Poll: Emma Watson's Speech on Gender Equality

Grahav

New member
Mar 13, 2009
1,129
0
0
Ri-iiight. Because what guys really need is to be liberated from "prescribed gender stereotypes." All the hot babes like Emma Watson are crazy for guys who don't fit "prescribed gender stereotypes," right? So you won't be surprised to learn that Emma Watson is dating a bald scrawny impoverished poet



JK, the biggest jock at an elite university:

http://www.ibtimes.com/who-matthew-janney-meet-actress-emma-watsons-rumored-new-boyfriend-photo-1533780



They are confining. Some of them are idiotic and should be extinguished. But I also know that a lot of it is the reality and I want and must fight to be The Guy whose girlfriend likes to caress and trust. And I know it will be fucking hard since I am 1,64, shy and balding but how exactly I am going to get a cool girl if I don't become cool myself?

Just don't expect me to be a dogged, ass kissing, White Knight. I would rather be alone.
 

white_wolf

New member
Aug 23, 2013
296
0
0
Sometimes yes I relate with Vid87 as far as not fitting in to either side of the male and female spectrum. People want me to be more feminine then I'm, yet I want to be myself which is a mix more male and less female in most instances but I do feel very pressured to fit in around other women and men I relate to the not fitting in for lots of social situations. Using vid's example if I was to also write a woman character she'd have male emotions but like fashion so she'd be a very unusual character she wouldn't be a correct woman by media standards and if I handled it wrong she'd probably come off as butch or man with breasts but to me I'd be writing a character I find strong and capable like Ripley.
 

Westaway

New member
Nov 9, 2009
1,084
0
0
erttheking said:
Christ. Christy Christ Christ yes. Male gender roles are such bullshit it isn't even funny. I always felt like I didn't fit in that well with other guys at my school because I wasn't very athletic. By the point I had gotten to high school, I had developed the opinion that 50-75% of the male population was made up of douche bags. To be honest I still think that. I just never bought any of the bullshit about "being manly" Fuck sports, fuck toughing it out, fuck "be a man". In the words of Senator Armstrong "Fuck...ALL OF IT!"

Westaway said:
Nah I'm pretty sure gender roles exist because of biology, not social pressure.
Citation needed.
Here is your citation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiJVJ5QRRUE

Even in the most egalitarian societies genders choose different professions.
 

Dr. Doomsduck

New member
Nov 24, 2011
217
0
0
SonOfVoorhees said:
I read this in the Metro (UK) and in the same paper they commented on that girls are getting an anti cancer injection that boys dont get. Now theres an argument so that boys get that same injection to protect them from cancer (an figures show men die from cancer more than women - talking about male only cancer like prostrate compared to Breasts cancer). An people are so uptight about women in games being sexist. Its laughable....lets look at real life issues.

For this thread - games dont effect my life. I love women and respect them. An i am not an over muscled dumb arse. An their are millions of men that dont see real women the same as a computer game women. I think its easy to pick on feminist issues in games than feminist issues in real life.
If I recall correctly, those vaccines are really only effective against cervical cancer, so giving them to men wouldn't be all that effective at the moment. That said, there are several vaccines being developed for lung, bladder, colon and metastatic prostate cancer. So, it's not really so much as not wanting to protect the men rather than not really having figured out how to protect them from it. On another note; I think that there are more people currently working full time on serious issues like world-hunger, gang-rapes and curing cancer than there are those who are full time committed to stopping the sexism in games. Personally, I can take time out of my day to worry about both.

As for the topic at hand; I'm a woman, so I don't have a direct connection to the confining roles of masculinities, but I can see that they affect the people around. Yeah, kudos to Watson.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
Westaway said:
erttheking said:
Christ. Christy Christ Christ yes. Male gender roles are such bullshit it isn't even funny. I always felt like I didn't fit in that well with other guys at my school because I wasn't very athletic. By the point I had gotten to high school, I had developed the opinion that 50-75% of the male population was made up of douche bags. To be honest I still think that. I just never bought any of the bullshit about "being manly" Fuck sports, fuck toughing it out, fuck "be a man". In the words of Senator Armstrong "Fuck...ALL OF IT!"

