Feminist or FemiNazi? Truth and Myth

benevolent heritic, the attitude you are displaying toward my post is what i find so frustrating, just because i don't agree with you doesn't mean i don't ''get it'', i do get it, and i did read all the posts in the thread before posting myself, i still don't know what else socity as an institution can do to further the equal status of women.

past a certain point, equality legislation ammounts to preferental treatment, although the case is made that this is needed to redress the balance it hardly equates to equality, therefore my argument is that any further advancement of women in socity must be achieved individually and on personal merit, no other means can be used to ''change the attitudes of a patriarchical socity'', how can any person who has achived status through preferential treatment expect to be ever taken seriously for their merits, no matter how good they are. so in that light, what more do you want.

also when i say severe disapline, i don't mean brutality, disapline through brutality teaches a child nothing except the use of butality, a punishment should enforce the conciquences of the action, by harsh i mean overstating the fact. ie. if a twelve year old will not put their clothes in the laundry, make them hand wash everyones clothes on a saterday, it's harsh but it teaches the child how lucky they are to simply have to use a laundry basket in order to have clean clothes. these types of harsh punishment are traditionally left to the man, so i refer to them as masculine, although i am well aware a woman could hand them out if she wanted.

Godservant, I read somewhere that today's divorce rate reflects greater respect for marriage. "Till death do us part" used to be maybe 6 months or 6 years, where now marriages can last much, much longer. Some women (and I imagine a few men) used to pray for death as a way out of a bad marriage. At least one spouse recognizes the marriage is bad and will not participate in a sham. If a marriage does not allow for self-respect and dignity, then marriage has lost respect and dignity. It is then one's choice as to what to do.
Feminism did not say put woman on a pedastal, meaning higher, more important than man. Let us hope we can make adjustments in thinking as we go forward. An aircraft is continually making adjustments to fly.
It is difficult to do away with traditional roles that are not working. Sometimes new roles are assigned by society that still don't work. Who cares for roles?--usually someone who is trying to sell something.
The "de-sexing" of either sex is bad. Men should not be emasculated, nor woman called, well, you know what some men call women who don't act "womenly".
Hopefully, when we look for a mate, we marry our best friend. Not entering a marriage only for what one can get out of it.
Galatians 3:28

sorry desert, i meant to mention, women who choose to vote as they are told to vote, by their pastor or husbard or whomever else are still choosing, no-one can stand over you as you vote, it is a secret ballot and therefore i can't accept that argument.

Just for the hell of it, I thought I'd post my opinions.

Firstly, I'm absolutely in favour of legal, financial and personal equality for women. And I do not feel that in all these areas the battle has been won.

However I went to university in the late 70s/early 80s, at a time when the feminist movement had some rather strident and ugly overtones. One that particularly wound me up was the smug slogan, "all men are potential rapists", which used to get bandied about in student discussions. I would try my best to say that there was no conceivable circumstance in which I could be moved to commit rape, but the discussion was absolutely at the level of, "you have a penis, therefore you can commit rape. Women cannot commit rape."

My interlocutors couldn't see why I found it insulting.

It is a matter of some amusement to me, though, that an ex of mine (who is now a moderately successful author and meejah person), when she was teaching law, blew the myth that only men can commit rape out of the water rather effectively. She told her class that coc aine, applied to an erection, renders it, if not absolutely permanent, than certainly far less temporary than usual. Thus, given the right combination of circumstances, rape of a man (not involving penetrating him) is possible. She was a wild one even when I knew her...

As far as gender roles are concerned, I admit to, at times, finding them very oppressive. The male is expected to be the breadwinner in most relationships, is expected to be mechanically minded, and so on and so on.

I think it's also important to look at the other side of the coin, too. Some women derive much pleasure and self-esteem from being good at the traditional wife/mother skills - no easy feat. I guess I'm basically for people doing what they want, which is pretty hard in the society we live in (though not as hard as it is in (for example) Iraq, where the feminist gains made under Saddam's secularist rule have been brutally rolled back, and where women dare not go out alone, and certainly not without being 'properly' dressed according to Islamic standards).

