Gender Equality According To Emma Watson. An Excellent Perspective

[Disir]

It always tickles me when a woman supposedly "hates" men...only the men who are the most hateful both in speech and their boyish antics are the ones that feel most betrayed.

Perhaps men who feel that women "hate" them should examine their own values.

Unfortunately in some cases they are correct. Some women feel being a feminist means hating men. I'm sure some men give them plenty of reasons to do so. But it's nearly impossible to start a dialog when you assume that the other person hates you before a single word is spoken. It tends to shade what they say one way or another in your mind.

I had wanted to comment yesterday but I didn't have a lot of time.

First, I don't speak for all feminists because they sure as hell don't speak for me. If you were to conduct a personal survey of women that were actively protesting during the women's movement of the seventies, you would come up with very few. There is a reason for that. You are looking at a predominantly upper middle class white women in universities. The rest of the women were working. Kind of like how they did before and during the fifties.

Feminism is divided. It's divided by class, race and culture. Only we can't have these conversations because (what I call) the elite squad has center stage. Always. They never shut up. Many of them have arranged their lives so that they don't have to participate in life in the same manner as the rest of their gender. In fact, many of them come from a place of wealth so that participation is optional---meaning they can retreat any time at all and suffer no real consequences. Maybe they volunteer a little time. So, then this group decides they are going to educate the rest of the society because they are more superior via their class/status. Most often, they don't bother to do any research into actual issues. Great. A group of women that have nil life experience, little to any research and gets to frame the arguments and then doesn't actually have to defend them because participation is optional. When they do, it becomes petty and superficial and then they expect the rest of us to defend their position when they opt out.

Men have never been excluded. We have fathers, brothers and sons. The most tragic element of my son growing up is watching him become the enemy simply because he is male. It is heart wrenching.

I want to thank you for the great post. I think you hit the nail on the head in most cases except one.
Feminism is divided by class, race, and culture. What conversation do think "we" need to have (I consider myself a feminist)? The divisions are pretty well known and accepted.

You didn't name names of who you think this "elite squad" is. I would like to know. If they are professors at some university or some columnist at a paper...you don't think they worked their ass off to get there? I do. First in college and then at the university or paper.

While it's true they worked their ass off, you're right, the hardest real decision alot of the well-to-do face is what wine to pair with their salmon in the evening. If you're trying to figure out if Sprite or Coke is better with your McRib...does that make your opinion any more valid? I suppose it will over real-life financial issues and how to afford day care when you make near minimum wage but there are certainly other issues than that.

So again, thanks for the post. I would want to know, however, who you think these "elite squads" are. Their biographies may surprise you...perhaps not.

Thanks. My issue is not with Profs. It's with columnists.

When the white middle class feminism of the sixties and seventies was exported overseas it was rejected. For the same reasons that it was and continues to be rejected by many feminists today: Minimization (simplification) of race, culture and class.
Here:
genderealisations 1 2002

Different cultures may have different priorities. For example, my culture may place education as the number one. This culture places family above all else and then education. It influences how we view time. One culture may stress complete independence and one culture is interdependent. It influences how we meet the needs (resolve issues) in a diverse community.

And the decisions that are made are not as simplistic as what to drink with a McDonald's meal.

I like Maslow's hierarchy of needs. It absolutely lays out the types of decisions that are the focus according to one's socioeconomic status. If your physiological needs are not being met then that is where your mind is at.

Any particular columnists?

Yep.

 

[candycorn]

Dickless???

You're just begging for me to stoop down to your level.

Let me go where you're too wise, cultured and polite to go.

What's the female equivalent of dickless? .

Not sure but you're the male equivalent. My guess is at some point you got labeled Tiny Tim or Short Stack by a female and you've hated them ever since.

 

[candycorn]

Unfortunately in some cases they are correct. Some women feel being a feminist means hating men. I'm sure some men give them plenty of reasons to do so. But it's nearly impossible to start a dialog when you assume that the other person hates you before a single word is spoken. It tends to shade what they say one way or another in your mind.

I had wanted to comment yesterday but I didn't have a lot of time.

First, I don't speak for all feminists because they sure as hell don't speak for me. If you were to conduct a personal survey of women that were actively protesting during the women's movement of the seventies, you would come up with very few. There is a reason for that. You are looking at a predominantly upper middle class white women in universities. The rest of the women were working. Kind of like how they did before and during the fifties.

