Feminist preoccupation with power

Post Reply New Topic

Well, it probably isn't a lot. Though it also isn't something good to do.

extreme body modification is much more popular with males than females.

Another gender difference about which to become enraged!

no, i am pointing out that men are culturally manipulated too.

What kind of 'extreme' body modification? Do you mean cosmetic surgery? Tattoos? Piercings? If you mean the latter 2 I see plenty of males doing it. Especially when it comes to tattoos!

yes that is exactly what i mean. neither gender has more of a tendency to be easily manipulated to make fashion and lifestyle choices that alter their bodies. it's just that different modes are more popular.

Simple: it was men's work, and it was an affront to their feminine purity to taint themselves with it.

Negative attributes were attributed to men who were unwilling to "get dirt under their fingernails." They were and are regarded as prissy, effeminate and unmanly. Men who cared about hygiene were once looked down on. This was so intense and deeply ingrained that, when Ignaz Semmelweis published findings that (male) obstetricians ought to emulate midwives by disinfecting their hands between victims, he was put in an insane asylum. He wasn't exonerated until Pasteur published his findings on germ theory.

It works both ways: women were just as averse to being seen as "masculine." As unbelievable as it may seem through modern goggles, women of the age would have seen a "power-seeking" woman as obscene. It was disgusting. It was vulgar. I'm glad enough that this mindset has changed, but this is just what our society used to be. You ought to count yourself lucky that we live in an age now where you won't be condemned for following your own path in life. At one time, it would have made you a pariah. Things are different now, and that is a good thing.

The way they saw it, men were protecting women from the ugly aspects of life, and the women were glad enough to be kept out of it. They saw the world their men lived in as filthy, obscene, vulgar, ugly and generally unpleasant. They wouldn't have had anything to do with it to save their lives. Of course, we see things differently now, and that is a good thing: women are perfectly able to care for themselves if they have to, and those who prefer to do so without a man's help ought to be left to it. The way we do things now really makes a lot more practical sense.

Seriously, there were plenty of women who saw politics as a filthy business that should be left for men to attend to. That's just how it was. We see things differently now, and that is a good thing: there are a lot of extremely talented and intelligent women in politics today, and it would be a travesty if they had not chosen to come forth with their talents. The way we do things now is really a lot better.

But the point is, it is very tiresome that many feminist seem to have this concept that it's all about power. The reality is that women in pre-modern times were actually highly put off by traditionally masculine pursuits. Men kept women out of power partly because they actually thought that they were doing their women a favor. It might have been very stupid of them to fail for so long to grasp the idea that some women are cut differently, but there wasn't a vicious or selfish intent behind it. It was simple ignorance. An ounce of ignorance is worth a pound spite.

And I really think that the system we have now really works very well. Men and women can both seek whatever lifestyle and career path they are most suited to. People are treated as individuals, and they are not expected to be cardboard cutouts of each other. It works great. The system really works, and I think we ought to keep it. Do you disagree?

Ultimately, the best long-term solution for all of us is a generally liberal climate of thought. I think that this is what it comes down to in the end.

Edit: Credit to AspieRogue for having already addressed this, in very similar language.

It's a little more complex than that. Fashion moguls put forth most of the ideas for new clothing trends, true, but it's a combination of social pressure and highly charismatic (and often well-off) female leaders who decide what's 'in' in any given social mileu, as well as how much of a faux pas it is (ie, how much nonconformers should be punished) to not toe the line of their fashion judgment.

No, there wasn't and there continue not to be. Corsets in this day and age, and even when goth was popular, are something of a specialty item. Back then many of the corsets were antiques/reclaimed, and now that corsets are in with the steampunk crowd, corset-makers are small and often custom-making corsets for individuals one at a time. If you don't see it in department stores, it's probably not making anyone a mint quite yet.

'Axe' cologne/shampoo/deoderant/whatever (gag).

Have you ever worn a necktie?

Many womens shoes are very attractive, actually. Especially those sexxxay stiletto heels like the picture you linked to earlier in this thread. Maybe women are just better at putting up with physical discomfort than men are.







Cars
Cigars
Gadgets(read electronic)
Beer
Guns
Cologne


...and many moar

Regardless of gender, sheeple are largely influenced by advertising and social stereotypes to buy, wear, and do things that they feel reinforces their identity or is the social norm. This is not a gender issue but a quality of society comprised of pack animals. True, I will admit that fashion sheepleness is more prominent in females in some societies because that is the social norm but males are just as compliant in other areas that are social norms for them.

Despite being a female, no one could make me buy a pair of shoes that I thought were ugly no matter what "fashion mogul" touted it or no matter how many people were wearing it. I buy shoes that fit one or more of the following criteria in order of importance: A. Cheap B. Comfortable C. Attractive (in my personal taste).

I will say this for feminism: it generates a lot of arguments.

But about "Christian feminists", show me a woman who humbly says, "Feminism is great, but God comes first in my life", and I will believe she is a Christian feminist. Christianity is about humility -- not exactly something feminists are known for!

Consider feminism in the light of the biblical "fruit of the Spirit", which phrase refers to the correct Christian attitude: "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance." Is Sarah Palin a feminist? She's a good Christian woman who has achieved a high position of power -- that of governor -- and thus helped the feminist cause by making another crack in the "glass ceiling". But because she puts humility and God first in her life, she is not considered a feminist. You can keep arguing with everything I say, as usual -- but the REAL achievement would be to convince me there is such a thing as a Christian feminist. As thoroughly shown above, a feminist who simply says "I'm Christian" doesn't cut it.

Sarah Palin does not advocate peace but rather war as a solution to problems.
As far as patience goes "shoot first ask questions later" would be her foreign policy."
As for love " hate your enemies and now its payback time".
As for meekness "let's bring back the Reagun military buildup so we can intimidate our enemies during negotiations".

Last edited by androbot2084 on 12 Apr 2012, 8:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

I wonder why the subject of spanking almost invariably cums up when feminism is the discussion topic?

That's nothing like her or Reagan, but, oh ya, isn't Obama doing such a fantastic job in the foreign relations field? Treat our enemies like friends and our friends like enemies. Brilliant.

But let's stay on topic. This is the Jezebel thread after all.