The balance of power within relationships is a very difficult one to negotiate, however. Attractive as the slogan "the personal is poitical" is, in my experience, power within relationships is entirely due to personal predilections of the people involved, and people are incredibly, magnificently, various. One of the most amazing women I've ever known, one of the sharpest, smartest, funniest people I've ever known, really liked to be dominated, and indeed beaten, as a part of her sex life. Should her partner refuse to do this on the basis that it was enforcing ludicrous and outdated gender roles? Should she have had therapy to try and correct her attitude?

I shouldn't (but discussion boards being what the are, I will) have to say that there is no condoning partner abuse - by either sex.

I guess that I think that as long as feminism restricts itself to fighting battles for equality under the law and in economic and social terms, that's great. When it starts intruding into personal lives, that's not so good because I don't believe that, beyond a very few and obvious limitations, human behaviour can be rule-governed at that level.

A classic circumstance. A car brakes down with a husband and wife or unmarried couple inside. The man is told to get out and push, should we instead say "Hey equal rights, get off your lazy arse and you do it". The reason we are asked sorry told to push is because men by and large are stronger than women. I have argued that point with feminists and this is where the extremism comes through.

Biologically men are stronger. This isn't every man of course but it is the rule rather than the exception. The reason is the way our muscles and bones are built along with the fact that we produce more andrenaline and that key ingredient testosterone. I have had femenists say "Well women weight lifting champions are stronger than you", they are of course correct. The women weight lifters are stronger, but when you point out that male weight lifters are far stronger than the female ones you get immediately shut down.

The fact is that men are still expected to have a physical role because of their natural strength. Maybe we should consider this sexist though because we are expected to do physical stuff.

Hey if all men are potential or indeed actuall rapists because they have a penis then all women must be devil worhsippers because they excrete blood each month. Ok that's a truly stupid arguement, but it's the same logic as saying all men are rapists now isn't it.

Originally posted by rich23
It is a matter of some amusement to me, though, that an ex of mine [...] blew the myth that only men can commit rape out of the water rather effectively. She told her class that coc aine, applied to an erection, renders it, if not absolutely permanent, than certainly far less temporary than usual. Thus, given the right combination of circumstances, rape of a man (not involving penetrating him) is possible.

Uh, a woman forcing a man to have an erection and then proceeding to have sex with him is NOT rape. I will be happy to discuss this. It is not bodily invasive, and not traumatic except perhaps to a lawyer who wants to take your case.

Let's stay within the margins of reality here. Nobody thinks a vagina can be used as a weapon, do they? Really.

smallpeeps,

Your 'penis as a weapon' theory cracked me up almost as much as your Rommel comment. Shwartz jokes and star wars parodies immediately sprung to mind.

My girlfriend happened to be looking over my shoulder, and she asked "who's Rommel?" No lie. The kicker is, she's German.

So what do y'all make of that? Is it enough to provide equal employment when there's such a huge gap in the educational regimen? Do certain fields and subjects fall outside of feminine interest (for the most part) naturally, or does it take conscious manipulation to keep that norm in place? Should this be changed, eliminated, protected?

I'm really curious about this distinction. Equal chance at a job is great, and most folks would gladly support it. But if a sea change in gender roles is what you're after, the workplace is the finish line, not the starting gate. The starting gate is education.

Why are all the small engine repair classes 80% male? It's not because the teacher is a sexist, that's for sure - it's because not enough women ever got the idea in their head that they might like to know how to repair and maintain small engines.

And this:

Nobody thinks a vagina can be used as a weapon, do they?

It all depends on the definition of weapon, doesn't it? If the penis is the stick, and the vagina is the carrot, both are tools designed with the same need in mind (control). A tool used to control might reasonably be considered a weapon, even if there's no threat of overt violence.

A side note, about those adds on ATS and everywhere else...

I think they're pretty presumptious and insulting, personally. Not because I'm a prude or I object to looking at beautiful women, quite the contrary (as Jay says "I love women!".)

But there's no shortage of pornography on the web. We don't need it here as well, just my opinion. I find most adds insulting, come to think of it. It makes me hate the company, the product, and the advertiser when I see them trying their damndest to circumnavigate my conscious, decision-making mind.



[edit on 29-4-2006 by WyrdeOne]

Uh, a woman forcing a man to have an erection and then proceeding to have sex with him is NOT rape. I will be happy to discuss this. It is not bodily invasive, and not traumatic except perhaps to a lawyer who wants to take your case.