Westaway said:
Nah I'm pretty sure gender roles exist because of biology, not social pressure.
Citation needed.
Here is your citation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiJVJ5QRRUE

Even in the most egalitarian societies genders choose different professions.
...Uh...I'm arguing the exact same point that this video makes. I'm only at the 12 minute point, but it argues there that boys and girls choose different roles because of society's pressure...which is what I said.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
BloatedGuppy said:
Didn't see a topic on this, thought it was worth discussing. Apparently Hermione Granger, not satisfied with crusading solely on behalf of House Elves, has now been appointed a UN Woman's Ambassador.

Transcript of her speech here:

http://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2014/9/emma-watson-gender-equality-is-your-issue-too

I thought I would touch on one part in particular, as this forum is primarily male.

Men-I would like to take this opportunity to extend your formal invitation. Gender equality is your issue too.

Because to date, I?ve seen my father?s role as a parent being valued less by society despite my needing his presence as a child as much as my mother's.

I've seen young men suffering from mental illness unable to ask for help for fear it would make them look less "macho"-in fact in the UK suicide is the biggest killer of men between 20-49; eclipsing road accidents, cancer and coronary heart disease. I've seen men made fragile and insecure by a distorted sense of what constitutes male success. Men don?t have the benefits of equality either.

We don't often talk about men being imprisoned by gender stereotypes but I can see that that they are and that when they are free, things will change for women as a natural consequence.

If men don?t have to be aggressive in order to be accepted women won't feel compelled to be submissive. If men don?t have to control, women won?t have to be controlled.

Both men and women should feel free to be sensitive. Both men and women should feel free to be strong...It is time that we all perceive gender on a spectrum not as two opposing sets of ideals.

If we stop defining each other by what we are not and start defining ourselves by what we are-we can all be freer and this is what HeForShe is about. It's about freedom.

I want men to take up this mantle. So their daughters, sisters and mothers can be free from prejudice but also so that their sons have permission to be vulnerable and human too?reclaim those parts of themselves they abandoned and in doing so be a more true and complete version of themselves.
So, poll question and discussion...do you feel that traditional definitions and expectations of masculinity are confining for you? Do you feel forced to assume roles that run against your nature? Would you be interested in seeing a gradual cultural tear-down of the "Masculine ideal" in the same way feminism tried to tear down antiquated notions of femininity and expand the parameters of how they could express themselves? Or are you happy with the status quo? Do you not want to lose traditional definitions of manliness and manhood? Do you think there is value in expressing sexual dimorphism socially?

THREAD REQUEST: Keep the any debate civil. First mention of "SJW" earns 20 crotch punches.
Well good thing I'm wearing my titanium jock cup today. :)

The problem with feminism is that it rapidly goes from crusading for equality, to demanding to be given things, rather than simply the opportunity to earn them. Feminism by and large made sense when it was an issue of saying "well if a woman meets the requirements to do this job, why can't she do it?" to demands that jobs be changed to have lower standards so women could do them, to affirmative action programs in ensuring so many women were in "meaningful" leadership positions, to most currently round about arguments that men should basically stop being men. The bottom line is that yeah, guys have their own baggage of expectations to carry, and it's not a bed of roses, the expectations of bring strong, aggressive, and running point to do things can be a burden at times but it's also how a lot of things can get done. It's seductive to hear someone say "well, wouldn't it be nice to put down those gender expectations?", but in practice at the end of the day such arguments tend to be made mostly in terms of social assertiveness and places at the high end of society. Women as a general rule are not lining up to have their fair representation in menial labor among the ditch diggers, garbage men, and grunt janitorial workers (which is a bit different than house keeping or stewarding), unless of course money and prestige goes along with the job, such as an area where the municipal trash collectors actually have a pretty good deal going as far as pay and benefits, you'd be shocked at how much money garbage men and dog catchers can actually make in some places.

The way that I see it is that as time goes on the whole "Feminism" thing needs to find reasons to sustain itself, it's long since established it's stated goals, even the major one like the vote, now it's all about pushing the fabric of society, and really as time goes on you see more and more radicals appearing because there are less legitimate positions to hold, as really the only way to move forward becomes more about taking things away from men, as opposed to simply being given the right to compete if you happen to be there for a job or position with the right qualifications.