Feminism is divided. It's divided by class, race and culture. Only we can't have these conversations because (what I call) the elite squad has center stage. Always. They never shut up. Many of them have arranged their lives so that they don't have to participate in life in the same manner as the rest of their gender. In fact, many of them come from a place of wealth so that participation is optional---meaning they can retreat any time at all and suffer no real consequences. Maybe they volunteer a little time. So, then this group decides they are going to educate the rest of the society because they are more superior via their class/status. Most often, they don't bother to do any research into actual issues. Great. A group of women that have nil life experience, little to any research and gets to frame the arguments and then doesn't actually have to defend them because participation is optional. When they do, it becomes petty and superficial and then they expect the rest of us to defend their position when they opt out.

Men have never been excluded. We have fathers, brothers and sons. The most tragic element of my son growing up is watching him become the enemy simply because he is male. It is heart wrenching.

I want to thank you for the great post. I think you hit the nail on the head in most cases except one.
Feminism is divided by class, race, and culture. What conversation do think "we" need to have (I consider myself a feminist)? The divisions are pretty well known and accepted.

You didn't name names of who you think this "elite squad" is. I would like to know. If they are professors at some university or some columnist at a paper...you don't think they worked their ass off to get there? I do. First in college and then at the university or paper.

While it's true they worked their ass off, you're right, the hardest real decision alot of the well-to-do face is what wine to pair with their salmon in the evening. If you're trying to figure out if Sprite or Coke is better with your McRib...does that make your opinion any more valid? I suppose it will over real-life financial issues and how to afford day care when you make near minimum wage but there are certainly other issues than that.

So again, thanks for the post. I would want to know, however, who you think these "elite squads" are. Their biographies may surprise you...perhaps not.

Thanks. My issue is not with Profs. It's with columnists.

When the white middle class feminism of the sixties and seventies was exported overseas it was rejected. For the same reasons that it was and continues to be rejected by many feminists today: Minimization (simplification) of race, culture and class.
Here:
genderealisations 1 2002

Different cultures may have different priorities. For example, my culture may place education as the number one. This culture places family above all else and then education. It influences how we view time. One culture may stress complete independence and one culture is interdependent. It influences how we meet the needs (resolve issues) in a diverse community.

And the decisions that are made are not as simplistic as what to drink with a McDonald's meal.

I like Maslow's hierarchy of needs. It absolutely lays out the types of decisions that are the focus according to one's socioeconomic status. If your physiological needs are not being met then that is where your mind is at.

Any particular columnists?

Yep.

Such as?

 

[Disir]

She went to Georgetown because she wanted to sue the University. No other reason.

Besides, what's wrong with slut? I'm certain it's mainly women who use slut to denigrate other women.

The war on women from conservatives has no end in sight I see.

It's all in your mind.
Just ask Emma Watson.

It doesn't matter if it's in her mind. It doesn't matter if it's true or not. The strategy is to repeat the lie over and over like it's the truth.

A lot of women will fall for the lie because they don't know any better.

332-206
Thanks to the women's vote. It turns out that women knew better.

Men vote for the good of society, women vote for their own security. This seriously changes the dynamics of government and society. The rise of the welfare state was made possible by the vote of women. The 72% illegitimacy rate and family destruction is in large part caused by welfare state policies enabled by women's voting.

I had wanted to comment yesterday but I didn't have a lot of time.

First, I don't speak for all feminists because they sure as hell don't speak for me. If you were to conduct a personal survey of women that were actively protesting during the women's movement of the seventies, you would come up with very few. There is a reason for that. You are looking at a predominantly upper middle class white women in universities. The rest of the women were working. Kind of like how they did before and during the fifties.

Feminism is divided. It's divided by class, race and culture. Only we can't have these conversations because (what I call) the elite squad has center stage. Always. They never shut up. Many of them have arranged their lives so that they don't have to participate in life in the same manner as the rest of their gender. In fact, many of them come from a place of wealth so that participation is optional---meaning they can retreat any time at all and suffer no real consequences. Maybe they volunteer a little time. So, then this group decides they are going to educate the rest of the society because they are more superior via their class/status. Most often, they don't bother to do any research into actual issues. Great. A group of women that have nil life experience, little to any research and gets to frame the arguments and then doesn't actually have to defend them because participation is optional. When they do, it becomes petty and superficial and then they expect the rest of us to defend their position when they opt out.

Men have never been excluded. We have fathers, brothers and sons. The most tragic element of my son growing up is watching him become the enemy simply because he is male. It is heart wrenching.