Let's stay within the margins of reality here. Nobody thinks a vagina can be used as a weapon, do they? Really.

A dispicable and stupid statement. So if someone forced me against my will to have sex and i begged them not to, i pleaded crying and they went ahead then this isn't rape? They say dose me with viagra and forced it so i can't prevent it and this isn't rape? What world are you living in! If this happened to me i would feel, and there is no other word for it, violated. I would feel completely bloody awful, you are truly living in a strange world of your own.

Originally posted by smallpeeps

Originally posted by rich23
It is a matter of some amusement to me, though, that an ex of mine [...] blew the myth that only men can commit rape out of the water rather effectively. She told her class that coc aine, applied to an erection, renders it, if not absolutely permanent, than certainly far less temporary than usual. Thus, given the right combination of circumstances, rape of a man (not involving penetrating him) is possible.

Uh, a woman forcing a man to have an erection and then proceeding to have sex with him is NOT rape. I will be happy to discuss this. It is not bodily invasive, and not traumatic except perhaps to a lawyer who wants to take your case.

Let's stay within the margins of reality here. Nobody thinks a vagina can be used as a weapon, do they? Really.

WHAAAAAAT?!

What kindof statement is that? are you saying that there is no emotional trama? no physical assualt? Nothing about being essentially tied up against your will and abused? Thats not rape?

Please.

Let's stay within the margins of reality here. Nobody thinks a vagina can be used as a weapon, do they? Really.

Also to someone like myself who thinks rape is basically worse than murder then how can you think my penis is a weapon? Do you expect me to beat someone to death with it? I promise you it isn't long enough.

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984

Let's stay within the margins of reality here. Nobody thinks a vagina can be used as a weapon, do they? Really.

Also to someone like myself who thinks rape is basically worse than murder then how can you think my penis is a weapon? Do you expect me to beat someone to death with it? I promise you it isn't long enough.

On behalf of the male community we would like to retract that comment.

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Rape
(force (someone) to have sex against their will) "The woman was raped on her way home at night"
Taken from
wordnet.princeton.edu...

Do you really want that definition, IR84? It's from a dictionary. I'd define rape like this:

rape: having part or whole of an erection forced into your body.

But see, my definition speaks to YOU, the human. It is not a legal definition and does not speak to the non-person, i.e. the court, i.e. judges and other lawyers which is what a dictionary does. Shouldn't a dictionary assume that a HUMAN will be reading it? Well, no. Dictionaries do not speak to or define such events as rape in the least ambiguous way.

So if someone consents to have sex with me (a rarity that) and we have sex then it is rape because i stuck my penis inside her, with her consent! What utter and total rubbish. By calling every man a rapist simply by him having sex is an utterly dispicable thing.

You are drawing your argument from your definition. I have a question for you: Do lawyers rape and if so, do they define it as I do or as your princeton dictionary does? Moreover, if all lawyers get sent to prison, will the princeton definition of rape be changed to fit mine?

Oh now this is a joke you are twisting my words beyond all recognition. I never said that the penis was the only way i simply stated it is important for the emotional well being of a man and also that many women like a penis! You are demonising the whole thing.

No. It sounds like you were "owned" by your girlfriend and I do not deny that such ownership of a significant other is possible IN ALL CASES of domesticity. Gay males can own men and so on. What I did, was try to draw your attention toward your own synthesis of the terms penis and erection. Many males mistakenly see these two as the same.

Well i think my ex girlfriend would disagree there. She attacked another woman when she flirted with me. How about i say it's a joke when i say it that fair? Why not it's a damn equal right! You cannot claim one thing for women and another for a man! As far as i am concerned when i am with someone she is mine and i am hers! You gonna tell me that isn't equal?

No, you can choose to give your autonomy up to her or to Homeland Security for all I care. But step outside your own situation for a second and try to imagine life as a woman. It is not hard to understand why women like your girfriend will become combative if there are female interlopers. Both of you are buying into the traditional western scheme which provide the lawyer-feasts-- I mean divorces, in the world.

You condesending little bleep.

Circumventing the language censor is a no-no, but I'll use my imagination.