I'll also say that I think the decay of feminism has a lot to do with the fact that people like Emma Watson, Anita Sarkessian, and others are kind of cowardly at the end of the day. Part of the reason you see issues like this pushed is because they can get away with it in the first world where women are already pretty fairly represented (the genders are ?NOT the same and not equal in all things, like it or not, men and women are different). I mean Anita Sarkeesian can be a trouble maker and the most she has to worry about is people talking smack at her. When you consider the gender issues in China, India, The Middle East, etc... (China and India both independently make up 1/3rd of the human race, so that's 2/3rds right there) it's really kind of silly. Your vocal feminists pretty much decide to focus on the small portion of the third of the human race where they have had victories rather than actually taking their message where it could still do some actual good as opposed to getting into increasingly ambigious territory. Of course if Anita for example decided to move to one of those countries and try and do her "Feminist Frequency" thing on real issues, she'd run a risk of actually being raped, or guest starring in an IS-sponsored snuff flick alongside the other recent victims. Emma Watson isn't as bad yet, and I agree with her on some points, but she is sort of making a joke out of her whole UN appointment when her speech largely addresses issues from a first world perspective, and seemingly aimed at the first world status quo. As she's operating at a UN level she should be butting heads with China, India, The Middle East, and other nations and going overseas into the hotbeds of these problems to shake things up, presumably under the aegis and protection of the UN, in some respects that makes her an even bigger coward than Anita because you'd at least expect as an Ambassador in cases like that (doing her job) she'd have an entourage and body guard. She has UN backing, and as much press as this is getting, she is doing pretty much nothing with it. Of course that might be why she was selected, the UN is big on doing nothing, if they actually had someone in this position going into these countries and stirring things up and pushing for reforms under UN authority it would be too much like doing it's job. Next time some woman gets stoned in The Middle East ask yourself where Emma Watson was during the whole thing, and then remember this speech and where she's decided to turn her eyes instead because the real problems seem to be too big for her.

That said, I will also say that the people in support of this entire perspective seem to largely be SJWs (I hear the clanging on my jock guard already) because this is how they get attention, it's much easier for them to pick on first world issues and just make some sympathetic questions when things get too far out of that arena. You see more of these people flocking to the defense of say Anita Sarkeesian than say going after gender inequality in The Middle East. Of course at the end of the day though most SJWs can't get too international in their rants, because when you follow that through it all of a sudden turns into actually pushing to DO something tangible, and that rapidly turns away from the whole "peace at any price" attitudes that tend to go along with the rest of the philosophy. Basically SJWs tend to stand for what they can get away with QQing about in the first world no matter how hypocritical it makes them sound.

In closing I'll also say that the modern feminist movement has also lost it's way which is part of the entire problem. They rapidly tend to forget about how first (or was it second) wave feminism was heavily about sexuality and women pushing for their right to be sexy, nude, etc... and not find any shame in that. That came first largely because it formed a foundation the rest of this was supposed to be built on. Right now one of the big feminist issues is how people have been leaking nude and sexually oriented pictures of all these "very serious" women all over the internets. Indeed Emma has been threatened with this herself (and let's be honest she's been a model in addition to an actress at this point so chances are nudes of her probably exist somewhere in portfolios even if they weren't personal ones for a boyfriend). The bottom line is that the whole point of the original baseline was to make it so this kind of thing wouldn't work. The way I see it is that if someone can get your goat by putting up pictures of you naked or having sex, then you really shouldn't be talking about feminism as a big part of the foundation was to remove the negative connotations from that kind of thing. This is also why a lot of "feminists" like Anita need to dance the two-step around things like sexy women in artwork and the like, and fail to acknowledge how women create stuff like this themselves. Basically the idea is to be at peace with it.


That's my thoughts at any rate. I think Emma is probably well intentioned, but I think she's doing it wrong. I also dispute the wisdom of having put her there because supposedly she had problems in school being able to deal with the pressure of being high profile due to her modeling, and fame over the Harry Potter movies. Of course again, that could be the entire point of the UN giving her this position. She's going to sit around and QQ at countries like the US and UK and otherwise ignore the greater issues afflicting the majority of humanity, allowing the UN to have a Women's rights ambassador, but one that won't actually get the UN involved in anything touchy. Of course then again I have no idea what kinds of resources this position has (I didn't hear it called "honorary" though it might be, so I'm guessing it's an actual appointment). I'd find it hilarious, if oddly appropriate, if we say have UN peacekeepers hitting the Middle East harder than the USA ever did specifically to force gender equality on the cultures and governments. Having Hermione air dropping a battalion of Royal Marine Commandoes on the next tribe that tries to stone a girl for something like not marrying her rapist would just be too awesome for reality. :)
 

