The Student Room Group

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Feminism!

Scroll to see replies

Original post by When you see it...
Anything.




IQ tests are culturally biased and rely somewhat on knowledge rather than pure aptitude, but I get what you mean. Anyway, do you disagree that women are in general, more intelligent? I mean that it is banter in the same sense that calling someone a 'dumb blonde' is banter. It is not a personal attack and the person knows it, it is just making a joke about a societal stereotype. Everyone who makes those jokes knows that not all blondes are 'dumb' but they may or may not belive that blondes, in general, are dumb. They are not trying to make the person they insult feel 'dumb' - it is just banter, which now that I think about it is very hard to define. I disagree with your viewpoint that it 'trivialises' the issue because the entire point of banter is to make people see the human side of your worldview. To use an analogy, who did you learn most from in primary school, the teacher who thought that education and entertainment don't mix or the teacher who made a few jokes?


I didnt really learn much at school to be honest, I would day dream and because I'm visually impaired the teachers rarely allowed for this and I would self teach with text books, or my parents would.

Joking is fine, banter is also fine, but I doubt if you would have said it was banter had anyone not called you out. You are creating a discussion on feminism by stating an inaccurate and irrelevant point that will immediately get peoples backs up and make them become unreceptive to any valid, good points made on the subject.

I believe that cultural, environmental factors play a much bigger part in 'intelligence' than things like gender or sex could ever play.
Reply 21
Original post by I Persia I
I hope you support the motion that female soldiers should be required to fight on the front line.


I don't think required. But certainly allowed.

I do however believe there are cases against it, such as a Man's natural mentality towards women, protective instincts, long periods without sexual contact and as ridiculous as those may seem, its still a genuine issue.

However, I think that women can and should be allowed to fight on the frontlines. From my own experience in weapon use, I've seen girls shoot just as accurately as men, (often more accurately) and control firearms as well as maintain them just as efficiently.

The only element of the Armed Forces I strongly disagree with women being in is the Submariners. Contained spaces with men in claustraphobic conditions for months on end with very few forms of release is a recipe that myself and many others believe only leads to disaster.

However, again, every where else I feel women are just as efficient in a combat role as their male counterparts. And certainly should be allowed the right to serve whatever cause it is that encouraged them to join the Army.
Original post by twohanprincess
I am all for equality, but I think the word 'feminism' may be interpreted as being a sexist word... If a male group called themselves 'masculinists', would this be seen as acceptable? This may be a personal thing, and I am honestly not arguing with anyone or anything, but isn't something like 'advocate for women's equality' better?

It is just a word. Any equivalent pro-male movement would be completely differrent as men aren't really oppressed. It would be like a white Malcolm X complaining that black people have rewritten history and that white people created civilisation and that white people were enslaved by blacks in recent history. It would just be a stupid movement with a misguided agenda based on lies. Women need emancipation, men do not. Therefore, a 'masculinist' movement would be completely different. Also, my objections to such a movement would not be due to its name (as names are just names - get over it) but due to its agenda. Are you offended by the BNP because they are called the BNP? No, you are offended by them because of what meaning their name holds and what they represent.
Reply 23
Should a women who recently had a child or has, say, quite a young child she needs to take care of, so needs more flexibility at work, should she be payed the same as a man who does not require this flexibility?

If there is a couple and both of them choose to work who should it fall too to take car of the baby? should be equal and take it in turns? Consider that biologically an infant is in more need of their mother

Is there any meaning to the word gender roles? If everyone should be treated equally with no prejudices, then what is the meaning of gender dysphoria? surely if there are no gender roles, then this ailment doesn't exist.

Just food for thought, not saying that any of this is or isn't my opinion.
Original post by soya salami
I didnt really learn much at school to be honest, I would day dream and because I'm visually impaired the teachers rarely allowed for this and I would self teach with text books, or my parents would.

Joking is fine, banter is also fine, but I doubt if you would have said it was banter had anyone not called you out. You are creating a discussion on feminism by stating an inaccurate and irrelevant point that will immediately get peoples backs up and make them become unreceptive to any valid, good points made on the subject.

