posted June 30, 2011 05:07 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by vertiver:
I live in one of the most liberal places in the states, but I still witness discrimination on women. Just last night I was with a group of guys and they were joking about how they might get ruffied if they leave their drink, and I was really annoyed because these are real things that women have to deal with constantly and men just make fun of it...

---

posted June 30, 2011 12:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by vertiver:
No its how women are told to act through the media and our culture. Were supposed to be pleasing and sexy to men, yet at the same time its not the 50's anymore and most women are independent and no longer rely on men, so why should we have to look to them for validation?

---

I'm not sure you got me, vertiver.

Some women act this was as a strategy to get what they want, not because it is a "pressure".
Of course, in an ideal world, we wouldn't have to, but this world is not ideal, so might as well make the most of it.
Take Marilyn Monroe..do you actually think she was stupid? Think again.
She played every card she had to get where she wanted.
Point is men can be played, and it's sometimes a win-win situation. Men feel all proud and "masculine", and women get what they want.
Personally, I often missed the point of why women care so desperately about what men really think of them. Especially when it comes to those that seem natural-born pricks.
Maybe I come across as too permissive(Pisces Sun, venus, Mercury, around the DC-I can definitely play the damsel in distress at times) but I just think why waste time and emotional energy trying to change the world, when you can "play the game" and get what you want, anyway?
I see myself as a total feminist, but, if you saw me, you might think I'm just this harmless-looking, cute little thing.
If I can manage to control my somewhat aggressive emotions(Moon tightly conjunct Mars, both tightly conjunct Jupiter, plus Venus tightly trine Pluto)I find I can get a lot by just being very open and polite/honest with men. Even the worst mysoginists get disarmed by sheer cuteness/innocence.

posted July 01, 2011 03:43 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pinkie&TheBrain:

I see myself as a total feminist, but, if you saw me, you might think I'm just this harmless-looking, cute little thing.

---

Being a feminist has nothing to do about appearance, its a ideology, plain and simple... I mean I go by conventional beauty standards - I dye my hair blonde etc...

posted July 01, 2011 06:17 AM            

quote:

---

I don't deny that women work their sexuality to their advantage nor take advantage of men

---

Much like "who makes the first move in love/sex" and "who takes the rubbish out"... this ^ - also.. has absolutely no connection to feminism.

This is actually another reason why I do not call myself a feminist.. because it seems people read personal things into a political movement that is not meant to be *personal*.

If someone (male or female) decides to use sex to get ahead in life... this has NO connection to their political inclinations or whether or not they are feminists.

You may say such behaviour is deceptive.. and hence, morally wrong.

If I were a part of the "moral movement against lies and deception" THEN it would be hypocritical for me engage in such behaviour and to manipulate someone using my sexuality.

However, If I was to call myself a feminist (which i don't.. but for argument's sake).. there is no implication in this that I am honest or that I don't "lie" or that I don't USE people (whether they are male or female).
So there is no hypocrisy in being a feminist and using as many men as you like to do whatever you like with them.

In the same vein.. when it comes to "who makes the first move" - another CLASSIC area of confusion...

If I was to be a part of the "hetero women must make a genuine effort to make the first move sexually" GROUP... then it would be hypocritical of me to expect men to always chase.

But if I was a feminist - there would be absolutely no discrepancy between my feminist beliefs and my expectation that my suitors should always chase romantically. Feminism is about having choices and options.. so it gives women the OPTION to be the 'chaser' without negative social repercussions. It gives women the OPTION to be 'career oriented' rather than a stay at home mother.
But that does not mean anyone is forced to take up those options.

But honestly! Try and explain that ^ to that Tom, Dick or Harry working at the local gas station.. Because it will go in one ear and out the other.

The only question left in his mind (though he may not be able to articulate it) will be -

"But hang on a minute.. so.. women get political rights.. correct? and they get social rights.. and they get a salary that matches mine.... BUT... I still have to take the rubbish out sometimes and I still have to chase sometimes.. --- SO -- What do *I* get out of this?"