Westaway

New member
Nov 9, 2009
1,084
0
0
erttheking said:
Westaway said:
erttheking said:
Christ. Christy Christ Christ yes. Male gender roles are such bullshit it isn't even funny. I always felt like I didn't fit in that well with other guys at my school because I wasn't very athletic. By the point I had gotten to high school, I had developed the opinion that 50-75% of the male population was made up of douche bags. To be honest I still think that. I just never bought any of the bullshit about "being manly" Fuck sports, fuck toughing it out, fuck "be a man". In the words of Senator Armstrong "Fuck...ALL OF IT!"

Westaway said:
Nah I'm pretty sure gender roles exist because of biology, not social pressure.
Citation needed.
Here is your citation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiJVJ5QRRUE

Even in the most egalitarian societies genders choose different professions.
...Uh...I'm arguing the exact same point that this video makes. I'm only at the 12 minute point, but it argues there that boys and girls choose different roles because of society's pressure...which is what I said.
If you had watched all of it you would know those assertions are completely blown out of the water by actual research.
 

DementedSheep

New member
Jan 8, 2010
2,654
0
0
SonOfVoorhees said:
I read this in the Metro (UK) and in the same paper they commented on that girls are getting an anti cancer injection that boys dont get. Now theres an argument so that boys get that same injection to protect them from cancer (an figures show men die from cancer more than women - talking about male only cancer like prostrate compared to Breasts cancer). An people are so uptight about women in games being sexist. Its laughable....lets look at real life issues.

For this thread - games dont effect my life. I love women and respect them. An i am not an over muscled dumb arse. An their are millions of men that dont see real women the same as a computer game women. I think its easy to pick on feminist issues in games than feminist issues in real life.
Are you talking about the one for cervical cancer? cancer comes in many different types and causes. There isn't a go to cure or prevention for all of them. The vaccine is against some strains of HPV, a STD that is the most common cause of cervical cancer. My understating was that HPV can cause cancers in other areas and men but its rarer. However they are looking at bringing it in for men at the moment.

Edit: However I will say I strongly agree that other cancers, particularly prostate need more promotion. We do have prostate cancer awareness campaigns and donation drives but they are smaller and there is less encouragement and education for guys to check for it (though they seem to be getting better about that).
 

Cathululock

New member
Sep 25, 2014
1
0
0
At first the results surprised me, then I remembered who you are talking to.


A bunch of NEETs on a gaming website, of course they would feel that way. I am actually surprised that "no" was as high as it is.



I still think most women feel a lot more attracted to strong manly men. That is just genetics and a bunch of complaining isn't going to change it.

Obviously I'm not talking about ALL women but as a gay man (and for the record I'm attracted to strong men) I spend a lot of time with women and they almost always complain about how there husbands have become soft and gush over strong manly men. Just the way it is and its been that way for thousands of years and is prominent in other mammalia. I don't think a silly campaign is going to change millions of years of evolution.
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
18,863
15
43
Grahav said:
Ri-iiight. Because what guys really need is to be liberated from "prescribed gender stereotypes." All the hot babes like Emma Watson are crazy for guys who don't fit "prescribed gender stereotypes," right? So you won't be surprised to learn that Emma Watson is dating a bald scrawny impoverished poet

They are confining. Some of them are idiotic and should be extinguished. But I also know that a lot of it is the reality and I want and must fight to be The Guy whose girlfriend likes to caress and trust. And I know it will be fucking hard since I am 1,64, shy and balding but how exactly I am going to get a cool girl if I don't become cool myself?
attractiveness and gender stereotypes and roles don't [I/]always[/I] go hand in hand

[quote/]Just don't expect me to be a dogged, ass kissing, White Knight. I would rather be alone.[/quote]
well with THAT attitude....
 

Bara_no_Hime

New member
Sep 15, 2010
3,646
0
0
BloatedGuppy said:
http://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2014/9/emma-watson-gender-equality-is-your-issue-too
**slowclap for both Emma Watson for saying it and for you for posting it**

Beautiful speech.