I believe that cultural, environmental factors play a much bigger part in 'intelligence' than things like gender or sex could ever play.


For the emboldened bit, I personally define intelligence as natural ability/aptititude so I don't think culture/environment play a role. I would replace 'culture' and 'environment' with 'individual variability which is based little (if at all) on gender'.
Do you still get what I'm saying with the primary school analogy?
I reiterate that I personally believe women are more intellient than men, whether it is interpreted as banter or not. I doubt it will offend people, but if enough people complain (2 so far) I will remove that bit (is that possible?)
IMO, women are more intelligent than men but it doesn't really matter. It is not a sexist viewpoint (I am male) - it is just my opinion. I don't think that it will make people discredit other feminist viewpoints. If anyting, it will provoke a response wihout alienating skeptics from our noble cause. It is just banter but, again, if enough people are upset by it or (like you) think it is a bad premise for a debate, I will try to get it removed. I would just like to make it clear that I do not feel strongly about this and I am surprised that this has been picked up on and has upset people.
Any ideas for the first post?
Original post by L. Serafy
Should a women who recently had a child or has, say, quite a young child she needs to take care of, so needs more flexibility at work, should she be payed the same as a man who does not require this flexibility?

If there is a couple and both of them choose to work who should it fall too to take car of the baby? should be equal and take it in turns? Consider that biologically an infant is in more need of their mother

Is there any meaning to the word gender roles? If everyone should be treated equally with no prejudices, then what is the meaning of gender dysphoria? surely if there are no gender roles, then this ailment doesn't exist.

Just food for thought, not saying that any of this is or isn't my opinion.

Interesting points.
I don't think that any political ideology based on biology is valid. Nazism is based on something called 'social Darwinism' or something like that which is a mis-interpretation of biological facts. I'm sure children can survive without their mothers, it is just overly-philosophical to base a policy/ideology on the idea that 'this is a fact of nature, therefore we must structure our society to correspond with it'. We naturally grow hair, so does it make sense not to cut it? Many children survive without mothers, therefore it can be done, therefore we can base our society on this axiomatic fact rather than a scientific fact. Common sense over mindless philosophy.
Reply 26
But is it really mindless? I have no evidence to hand at the moment but I'm sure their are psychological reasons too, or do those not matter either?
Original post by twohanprincess
I am all for equality, but I think the word 'feminism' may be interpreted as being a sexist word... If a male group called themselves 'masculinists', would this be seen as acceptable? This may be a personal thing, and I am honestly not arguing with anyone or anything, but isn't something like 'advocate for women's equality' better?



There is already such a thing. Just a movement advocating equal rights for men - especially in areas such as family law and conscription and such.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculinist
Original post by L. Serafy
Should a women who recently had a child or has, say, quite a young child she needs to take care of, so needs more flexibility at work, should she be payed the same as a man who does not require this flexibility?

If there is a couple and both of them choose to work who should it fall too to take car of the baby? should be equal and take it in turns? Consider that biologically an infant is in more need of their mother

Is there any meaning to the word gender roles? If everyone should be treated equally with no prejudices, then what is the meaning of gender dysphoria? surely if there are no gender roles, then this ailment doesn't exist.

Just food for thought, not saying that any of this is or isn't my opinion.


That was beautiful. Just saying.

What particularly gets to me, is the fact that society should deem motherhood and child bearing as an inferior role or job, thus allocating it less respect. Why should the perpetuation of the human race be considered less important than closing corporate mergers and acquisitions? Who's going to close those deals if women decide to play the game and have fewer children? And we wonder why birthrates are declining.