I want to thank you for the great post. I think you hit the nail on the head in most cases except one.
Feminism is divided by class, race, and culture. What conversation do think "we" need to have (I consider myself a feminist)? The divisions are pretty well known and accepted.

You didn't name names of who you think this "elite squad" is. I would like to know. If they are professors at some university or some columnist at a paper...you don't think they worked their ass off to get there? I do. First in college and then at the university or paper.

While it's true they worked their ass off, you're right, the hardest real decision alot of the well-to-do face is what wine to pair with their salmon in the evening. If you're trying to figure out if Sprite or Coke is better with your McRib...does that make your opinion any more valid? I suppose it will over real-life financial issues and how to afford day care when you make near minimum wage but there are certainly other issues than that.

So again, thanks for the post. I would want to know, however, who you think these "elite squads" are. Their biographies may surprise you...perhaps not.

Thanks. My issue is not with Profs. It's with columnists.

When the white middle class feminism of the sixties and seventies was exported overseas it was rejected. For the same reasons that it was and continues to be rejected by many feminists today: Minimization (simplification) of race, culture and class.
Here:
genderealisations 1 2002

Different cultures may have different priorities. For example, my culture may place education as the number one. This culture places family above all else and then education. It influences how we view time. One culture may stress complete independence and one culture is interdependent. It influences how we meet the needs (resolve issues) in a diverse community.

And the decisions that are made are not as simplistic as what to drink with a McDonald's meal.

I like Maslow's hierarchy of needs. It absolutely lays out the types of decisions that are the focus according to one's socioeconomic status. If your physiological needs are not being met then that is where your mind is at.

Any particular columnists?

Yep.

Such as?

No.

 

[JFK_USA]

Whatever you say dickless...

Candycorn,

I mostly agree with your politics, but calling a man "dickless" is emasculating and going to push men away from the issue of equality.

In fact, you promulgating the very gender stereotypes Emma watson and myself are trying to get rid of.

Calling a man "girly" or "dickless" implies that the man is a weak person. Therefore, you are implying as well that a woman is the weaker gender.

"Take it like a man" implies that a man is suppose to always be strong and never reveal how he feels. This is why you get many men who lash out violently in domestic violence situations, mass shootings and suicides. If that man could have been socially accepted to talk about his feelings without being laughed at. That also might help men live longer because they have a healthier avenue to express themselves.

Feminism can imply that you are only looking out for the issue of women only instead of equality as a whole. Gender equality is about breaking gender stereotypes that hold women and men back. Where women are penalized for taking maternity leave and men are penalized for taking paternity leave to be with his new family. It's not overt, it's subtle. It's the boss expecting the men to stay late to finish a project while expecting the women to go home. It's women expected to plan office parties. It's the men having to constantly prove themselves and if they show any sort of weakness, they are not a man.

And so on. Gender stereotypes hold both genders back and you calling an opponent "dickless" doesn't help gender stereotypes, it promotes it.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

[ClosedCaption]

It always tickles me when a woman supposedly "hates" men...only the men who are the most hateful both in speech and their boyish antics are the ones that feel most betrayed.

Perhaps men who feel that women "hate" them should examine their own values.

Unfortunately in some cases they are correct. Some women feel being a feminist means hating men. I'm sure some men give them plenty of reasons to do so. But it's nearly impossible to start a dialog when you assume that the other person hates you before a single word is spoken. It tends to shade what they say one way or another in your mind.

So can we look forward to you denouncing Rush Limbaugh calling Sandra Fluke (someone he doesn't know, doesn't know anyone who does know her, and has never met) a Slut on national radio? As you said, it's hard to start a dialog when the first word out of the man's mouth is "slut".

Sandra Fluke is hardly a good role-model.

No one mentioned role model. Nice side step tho.

 

[mudwhistle]

It always tickles me when a woman supposedly "hates" men...only the men who are the most hateful both in speech and their boyish antics are the ones that feel most betrayed.

Perhaps men who feel that women "hate" them should examine their own values.

Unfortunately in some cases they are correct. Some women feel being a feminist means hating men. I'm sure some men give them plenty of reasons to do so. But it's nearly impossible to start a dialog when you assume that the other person hates you before a single word is spoken. It tends to shade what they say one way or another in your mind.