**writes a post then deletes it**

You know what - just read the speech again. I bow to Emma Watson on this one.

And thanks again to Bloated Guppy for drawing my attention to it. ^^
 

Skatologist

Choke On Your Nazi Cookies
Jan 25, 2014
628
0
0
Okay this is a bit of exposure time for me...I liked the speech, it kind of spoke to me if you could say that. Let's just say I am a young man who doesn't like physical contact, doesn't enjoy too many sports, who finds the stereo-typically admired aspects of a woman's body many guys like as usually unimportant and sometimes intimidating rather than sexy, and who really doesn't like too many things considered "manly". I like androgynous and traditionally feminine things, but I'm afraid of expressing my like for the latter because doing so somehow expresses that I'm gay to so many people, both men and women. I think that and a few other things is definitely confining for many guys, so they feel they have to go through the same motions as the stereotypical male and try their hardest to fit that model. I tried that, I wasn't happy. I wasn't me, I feel more like myself now and hopefully when I can walk outside wearing whatever I damn well please, I'll feel I'll be showing even more of the me inside and being even happier with myself. I never get this urge to fight or beat up on anyone or anything, sometimes I just want to cry out all the negativity and talk to someone who either understands or at least wants to listen and I'm willing to do the same for anyone else. I would be more than happy to be married to a woman who was making more money than me with a more demanding job.

So yeah, I agree with Watson and what she said and say "Yes" to the poll. Oh, and as an added bonus, screw Return of Kings and all[footnote]or at least most [/footnote] of what it stands for.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
15,707
1,344
118
Lightknight said:
Some interesting data: Somewhere between 2.5% and 5% of the people in prison are innocent. [http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2012/05/01/the-price-of-freedom-what-happens-to-the-wrongfully-convicted/] So 1 in every 200 or 1 in every 400. To put that in total terms, in 2006 there were 7.5 million people in prison. If we use the low end estimate of 2.5% that would be 187,500 people in prison for a crime they did not commit.

False accusations of rape specifically are believed to run between 2% to 8%. David Lisak's 2010 study that was published in a magazine dedicated to violence against women put the number at 5.9% when they only counted cases where actual evidence turned up to show that the claim was false. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape#Lisak_.282010.29] So it isn't counting other people for whom there was no evidence to exonerate but were innocent. So that 8% may not be that unlikely but study results can vary wildly by who is doing the study and what criteria they use to define a false accusation. That's why I used the study put out by Violence Against Women since I assume they wouldn't want to print particularly high numbers unless they were true.
The proportion of false accusations might be more than the proportion of people, in general, wrongfully convicted? That says nothing about the amount of false accusations leading to a conviction.

Lightknight said:
In any event, getting convicted isn't the only way to be damaged by this thing. Getting accused can often have significant impacts on the individual in society. From loss of job, time in jail awaiting trial (and money lost to bail if any is set), separation from family, to any number of other ramifications. So conviction isn't even the only concern by a long shot.
That's assuming that the authorities take the allegation seriously, mind, which is also far from a given.

Lightknight said:
So yeah, this is something to be afraid of. A person you've done absolutely nothing has potential power over your life and livelihood for no other reason than you are man and they are a female. This is a very real fear men have that women don't have to deal with and I seriously doubt anyone is going to care that we have to deal with that.
It's something to be afraid of, in that it is bad when it happens, yes. It happening once is too many.

However, it's not something any given individual is going to need to be particularly concerned with, it is very rare.

Now, the fear of this is very real, of course, our society has a real dread of false rape accusations, but that's a problem that is almost separate to the reality of them.
 

Kameburger

Turtle king
Apr 7, 2012
574
0
0
I understand what you're saying and I think my following answers might be more likely to be frustrating so I would like to preface this by saying that I am not taking a position of inaction, but more so with an approach in line with the old wood working saying "measure twice, cut once."