Ok ok i will calm down here. No a penis isn't the be all and end all, it is far from a magic wand and many men need to learn this. This however does not mean it should be ignored and inserting into someone with there permission, male or female is not rape.

I agree completely.

How many times have you seen a place saying something like "Womens' only yoga" or "Womens' only pole volting", ok the second one is rare i admit. Anyway what if i started my mens' only group? I would have feminists so far down my throat i could taste the leather of dock martins.

IR1984, are you old enough to remember when women couldn't vote? I doubt it. In fact, not only couldn't women vote, they couldn't engage in yoga or pole-vaulting. They had to fight for those rights, just like any oppressed people have to fight for their rights. Oppression means having someone sit on your chest while you try to breathe. If you are oppressed, you will know it.


[edit on 1-5-2006 by smallpeeps]

Let's stay within the margins of reality here. Nobody thinks a vagina can be used as a weapon, do they? Really.

you've never had a long term relationship then, trust me, a vagina can and will be used as a weapon, by a certain ilk of woman.....

Originally posted by WolfofWar

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984

Let's stay within the margins of reality here. Nobody thinks a vagina can be used as a weapon, do they? Really.

Also to someone like myself who thinks rape is basically worse than murder then how can you think my penis is a weapon? Do you expect me to beat someone to death with it? I promise you it isn't long enough.

On behalf of the male community we would like to retract that comment.

I do apologise i was speaking only for myself.

IR1984, are you old enough to remember when women couldn't vote? I doubt it. In fact, not only couldn't women vote, they couldn't engage in yoga or pole-vaulting. They had to fight for those rights, just like any oppressed people have to fight for their rights. Oppression means having someone sit on your chest while you try to breathe. If you are oppressed, you will know it.

You are correct i am not old enough to remember, this doesn't make my arguement any less valid. My ideas on WW2 and killing loads of people in gas chambers is valid but i wasn't alive then either.

Once a right is won you should fight to keep it but you shouldn't then try to get back at those who didn't allow them. It is like the militant black people who wanted to kill whites for being white as there ancestors oppressed their families.

Don't punish all men for others mistakes and don't judge all men by the same standard. If that were the case then i say all women are over emotional, drippy, dumb, muppets, just like a women i used to know and dislike.

Maybe we should lock all us men up, i mean we are potential rapists! We lock up certain dangerous mental people and if we all have the idea of rape in our minds then we must be sick. Oh damn i think i'll get out the phone directory and get the clinic with those nice white jumpers on the line. Afterall i must be sick, i have a penis which can become erect.

[edit on 29-4-2006 by ImaginaryReality1984]

Originally posted by smallpeeps

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Rape
(force (someone) to have sex against their will) "The woman was raped on her way home at night"
Taken from
wordnet.princeton.edu...

Do you really want that definition, IR84? It's from a dictionary. I'd define rape like this:

rape: having part or whole of an erection forced into your body.

Where on the internet did you find that? Ever read a real dictionary?

rapeThe crime of forcing another person to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse.

dictionary

Where on the internet did you find that? Ever read a real dictionary?

rapeThe crime of forcing another person to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse.

dictionary

Maybe we shoudn't take the dictionary as correct. I think i will redefine murder as "Someone who killed someone else in a premeditated manner but it's ok cause the guy deserved it"

The dictionary contains the definition of a word.

[edit on 29-4-2006 by ImaginaryReality1984]

Originally posted by smallpeeps

rape: having part or whole of an erection forced into your body.

Ok ok i will calm down here. No a penis isn't the be all and end all, it is far from a magic wand and many men need to learn this. This however does not mean it should be ignored and inserting into someone with there permission, male or female is not rape.

I agree completely.

your contradicting yourself there!!!! sex is consentual, and an act of mutual respect and intimacy at least, rape is voilent and is about control rather than gratification, you seem to confuse the two. rape is a narrow term, in my opinion any nonconsentual sexual contact, from a pinch on the ass to Full Unlawfull Carnal Knowledge (yeah, thats what the F word means), are meant to intimidate the reciever using sexual intimacy, and are acts of violence and control, they can be carried out by anyone and are not confined to one gender. your changing the definition of rape to meet your ends, so the term is wishy washy in this sence, please give me your views on sexual violence in general, can men be the victims of this?