And the only answer REAL feminism (as opposed to 'made up' versions of feminism) gives to this question is:

NOTHING. You get absolutely NOTHING.
Because - this is NOT. ABOUT. YOU.

Feminism is a political movement to make sure women have the same political and social standing as men.

posted July 01, 2011 08:53 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by dysfunctionalmystic:
Good post Anemone;

I hear ya!

---

I know you do honey, sometimes we just have to say those uncomfortable truths..! We are not all 'goddesses', some women are loud, annoying, entitled, insecure egomaniacs that make it a point to project these issues to men. Life is not fair. Take what you can from that, the sexes are different (yet EQUAL, in case I am misunderstood) and we have to work with this REALITY in mind, not our egotistical fantasies.

After some decades of feminism prevaling, what have we succeded at? Destroying marriage, family, and sometimes even self-respect, with co-ed dorms, women heavily drinking, cursing, lets just say behaving unladylike and after their 100th hook-up complain why men are such misogynistic pigs and wont commit to them. I say, go empowerment!!
* PS. At least in liberal societies, it's been a long time since women got the right to vote, work in every position desirable and have many social benefits. So no arguments over the obvious, please.

posted July 01, 2011 11:42 AM            

Someone else said that it's not discrimination unless it is intentional. I would say that a lot of sex discrimination is subconcious because we internalize messages about males and females and it starts wheb we're babies. We shroud them in either pink or blue, when sex at that age doesn't even matter and the babies haven't even formed gender identities yet. It's pervasive and it certainly disturbs ME, but I can't speak for everyone.

posted July 01, 2011 12:26 PM            

There is a side of me that finds it frightening to not have a part of my identity based on my gender.

Most opinions, feelings and beliefs are coming from something subconscious.

but above all else, any dogma is the fear of freedom...I think it was Rollo May who said that.

posted July 01, 2011 01:49 PM            

i've always considered myself a strong feminist (though i struggle with the word because of the connotations) who happens to somewhat agree with this sentiment:

" Since the sexual revolution, we've been witnessing a slippery-slope, where women are embracing and adopting male-friendly behaviors, like promiscuity, becoming more aggressive, shaming and showing contempt for fellow women who value family and modesty. How many times have you heard "oh i am a strong, independent woman, i am not going to sit and rear 5 children while baking cookies". Do you think thats not contemptuous AND presumptuous?"

however on the other hand, not only am i for complete freedom (inclusive of gender 'roles'), i am also of the opinion that before things can find a balance that is healthy and inclusive of everyone's rights/needs, there are going to be many compensating/overkilling sets of behaviours in BOTH genders as we, the collective we, search for total equinamity.

that is to say, it is totally a woman's right to behave however she wants sexually (as long as she's not hurting anyone; and thankfully women aren't as predisposed or physically as capable of raping men), and i support her rights, just as i support men's. but it's much trickier to establish an ideal that encourages the 'best' within each gender that reflects each particular gender's more natural inclinations (ie, women in general ARE more nurturing, men in general ARE more protective; we are psychically and physiologically disposed) within the new paradigm of freedom. i just hate it when people get caught up in the details of the inevitable overcompensating backlash overkill stuff once oppression has been either fully or partially dismantled (i'm speaking of these things only in terms of sexual behaviours, and even then i tread carefully because i do not want to attempt to impose any moral structure on peoples' sexual behaviour, especially if most of the 'blame' is to fall on women. again.); instead people should stop squabbling and look at the bigger picture, the basics:

-women and men alike should be free to express themselves free of discrimination

-women and men are EQUALLY human; men are no more human then women, therefore should be paid the same wages for the same jobs (how could there be any debate about this??)