thaluikhain said:
Kameburger said:
So of course, I would never expect these things to be simple, but I think that one of the discussions that needs to be had (and I realize this is my opinion but stay with me), is what exactly the goal is in all of this. What does equality really mean? What would complete victory feel like if we ever did attain it? Because if we just keep doing good things because they feel good, I feel we might set things up to be worse for us in the long run.
Well...I wouldn't say "worse". It will lead to problems, as people ate going after the symptoms, not the cause, but it's still an improvement.
In this case I think there can absolutely be bad or less productive decisions that could be reached here. I've never been personally attached to the idea of doing something automatically trumping nothing. Not say that we should do nothing, but more so that consequences can be negative. Particularly on the issue of pay, I am very reluctant for government to legislate pay levels beyond the minimum wage. This is not to say that nothing should be done, or I am opposed to wage regulation, but taking goals word for word, equal pay for the same job, which tends to be a really common issue, might be a really hard kind of rule to enforce when it comes to the business world. What is the determining factor? Job title? Description? Would companies have to submit their salary budgets to a government agency that than would determine whether they're being fair? Who is going to do that job if there is? Are we going to have to create another government agency? And that's just for one company in one country. What about if that country has a home office overseas, or has branches overseas? I mean I would love to sit down and hammer out the details but this is going to be years of work and planning. In any thing this big, mistakes are not just likely, but a virtual certainty.

This is my line of thinking at least when I say we need more clear goals.

thaluikhain said:
Kameburger said:
I mean even in the case of Anita Sarkeesian (I hate that I'm bringing this up again but she's the most prominent figure in gaming), she makes the point that there a lot of bad tropes in video games, a premise which I don't disagree with, but leaves the causes and solutions of those problems open ended. In a way it's all the important parts.
Yes and no.

Yes, in that the underlying causes are very important, and need to be addressed.

No, because before we get to the cause of the problem, we need to be aware that the problem exists. In this case, "raising awareness" is actually useful. Many people aren't seeing the problem...the massive amount of denials of sexism/rape threats shows that.

What's behind everything is very controversial and complicated. Maybe Sarkeesian doesn't know what the underlying auses are, she'd hardly be alone in that. Maybe she has ideas, but wanted to get people on board with acknowledging the obvious before going to the most obscure and controversial stuff.

A big part of feminism is arguing with other feminists about that sort of thing. Mostly over intersectionality issues. IMHO, that's one of the most important concepts to grasp, and so many people struggle with that.
I think maybe it's just my issue a little but I don't know if awareness by itself is productive in this case. Disease and the like need awareness I think primarily because the dangers are potentially universal to all people and could be preventable if people knew. I suppose that's one way to look at the problem women's equality, in so that maybe if more people were aware of the problems this might have an impact, however, I think that we have to start treating gender more as though people know there is a problem. Most of humanity is aware that there are women out there, and that woman are being treated differently, and will hold some sort of opinion on the issue.

It's for this reason that I am of the opinion the language we use and the approach itself needs to change fundamentally. I think Emma Watson is absolutely right that a lot of men feel alienated by the term Feminism, and that they feel antagonized. I think that is separate from feeling imprisoned by masculinity, but I am sure some people do feel that way and I wouldn't refute it.

I guess I understand this idea that feminists are still ironing out these issues among themselves. But it's a lot to wrestle with if you don't keep up with it regularly, but I also don't like to be approached constantly with new and drastically different view points that I must adopt. So now you're telling me Nintendo is sexist for Starfox? (Sarkeesian pointed this out in a video) This is so weird for me because it's such a random assertion to just accept. I have a lot of memories tied to that game, and a lot of those decisions were made behind closed doors 8000 miles away from where I grew up. It's like having someone go through my child hood room and saying "this is sexist that is sexist, this is all sexist. All your stuff has had a notable negative impact on my life." I personally could never rationalize harassing anyone for thinking this or threaten them or what ever, that part is deplorable, but I think these people also have deeper issues. But on the other hand if you are going to tell me that I am a lifetime consumer of something that really hurts you, than it might be nice to give me an idea of how I'm supposed to cope with it all. Sure I would like to help but the best I can do is tell you how I feel, and inform you of my reaction right?

I hope I'm not coming across as antagonistic, and I understand I might sound quite ignorant at times, but honestly there is still a lot I would like to understand. So thank you again for your replies and sorry for pressing you.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
15,707
1,344
118
Kameburger said:
In this case I think there can absolutely be bad or less productive decisions that could be reached here. I've never been personally attached to the idea of doing something automatically trumping nothing. Not say that we should do nothing, but more so that consequences can be negative.
Certainly, that can be a concern, though I'm not seeing much of that as a problem as the moment.