Maybe we shoudn't take the dictionary as correct. I think i will redefine murder as "Someone who killed someone else in a premeditated manner but it's ok cause the guy deserved it"

The dictionary contains the definition of a word.

[edit on 29-4-2006 by ImaginaryReality1984]

Yes, so lets just change it to something that fits to proove a point.

Fact is, what is rape? Its an unwanted and forced sexual assualt on a person. It means that they have been invaded and attacked in the most personal way possible, through some form of sex.


[edit on 4-29-2006 by WolfofWar]

[edit on 4-29-2006 by WolfofWar]

Originally posted by rich23

I guess I'm basically for people doing what they want, which is pretty hard in the society we live in (though not as hard as it is in (for example) Iraq,

Great discussion here! Pieman, re voting, the idea is that if a woman votes without thinking but based on the belief that a man is right simply for being male, that is not a freely chosen vote, anymore than under a dictator when he gets 99%.

Rich23, yes, so sad about women's rights under Islamic fundamentalism. Re domination, if totally in the bedroom and consenting, I say qualifyingly ok, but such behavior probably has underlying problem that the person is not dealing with except in that way, and would probably be better off getting rid of the underlying problem.

ImaginaryReality1984, yeah, it's good that men are "built stronger", for the ones that are, but how many boys are ridiculed for being not as developed as others. Weight lifting was an issue for women who could sling a bag of feed or a bale of hay yet be denied entry into a traditional male occupation. Let's not confuse side show issues from "either side" with the more meaningful issues like the top of my post...

Why should it be so hard for people to do what they want at this point in history? Feminism, in trying to make a better world for women, only implies a worse world for men, if those men still cling to traditions that don't allow women to be as free. We all should be valued and given dignity. Instead, by denying feminism or participating in the freak show only (feminazi, ex) we have devalued men and women, we have lost self-respect and dignity. Shame on this nation.

Oh, forgot to add--lets all stop saying things are not as bad as...look, so things are good, lets make it better. Isn't that what America/Free World stands for? A better way of life, especially now?

[edit on 29-4-2006 by desert]

Originally posted by pieman

Let's stay within the margins of reality here. Nobody thinks a vagina can be used as a weapon, do they? Really.

you've never had a long term relationship then, trust me, a vagina can and will be used as a weapon, by a certain ilk of woman.....

Oh man, I knew this was coming. I guess you want to discuss this.

Okay then.

If you are a man who see a woman as being ABLE to use her vagina as a weapon, then you are ADDICTED to a substance. Okay? It is not unusual for nature to give females a potent and effective lure (for lack of a better word) in order to balance the issues of survival. That's why a woman has that power: You give it to her because your animal nature says you must.

All these guys who are whining about how women behave. All these arguments could be boiled down to one cry: Please give us more vagina! It is good for man and women to feel possessive of the other when they are in a relationship, but if the woman in that relationship sees her sex apparatus as a lure, she will use it as such. However, it can't work unless the man is mentally open to that sort of power-play.

For the smallpeeps bio: I was married at 19 (as a virgin) for ten years, and now divorced for four. Since my divorce I have met women who want to control me, of course, and I am not saying I didn't engage these women physically and play along with that game. But the mind-games they play are identified by me and gently vocalized, early on. I try to establish an equality in the bedroom. It must be known to both parties, that "ownership" or damage to the other is not possible, for good sex to occur, IMO.

To me, it's funny/sad to hear Eminem, for example, rap about bitches n' hos when in fact he keeps going back to the same girl in an attempt to keep his family-unit intact. I mean the guy can't figure out the scam! Except for the bitches n' hos element, he's pretty smart. What I'm saying is that ALL humans both male and female are vicitimized by the gender roles we are ordered to fill. Em wants his daughter to have a family-type life as do a lot of divorced fathers, but the mom's trying to control him. Any man caught in this trap is destined for heartbreak. Maybe his situation defines this idea of women using their sex apparatus as a weapon? But really now, is Eminem a victim of Kim Mathers? He'd be a fool to say so.

Do you think there's a gender war on? If so, you are buying into a lie. Women are in a defensive posture, globally. On the whole, there are more human slaves today than at the height of slavery.