-there needs to be more support for 'traditional' female roles in society; look how many single mothers there are, and look how much of a stigma welfare is for these women. women are asked to leave their infants in the care of others to raise; are seen as 'unproductive' and even greedy to want assistance. many women are in their element mothering and raising children and it is a FACT that the economy would THRIVE on women's being awarded financial assistance to raise their OWN children (i'll try to dig up an excellent study on this if anyone wants me to), and not only that, i believe many problems in the world stem from a widespread lack of early nurturing in these most recent generations.. which directly results in part FROM the feminist movement. that may make me appear to be antifeminist, but i am not. it is just one humungously unjust result OF a long established paradigm being thrown into relative chaos, and, we would hope, trying to find its bearings.. which is a result OF the movement, sure, but does not render the movement any less valid. this is an important distinction and i think most people get lost here and that is when it gets emotional and the term gets convoluted.

-the movement unto itself is about equality and fairness toward women and men ALIKE. to simply consider women HUMAN BEINGS with RIGHTS was laughable before the movement. can any 'antifeminist' here actually get on board with that sentiment? if not, then you ARE a feminist, whether you like the word or not. all the myriad social problems in the world are not caused by feminism; that is like saying every problem a person ever has in their adult life is a result of having had a 9th birthday.

posted July 01, 2011 02:58 PM            

i fully 100% support the traditional values of male provider/female childrearer; and at the same time IN EQUAL MEASURE, support complete freedom for women and men and their right to fully eschew these traditional roles at will.

i believe many people consider feminism to be contrary in spirit to traditional roles. but i personally believe it is about the freedom to be able to CHOOSE a life path which is most personally fulfilling.

further complicating things is the fact that once the momentum was there of women entering the workforce, and it became the norm, the support for 'traditionally-minded' women all but disappeared. this is one huge reason for the backlash against feminism.

but yet that backlash does not honour and recognize what is at the heart of feminism, in my opinion. neither do 'militant' feminists who disregard some women's inclination to traditional roles.

the point is supposed to be FREEDOM.

discussing the nuances is GOOD. getting caught up in the blame game and convoluted stuff is BAD (unproductive, ineffective, useless, pointless).

i personally mourne the ABILITY women used to have to stay home raising their tots and the honour they were allowed to feel in so doing. but would i want to be stuck in a world where that is all i would be ALLOWED to do? hell no!!!

the debate can reach further than polarization.. and must.

it's funny because i'm a sun, merucry mars in aquarius, sag rising and venus (pro freedom all the way) but a taurus moon in the fourth (major nurturer). maybe that is why i can ride this divide and not sacrifice one for the other, ideologically.

posted July 02, 2011 01:46 PM            

I really can't stand debate though, and I probably will stray from doing another political post again, because of all the conflict that has been stirred up.

But as a side note, I know plenty of feminist mothers who enjoy raising their children and feminist men.

posted July 02, 2011 03:38 PM            

i'm not enough of a history buff to know exactly how and exactly when everything went down, but here's something i'm wondering. do you think maybe men in general feel at a loss in terms of having their chivalrous tendencies revoked? admittedly it's got to be easy to be chivalrous when you have almost complete control of your woman (eek), but i'm trying to imagine being a male and i know that i would be hesitant to extend myself in such ways toward women (i'm recalling images of women saying 'i can open my own door!' and the like at the outset of the sexual revolution); what i mean is, 'their' roles were altered involuntarily, and though of course i'm not saying that they ought not to have lost their 'rulership' over women (yikes that's pretty inflammatory but i just woke up and that's all that's coming to me), but in terms of their relating to women, and their place, it's all sort of fragmented and confused, at least in terms of knowing exactly what is expected OF them, i imagine. obviously there is no blame to be assigned anywhere for this as it is what it is. i guess my point is we're all sort of scrambling essentially within the relative chaos of having dismantled a longheld paradigm of relating, and it's interesting and i would say worthwhile to consider the effects on men as well (and i guess i'm suggesting that not having considered the effect on them and their FEELINGS about it.. cuz they have those too.. to any particular extent might be part of the reason for the perpetuating divide and the inability of some men to accept feminism. like there's no framework or umbrella term that i know of for working through men's feelings about their adjusting as a whole TO the sexual revolution, but maybe there should be???).

posted July 02, 2011 10:56 PM            

------------------
Gemini Sun
Libra Moon
Gemini Mercury
Cancer Venus
Virgo Mars
Virgo Asc

posted July 04, 2011 12:20 PM            

Sweet lord, I love being a woman.