So can we look forward to you denouncing Rush Limbaugh calling Sandra Fluke (someone he doesn't know, doesn't know anyone who does know her, and has never met) a Slut on national radio? As you said, it's hard to start a dialog when the first word out of the man's mouth is "slut".

Sandra Fluke is hardly a good role-model.

No one mentioned role model. Nice side step tho.

Somebody did.

 

[mudwhistle]

Whatever you say dickless...

Candycorn,

I mostly agree with your politics, but calling a man "dickless" is emasculating and going to push men away from the issue of equality.

In fact, you promulgating the very gender stereotypes Emma watson and myself are trying to get rid of.

Calling a man "girly" or "dickless" implies that the man is a weak person. Therefore, you are implying as well that a woman is the weaker gender.

"Take it like a man" implies that a man is suppose to always be strong and never reveal how he feels. This is why you get many men who lash out violently in domestic violence situations, mass shootings and suicides. If that man could have been socially accepted to talk about his feelings without being laughed at. That also might help men live longer because they have a healthier avenue to express themselves.

Feminism can imply that you are only looking out for the issue of women only instead of equality as a whole. Gender equality is about breaking gender stereotypes that hold women and men back. Where women are penalized for taking maternity leave and men are penalized for taking paternity leave to be with his new family. It's not overt, it's subtle. It's the boss expecting the men to stay late to finish a project while expecting the women to go home. It's women expected to plan office parties. It's the men having to constantly prove themselves and if they show any sort of weakness, they are not a man.

And so on. Gender stereotypes hold both genders back and you calling an opponent "dickless" doesn't help gender stereotypes, it promotes it.

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
When I was in grade school I got into trouble for hitting a girl. She was teasing me, sort of the way Ray Rice's gf was teasing him in the elevator. Back then I was too young to understand that you don't hit girls no matter how nasty they treated you. This girl was following me around the schoolyard calling me names, taunting me, I couldn't figure out what her problem was. Eventually I'd had enough. Hit her right between the eyes. She ran screaming to the teacher saying I was picking on her. Of course I was sent to the principal and got a spanking.

I still don't know what her problem was, but she never taunted me again. Problem solved.

 

[ClosedCaption]

It always tickles me when a woman supposedly "hates" men...only the men who are the most hateful both in speech and their boyish antics are the ones that feel most betrayed.

Perhaps men who feel that women "hate" them should examine their own values.

Unfortunately in some cases they are correct. Some women feel being a feminist means hating men. I'm sure some men give them plenty of reasons to do so. But it's nearly impossible to start a dialog when you assume that the other person hates you before a single word is spoken. It tends to shade what they say one way or another in your mind.

So can we look forward to you denouncing Rush Limbaugh calling Sandra Fluke (someone he doesn't know, doesn't know anyone who does know her, and has never met) a Slut on national radio? As you said, it's hard to start a dialog when the first word out of the man's mouth is "slut".

Sandra Fluke is hardly a good role-model.

No one mentioned role model. Nice side step tho.

Somebody did.

Yeah but we dont usually count imaginary people. You quoted someone who did not then threw it out to deflect from denouncing

 

[MaxGrit]

Dickless???

You're just begging for me to stoop down to your level.

Let me go where you're too wise, cultured and polite to go.

What's the female equivalent of dickless? .

Not sure but you're the male equivalent. My guess is at some point you got labeled Tiny Tim or Short Stack by a female and you've hated them ever since.

Feminist

Ugh Nasty

 

[mudwhistle]

Unfortunately in some cases they are correct. Some women feel being a feminist means hating men. I'm sure some men give them plenty of reasons to do so. But it's nearly impossible to start a dialog when you assume that the other person hates you before a single word is spoken. It tends to shade what they say one way or another in your mind.

So can we look forward to you denouncing Rush Limbaugh calling Sandra Fluke (someone he doesn't know, doesn't know anyone who does know her, and has never met) a Slut on national radio? As you said, it's hard to start a dialog when the first word out of the man's mouth is "slut".

Sandra Fluke is hardly a good role-model.

No one mentioned role model. Nice side step tho.

Somebody did.

Yeah but we dont usually count imaginary people. You quoted someone who did not then threw it out to deflect from denouncing

Sorry, I'm not as devious as you are.

 

[ClosedCaption]

So can we look forward to you denouncing Rush Limbaugh calling Sandra Fluke (someone he doesn't know, doesn't know anyone who does know her, and has never met) a Slut on national radio? As you said, it's hard to start a dialog when the first word out of the man's mouth is "slut".

