitten
Banned
It is irrelevant in that scenario. If marrec's son likes my little pony, your "Biology speaking, boys and girls are different.(paraphrasing)" goes out the window, doesn't it?
I do believe biology has no bearing on what kids shows my son watches. Or what toys he chooses.
He said that toy companies affect the choices of young children, not monkeys.
As for the rest of your post, I'm going to go with "you can't prove anything", as I and a legion of feminists have been stating for as long as this debate has existed.
Only if he said girls are more likely to like MLP because of biology. It does nothing to prove or disprove statements of spatial ability, reading ability, numerical ability, or social ability differences. Seriously, it seems a lot of people like to over generalise a persons statements.
I genuinely wonder how many people outside of completely and systematically male-dominated environments (like internet forums about videogames) actually get feminist and female supremacist confused. I honestly just don't see it being an issue with intelligent people.
- Status