Well, you get lots of presumably well meaning people trying to address rape as something it's up to victims to prevent, which is going about it the wrong way, but that is widely condemned by feminists.

Kameburger said:
Most of humanity is aware that there are women out there, and that woman are being treated differently, and will hold some sort of opinion on the issue.
Strongly disagree there. You constantly have people claiming that we are in a post-feminist society, that sexism doesn't exist, or if it does, it's all against men.

Alternatively, people believing in sexism in a vague nebulous way, but who would deny any given example.

On a related note, I'd imagine for many gamers, Sarkeesian was the first example of a woman being inundated by rape threats as a response to talking about feminism on the net, and yet this happens to any feminist of note. People just aren't aware of it.

Kameburger said:
It's for this reason that I am of the opinion the language we use and the approach itself needs to change fundamentally. I think Emma Watson is absolutely right that a lot of men feel alienated by the term Feminism, and that they feel antagonized. I think that is separate from feeling imprisoned by masculinity, but I am sure some people do feel that way and I wouldn't refute it.
This is an idea which comes up a lot, and IMHO, is rather missing the point.

The language isn't the problem, people are unhappy with the content. If you are comfortable with the status quo and don't want to change, it doesn't matter what the people challenging the status quo call themselves, you will be unhappy with them. And what they call themselves will become a label they feel threatened by.

By way of comparison, the way the euphemism treadmill works in regards to the mentally handicapped. Every so often, people change the terminology, because the official terms become insulting, simply because of who they are used for. "Retarded" becomes an insult, so you replace it with "special needs", which becomes an insult. You can do that as many times as you want, as long as the hostility towards the people in question is there, the name will become a slur.

(This is something many feminists had written about at great length, you might want to wander through google on this one.)

Kameburger said:
I guess I understand this idea that feminists are still ironing out these issues among themselves. But it's a lot to wrestle with if you don't keep up with it regularly, but I also don't like to be approached constantly with new and drastically different view points that I must adopt. So now you're telling me Nintendo is sexist for Starfox? (Sarkeesian pointed this out in a video) This is so weird for me because it's such a random assertion to just accept. I have a lot of memories tied to that game, and a lot of those decisions were made behind closed doors 8000 miles away from where I grew up. It's like having someone go through my child hood room and saying "this is sexist that is sexist, this is all sexist. All your stuff has had a notable negative impact on my life." I personally could never rationalize harassing anyone for thinking this or threaten them or what ever, that part is deplorable, but I think these people also have deeper issues. But on the other hand if you are going to tell me that I am a lifetime consumer of something that really hurts you, than it might be nice to give me an idea of how I'm supposed to cope with it all. Sure I would like to help but the best I can do is tell you how I feel, and inform you of my reaction right?
Well, you don't have to adopt, or agree with, every feminist on the net or anything. It's something to keep an open mind about, and there is a lot of useful information, however.

In regards to that particular example, though, was the complaint that it was sexist, or that it has sexist elements? Not quite the same thing.

Also, there's no reason you can't like things that have problematic elements. For example, I quite like the Lord of the Rings movies, which are about a bunch of rich, white, straight guys who go off and fight brown people and monsters with working class accents. There are issues there, and I recognise them. But that doesn't mean I can't enjoy the movies...if you were to only consume stuff that was perfect, you'd run out very quickly.

However, it is important to recognise it. The normal, instinctive response is to say "No, I like this, stop attacking my childhood", which really isn't helpful.
 

Tawanda

New member
Apr 1, 2010
21
0
0
Its seems to me the problem with feminism like any ism/idea is the difference between the theory and the practice. For example Christianity is actually a beautiful concept brotherhood of man treat people the same etc, but the practice of Christianity has lead to slavery, the modern day origins of racism, homophobia and the oppression of women. The same can be said of communism, capitalism even Islam.

Feminism in theory is about the equal worth of all people male/female/gay whatever but the reality is that its resulted in the empowerment of white women at the expense of everyone else, this is why it has such a notorious reputation, why a lot of women of color and gay/transgender women reject it why most men think its about man hating and male bashing because that's what it is in practice.