Sandra Fluke is hardly a good role-model.

No one mentioned role model. Nice side step tho.

Somebody did.

Yeah but we dont usually count imaginary people. You quoted someone who did not then threw it out to deflect from denouncing

Sorry, I'm not as devious as you are.

Wheres your hat? I want to tip you for that tap routine

 

[mudwhistle]

Sandra Fluke is hardly a good role-model.

No one mentioned role model. Nice side step tho.

Somebody did.

Yeah but we dont usually count imaginary people. You quoted someone who did not then threw it out to deflect from denouncing

Sorry, I'm not as devious as you are.

Wheres your hat? I want to tip you for that tap routine

Whatever.

I simply responded to another's post.

I didn't know I was secretly out to destroy civilization as we know it, or whatever it is you're accusing me of.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Ohh tapping while building strawman. This guys good!

 

[Anathema]

Just another foreign - born, feminist, left - wing, Hollywood girl who could use a good spanking to remind her of her proper place in society. Maybe if we started writing the checks to these actresses father's or husband's instead of them these women would remember their place in society better.

 

[ScienceRocks]

She is another that wants the government to take care of the children. So women can be wage slaves for 50 years like men. LOL. Idiots.

 

[mudwhistle]

Just another foreign - born, feminist, left - wing, Hollywood girl who could use a good spanking to remind her of her proper place in society. Maybe if we started writing the checks to these actresses father's or husband's instead of them these women would remember their place in society better.

And it's your job to tell them what their place is?
Thanks. Maybe if I tweet your comment to her she may follow me.

*figure the odds*

Being outspoken is just asking for it, I'm tellin yah.....

 

[Anathema]

And it's your job to tell them what their place is?

No. My job is to remind them what Biology, Psychology and Sociology have told human civilizations for thousands of years that a woman's place is. I'm not arguing with nature..... that requires a lower level of intelligence, like a woman.

Being outspoken is just asking for it, I'm tellin yah.....

For women, yes.

 

[Disir]

She is another that wants the government to take care of the children. So women can be wage slaves for 50 years like men. LOL. Idiots.

No.

 

[candycorn]

Whatever you say dickless...

Candycorn,

I mostly agree with your politics, but calling a man "dickless" is emasculating and going to push men away from the issue of equality.

In fact, you promulgating the very gender stereotypes Emma watson and myself are trying to get rid of.


Calling a man "girly" or "dickless" implies that the man is a weak person. Therefore, you are implying as well that a woman is the weaker gender.

Not sure about all that. I get called an ass so I responded in kind. If he feels emasculated, I would submit that a "man" wouldn't call someone an ass.

"Take it like a man" implies that a man is suppose to always be strong and never reveal how he feels. This is why you get many men who lash out violently in domestic violence situations, mass shootings and suicides. If that man could have been socially accepted to talk about his feelings without being laughed at. That also might help men live longer because they have a healthier avenue to express themselves.

I didn't ever say "take it like a man". What I did say was that women are flexing their societal, political and financial muscles in away that hasn't been done before and that we should "get used to it." If that is a threat to the old guard...so be it.

Feminism can imply that you are only looking out for the issue of women only instead of equality as a whole. Gender equality is about breaking gender stereotypes that hold women and men back. Where women are penalized for taking maternity leave and men are penalized for taking paternity leave to be with his new family. It's not overt, it's subtle. It's the boss expecting the men to stay late to finish a project while expecting the women to go home. It's women expected to plan office parties. It's the men having to constantly prove themselves and if they show any sort of weakness, they are not a man.

And so on. Gender stereotypes hold both genders back and you calling an opponent "dickless" doesn't help gender stereotypes, it promotes it.

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

Possibly. I'm a little too busy to get into the discussion this evening. I will say this; feminism for a woman in Burma means one thing; feminism for a woman of the same age in Paris means something totally different. Feminism from the perspective of Tina Fey probably is much different than the feminism that Tina Louise who are both actresses but are about 40 years apart in age.

One poster here was calling for a big discussion to find out what it really means. I don't think we need such a discussion since I don't think there is one universal definition that we'll all agree on. Equality would certainly be a cornerstone, empowerment would be another I think. Acceptance would be my third. And sisterhood would probably be a fourth; to act with a bit of cohesion. Yours may be different. "Man hating" for no reason isn't in there but gee when you get called an ass, you can pretty much take it to the bank that the hate goes both ways...can you not?