I definitely identify as a feminist, but it's just one facet of my political beliefs.

I read this entire thread. Thank you to the articulate women who expressed themselves here.

I've witnessed a lot of discrimination. Most of it I've observed and not personally endured. I have Moon/Mercury/MC in Pisces, with Sun in Aries, and both my sisters & my parents were softies, so I've always been in tune to the underdog. We're a family that can't even kill bugs. It hurt to read what a few people wrote in this thread about witnessing discrimination but that discrimination not personally affecting them, so they don't feel the need to step in. That's just really, really sad.

I had an awesome experience during my college graduation ceremony two years ago. I was born & raised in quite possibly the most conservative state in the US, but I spent four years in northern California attending college. The valedictorian or outstanding scholar of the year, or something like that, was a black female. After the Ethnic Studies graduates were awarded their diplomas, this female student gave a short, electrifying speech. After she finished, the members of the Black Student Union, about 20 of them, stood up together and did the Black Power Fist. I was so completely thrilled by their bravery that I burst into tears. I cheered and cheered for them because my first thought was, "Support my movement, and I'll support yours. We are all here together." I find it bizarre that people think you can't celebrate one thing without denigrating another. The beauty in life is so totally in its diversity.

What is more beautiful than seeing people find their own personal, precious power? How can someone be threatened by that?

So many of our institutions have a shady past. Can we please ******* face it? Feminism did not rise out of nowhere. It rose in response to a world rife with injustice. Obviously, the world has not become a better place, and the same problems of inequality exist. Look at what's going on in the world currently.

Since a lot of folks are scared to call themselves feminists, I become one of the only feminist-identified women people in my life know. For the past 10 years, I've gotten texts, emails, and phone calls from both male and female friends with lines like, "Thought of you when I saw this", and it's always something fierce and feminist and phenomenal. They've grown to associate feminism with me, and me with feminism. So sure, many folks might have negative ideas about feminism, but I throw my vibe into feminism, and I accept the feminist label, so I add to feminism, and feminism adds to me. If someone doesn't take the time to study to a movement, they often think that one person speaks for it (i.e., if a dude has never met a feminist and he meets me and I say I'm a feminist, he believes a lot of my behaviors are "feminist", when they're actually just my good, bad, or quirky traits, developed from a lifetime of living). And hey, I've lived a life that I think reflects well on feminism. So despite all the intensely negative connotations surrounding feminism, I will not abandon the movement.

posted July 04, 2011 01:25 PM            

Plus the way some (NOT ALL) feminists act is a shame to all women, more than any shame a man could bring upon women kind. But you get that with any movement or ideal or etc. etc. Some feminists are these man hating..well, I won't use the word. But those kind of women are an embarrassment to womankind in general. The ones who just blame men for everything and treat them as if they are these devils or something. But other feminists just celebrate the improving conditions with which women live in (right to vote in what the 20s?, etc.) which should have been givens for all women but were not...and that is respectable.

There is an unneeded negative contation when a woman says she likes to please her man. It does not make her weak by any means. Why can't it be seen as something positive like "loving, dedicated, devoted, caring, giving, sacrifice, etc." Some feminists have a way of turning something simple as doing something for her man into something negative like "holding us back, blah blah blah." She can still be independent and strong. Just like a man should want to please his gf or wife or whatever, that is positive and does not make him whipped.

I just prefer a woman who does not even need to focus on all these gender roles or whatever. Just be natural.

posted July 04, 2011 01:40 PM            

quote:

---

Plus the way some (NOT ALL) feminists act is a shame to all women, more than any shame a man could bring upon women kind.

---

posted July 04, 2011 01:46 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by moonram:
So many of our institutions have a shady past. Can we please ******* face it? Feminism did not rise out of nowhere. It rose in response to a world rife with injustice.

---