Misogynism

Wescli Wardest wrote: ex•am•ple
noun \ig-ˈzam-pəl\

I always did screw up pronouncing that word. lol


Anyway, to the OP I noticed that too actually, glad you brought it to light.

This has been an issue I've seen first hand in the job I had as a social worker. Sure some were playing victim, squeezing singles fathers and crap like that. Plenty of the situations, however, were of a gender indifference where women would get this crap. The very event that inspired me to join social work was a gender abuse. I joined it because I saw an injustice. Though like Khaos I don't deal with "isms" so I don't call myself a feminist. I do agree with them though. Things are shit for everybody, and women are part of everybody and they do have something that we can't just sweep under the rug.

But yeah, I disagree with equality. We ain't equal. Even Martin Luther King Jr wasn't about equality.

Martin Luther King, Jr wrote: I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

hah yeah, and my grandmother's a virg- I mean... well said heh

I've already said many times before that feminism has nothing to do with benefitting women. It is only about dismantling the patriarchy.

You are entitled to your beliefs.

Not only about your funny definition of feminism (It's called feminism, not anti-patriarchy), but also about the merit and success of feminism in destroying "patriarchy" (not once in my life have I felt at an advantage because of my gender, allow me to doubt patriarchy's existence).
If feminism has been destroying "patriarchy", why is it that women today feel less happy relative to men than they did in the 70s ? if this increase in unhappiness is indeed caused by the disappearance of "patriarchy", does that not mean women benefit from more "patriarchy"?

On feminism:
I know feminists from 3 generations.
First generation: My grandmother; she feels very strongly about equal rights and stopping abuse. It pretty much stops there.
Second generation: My mom; she feels very strongly about economic equality, education equality, and gender role assignments in housework.
Third Generation: My sisters. They feel very strongly that women are superior to men. They believe that men are optional luxury items similar to pets.

I'm able to openly discuss feminism and women's issues with my mom and grandmother. When I discuss it with my sisters or other 3rd gen feminists, I'm told my opinion doesn't matter because I'm male. If I share my thoughts on what's attractive to me, I'm accused of misogyny and told what to think, how to behave, who to be attracted to, and how to express myself.

I, personally, deal with it by excluding those 3rd gen feminists from my life. I mean who wants to be around a sexist control freak anyways?

Whyte Horse wrote: I mean who wants to be around a sexist control freak anyways?

other sexist control freaks.

anyway, kinda a generalisation. although I liked you were able to pull a new label out of your ass with the generations. I've worked with 3rd gen feminists ( lol), seem fine to me. They give me crap sure, but if you heard my fifty shade's of grey joke, anybody would haha

ren wrote: (It's called feminism, not anti-patriarchy)

You'll also notice it isn't called any variation of "equality," either. This fact, for good or ill, has had a marked effect on gender discussions worldwide.

I mean who wants to be around a sexist control freak anyways?

Some submissives.

Some people, as said earlier, make bad choices and pick such a thing. Women defending the man who beat them, or there child and vice/versa.

It's called feminism because it has to do with issues of how feminine characteristics are seen in society and because women have more to lose if it fails.

How have you decided women are less happy now? And could it possibly be because they have realized there are other options so they've stopped pretending to be happy with what they have?

The patriarchy very much exists. Men have more representation in media, more representation in management positions and at the tops of companies, more representation in politics, etc. With that representation comes power.

The patriarchy is far from being dismantled. Feminism is having a lot of trouble right now because people have realized they're actually moving forward, and there has been a lot of pushback. They also have to spend a lot of time convincing people they aren't like radical feminists because the rest of the world has a negative stereotype of feminists.

As far as this entire discussion, once again it has been made about men and about how men want to be included in feminism. Which is why feminism is necessary in the first place. Men have power in so many other places, they can't imagine giving it up for women in women's own movement. And that is an example of how you have privilege without even realizing it. When you can't imagine a social movement or supporting a social movement that doesn't somehow benefit you just as much as it benefits the oppressed group.

I don't see how the patriarchy you speak of really and truly exists. Maybe if there weren't so many women in positions of authority I would have an easier time seeing what you are attempting to portray. I can see how feminism is still needed because I don't think a man has the right to have any say about a woman's reproductive organs or rights. But, on the other side of that coin, I also don't think a woman has the right to have any say about a man's, either. That's just one issue I have seen floating around and I agree. If you don't have that body part, what right do you have to try and make laws about them? There are many of these types of issues out there, but this is just one example.

Women make up just over half of the world population. In the US, women are about 51% of the workforce.

But only about 17% of Senators are women. Just under 17% of the House of Representatives is made up of women. Around 34% of Supreme Court justices are women. 12% of governors are women. About 25% of elected representatives are women. In the largest 100 cities, only 9% of women are mayors.

Women are about 1/3 of the people in MBA programs, but they are only 2% of Fortune 500 CEOs, 8% of other top leadership positions, only 6% of top earners, and only 16% of board directors and corporate officers.

Over half of college graduates are women, but only 25% of college professors are female and less than 20% of college presidents are female.

Women are just under 50% of new lawyers, but they are less than 20% of law firm partners, federal judges, law school deans, etc.

50% of divinity school students are female, but less than 3% of pastors in congregations that ordain females are women. (This of course does not include congregations that don't allow women to be ordained because that would skew the statistics.)

Fewer women are featured on the front pages of newspapers. They are far less likely to be quoted in news stories. Only about 25% of TV talk show guests are women. Women make up only 3% of decision makers in mainstream media.

But remember, they are over half of the population. Clearly we have a representation issue. Men have far more power and influence. That's the patriarchy I'm speaking of.

Is it an issue of women being shut out or shut down from trying to overcome the barrier, or are there not as many trying because of the intimidation of shut out/down? Or, is it simply because their voice isn't being heard as much because less women take it upon themselves to carry out that type of role in the positions you mentioned? Is it as black and white as you make it seem, or is there more to it than meets the statistical data?

Also, I understand that some women (if not many) shy away from continuing successful careers because they get pregnant and put more importance on raising their children. But, I believe that if more people were supportive of women continuing their careers after having kids, they would be more likely to. I've seen and heard both sides of the argument and I agree that it is more difficult to continue after childbirth, but it's not impossible. I'm in full support of women continuing to accomplish what they set out for in the beginning and childbirth is not an end to their careers if people don't put so much of a stigma on it. I would like to see a more positive outlook on these situations than what's been made normal, these days.