feminization of america

[La Lioness Priyanka]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1919777

[Ellen Forradalom]

1. Good job calling him out.

'Emasculation'? 'Feminization'? Wow. I didnt realize that every time I go to work, make my own decisions, speak my mind I cut someone's balls off. Nor did I realize that requiring men to play by the rules goes against their basic nature. :eyes:

[WildClarySage]

2. Yeah, this world's been sooo feminized:

My sisters still earn .75 cents to my brothers' dollar, my sisters are still raped, whistled at, exploited and driven to subsume their needs in favor of men's needs, have our reproductive freedoms threatened, are the most likely to be single parents, and to live in poverty, and least likely to hold positions of power in business, community organizations, and government.

Yeah, this is a feminized, emasculated world. Poor widdle men-sies. :eyes:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

3. i get annoyed when people use me instead of google to 'get educated'

i mean its fine if you dont understand something and need help with finer point etc. but posting sexism masked as a desire to be educated is shitty.

[bliss_eternal]

8. When people are disingenious...

...they should be called on it.

I hate that. Seeing people claim they are interested in discussing something, or learning, but all they are really doing is baiting a certain demographic so they can attack and insult them. Baiting tactics piss me off.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

10. You know who else does that don't you?

The Republican "base". I've long since learned to tell them to do their own damn homework. It's not my responsibility to hold their hands and gently walk them through the big words and paragraphs so they can see that Rush is full of shit. Wingnuts like Rush because he makes it okay to be a racist goober. Liberal Doods like their pet junk science peddlers and Bill Maher because they make it okay to be a sexist asswipe.

[defendandprotect]

12. Challenges to patriarchy are not sexism . . ..

patriarchy is sexism --

[mrreowwr_kittty]

4. I don't know which was worse

His disingenousness - "I'm just asking questions!" "I'm just trying to be educated!", or his bullshit armchair evo-psych.

Ya know, it's so disheartening to see progressives, who are supposed to be thinkers, gobble up this biological essentialism where gender roles are concerned. Imagine if there were a bunch of researchers trying to "prove" the biological basis of racial stereotypes. DUers would be ripping them a new one. But when it comes to male/female stuff it's a whole nother story.

The patriarchy is the basic unit of oppression in society. Until so-called progressive men get that through their heads and stop supporting it for the tiny scrap of privilege it gives them, we will never change the status quo.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

5. or people reprimanding me for not attending adequately to his BS educated me shit

[Chovexani]

6. That really got me

Of course us damn whiny feminists need to bend over backwards to "educate" misogynist fuckwits.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

9. Which is completely pointless

It turns into this circular argument that always ends with "yeah but I think still we're genetically programmed this way". He's looking for people to validate that, and then reassure him how everything wrong with modern society is the wimmenz fault.

[ismnotwasm]

7. Wow

So, what does he want? Someone to tell him it's biologically ok to be a sexist pig? (Hope he doesn't find that rape as evolutionary adaptation theory.) And that he gets special brownie points for overcoming his "nature"? And what the fuck is "emasculation"? I know Maher did his thing recently, but really what is he talking about?

I'm in the middle of muddling through a feminist philosophy article. "Sharing without Knowing: Collective Identity in Feminist and Democratic Theory" by Michaele L. Ferguson (Arrgh)
The introduction;
Many feminist and democratic theorists share the presumption that politics requires a pregiven subject ("women" or "the people") whose identity is grounded in commonality. Drawing on Linda Zerilli's interventions in feminist debates, Ferguson develops an alternative account of collective identity that emerges instead from multiple, overlapping and discontinuous social practices. This reconceptualization of identity demands a corresponding reconceptualization of democracy, characterized by the ongoing contestation of the very subject ("the people") whose existence if presupposes"

The author points out problems in finding exactly what gender and woman are, the apparent need for a "shared identity" and the assumptions of sharing a commonality--assumptions that lead to criticism of feminism or a feminist split "essentialism and antiessentialsm". Ties the whole thing into democracy.

It's one of those things I have to read three times to understand. The first time I was pissed. Why should women bear the burden of identity? Why is gender based on what WE are, or are not? Then I realized I was reading a feminist essay, and it's topic wasn't exactly male gender identity.

But that is one of the reasons the whole "emasculation" bullshit is bullshit. It's based on a supposed female gender inferiority, which should be (unlike this essay--I'm on my second reading, and it's getting clearer, it's not the writer or the topic, it's my comprehension, I always have trouble with philosophy) obvious. In other words, the more men are NOT like "women" -- the patriarchal concept of women, the more "manly" they are. Ick.

(I'm more than happy to type up a couple paragraphs if anyone is interested. It's good stuff, once we get to the conclusion)

[defendandprotect]

11. Commenting on the link . .. . nature isn't suicidal . . .

Yes . . . men do tend to want to be together -- something that society hides behind "sports" and other pal-type activites . . . . however, I think it's more than that.

Also, I think it would be impossible o deny that TV and movies are in over-drive trying to not make males NOT more masculine, but more violent --