I don't think it was intentional or planned but unfortunately that's what its become.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
15,707
1,344
118
Tawanda said:
Feminism in theory is about the equal worth of all people male/female/gay whatever but the reality is that its resulted in the empowerment of white women at the expense of everyone else, this is why it has such a notorious reputation, why a lot of women of color and gay/transgender women reject it why most men think its about man hating and male bashing because that's what it is in practice.

I don't think it was intentional or planned but unfortunately that's what its become.
Mainstream feminism has long had a serious problem with intersectionality, yes, and that is a perfect reason for woman of colour and/or LGBT women to reject it (which is why womanism was formed). Just like everything else, unfortunately.

This isn't any reason for it to be associated with hating men, though.
 

Ishal

New member
Oct 30, 2012
1,177
0
0
BloatedGuppy said:
I hear that, and you're not wrong, but it's coming from a different place than "Women belong in the kitchen" or "Don't hire a Mexican, they're lazy" or "What's a black man doing in a car that nice?". Hell, even *I* get scared of guys when I'm out walking at night. If there's some guy behind me I tense up just in case I'm about to get mugged. If I was 5'6 and weighed 120 lbs soaking wet that tension could easily translate into terror, especially if I'd been assaulted in the past.

Doesn't excuse prejudice, but I can understand how things come to be that way.
Just wanted to come in and say this part sort of resonated with me. Since I'm 5'6 on a good day, and about 170lbs. My stature makes me seem shorter sometimes. Short arms and legs, and stalky. The extra lbs don't really matter all that much. It is terrifying walking through a city knowing you could get jumped by anyone anywhere, and that because of how you look, you're seen as an easy target. But lucky for me, I am a son of privilege. White, upper middle class parents who had me educated in ways to defend myself for years and years. So with that, it's not all that bad. It did provide me with a unique experience at Uni, though.

While there, I met a girl who I eventually became good friends with. At first we didn't have much in common, but as our majors slowly pushed us into the same classes together, we got to know each other better. She was a big girl, like... American Gladiator big. No body builder, but very well toned with defined muscles, and very much in shape. She was ~ 6,2 and even taller depending on what she was wearing. She was on the volleyball team for obvious reasons, and her upper thighs were about as thick as my chest.

Sometimes we would go to the gym together since our shared classes meant we both were free at certain parts of the day. I can't tell you how many people gave us looks when were walking together. Not sure if she took notice of all of them, but I certainly did. Our friends would constantly snark at how I needn't worry about being mugged or abused when she was around. Or that if she ever got tired of me she could just crush my head. They wondered what would happen if we were ever to fight, and figured she'd just kick my ass without any effort, despite being aware of my skills in self defense/martial arts. The vast majority of this was just light hearted banter, and both of us just let it slide off. No harm done. But after a while, it started to get to me. Being emasculated so regularly began to take it's toll. It started to get depressing.

A few of my friends thought that I was attracted to her, and I was. I like tall girls, and we got along pretty well. They wondered if she knew or if I had asked her out. She wasn't stupid, she knew how I felt after a while, but made clear she wasn't interested. I wasn't her type. She friendzoned me the stupid b*$#^!!! It sucked, but hey, that's life. It didn't ruin or change our friendship. Neither of us wanted that to happen. But some of my friends just wouldn't let it go. It wasn't because of my personality, my interests, or any other things that might have been a turnoff. It wasn't that she was allowed to have a say in this, that she had her own reasons. Reasons which, after witnessing me being the butt of jokes too many times, was nice enough to explain. It wasn't that big a deal. We had moved on. It just sucked, and it did depress me for a time.

But hey, the fuck do I know? I'm just a beta, or at the very worst, an omega. I should have sent that amazon ***** on her way the moment she snubbed me, right? She belongs with an alpha, someone with the attitude and physique to satisfy what she wants. Things I could never hope to possess. Her own interests be damned.

This rambling anecdote aside. Emma's point about things also being bad for men, and that they suffer too, is correct. I support most of what she said. It's a shame her voice, and those like her are seemingly drowned out by others in the movement. But I won't name names.
 

NeutralStasis

New member
Sep 23, 2014
45
0
0
I agree with Emma Watson's speech and with several of the comments that I have read above. I believe that Men's rights are something that will become a topic of concern. There are things that are not even being discussed yet that are areas of deepening concern. (for example, the education gap between women and men is widening quickly, but little publicity or measures are being made regarding this growing issue). I also agree that we have a ways to go in making all things equal.