Biologically, babies do depend on the mother more, but not to the extent that society currently wants us to believe. Outside of feeding, there's no reason why men should not play a more nurturing and involved role in their child's upbringing. If you want to have children, you must be prepared to partake fully in raising them, not just cutting a cheque at the end of the month, and showing up on weekends to give them a peck on the cheek. This is more or less what I saw many men do last year when I worked at an accountancy firm. These men (senior partners) literally travelled three days out of the week, and worked from 7:00am to about 10:00pm. There's no way they're getting home in time to have any meaningful interaction with their children, let alone wife. I bet she has to work a "less demanding" and perhaps menial job in order to make up for his absence. How is this fair?

Feminism is indeed about addressing these disparities, not giving women more rights than men. In our current society, unfortunately the inequalities are now structural, not direct. So it isn't a matter of a glass ceiling telling women they can't rise to the top, but rather societal practices that serve to ensure that they won't, at least not if they also wish to fulfill their roles as mothers and carers etc. As such, I think the dialogue continues...
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by When you see it...
It is just a word. Any equivalent pro-male movement would be completely differrent as men aren't really oppressed. It would be like a white Malcolm X complaining that black people have rewritten history and that white people created civilisation and that white people were enslaved by blacks in recent history. It would just be a stupid movement with a misguided agenda based on lies. Women need emancipation, men do not. Therefore, a 'masculinist' movement would be completely different. Also, my objections to such a movement would not be due to its name (as names are just names - get over it) but due to its agenda. Are you offended by the BNP because they are called the BNP? No, you are offended by them because of what meaning their name holds and what they represent.


I completely disagree and I am female. What about those men who have a child with a woman and the woman uses her sex and the child as a weapon against the father. There's a reason for father's for justice and the drastic measures they take. They are an oppressed group of males. I thought of another oppressed group of males as well when I read your post but it's escaped my mind for the time being, but I'm sure there are loads more and you never see women fighting for equality for the male sex. I don't think feminism should exist, I think equality should exist and is a lot more fair and undiscriminating.

Edit: Just remembered, I wanted to make the point, which I originally forgot, of what about the fact that society do not allow men to have the same amount of paternity leave as the mother's maternity leave. I think it is unfair and unjust and robbing the father and child of something that is highly desired, much needed, and let's face it, a job is nowhere near as important as a child and is something that should be cherished.

So basically, I don't think I really believe in feminism in this day and age. If you look at the problems that women went through throughout history I think it is stupid to complain in this day and age. I feel in no way at a disadvantage compared to men. Also, I like the "stereotypical" roles of men and women in society. It's nice having men being protective and caring of you. I feel like there will always be a difference between men and women because gender is essentially a cultural and social construct, but it doesn't necessarily mean that either gender is at a disadvantage. Fair enough, in some jobs women do get paid less and that should be changed. But is it really that big a deal nowadays? I know I've never been paid less than my male counterparts and I've had a looot of jobs. I don't know, I guess I just think that sometimes feminists just want a reason to moan and complain (not all, as obviously, like some men, some women do have a reason to moan... Sorry if this post is taken to be offensive in any way, it's just I suppose I don't believe in feminism and just wanted to see what people thought of this and whether they just think I'm ignorant or something). I just think that if a woman sees herself as being discriminated against and subsequently a minority in society, then she should route for other minorities e.g. male paternity leave, fathers for justice etc and not just female causes. What makes the female cause more important than the male cause and vice versa? Maybe history and the patriarchal society doesn't play the advantage that it used to for males and they're finding themselves left behind in some sections of society as well now.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by X_mark_the_spot
Feminism is indeed about addressing these disparities, not giving women more rights than men. In our current society, unfortunately the inequalities are now structural, not direct. So it isn't a matter of a glass ceiling telling women they can't rise to the top, but rather societal practices that serve to ensure that they won't, at least not if they also wish to fulfill their roles as mothers and carers etc. As such, I think the dialogue continues...


A lot of glass ceiling is done by girls to keep other girls rising up. Queen bee syndrome. Single mothers and then homemakers are the most looked down especially from women who work. So the pressure is for women to work and be independent.

Being a women is easy. All you need to be is have average looks and you are pretty much set for life.

P.S. On feminism it's weird how feminist aren't trying to change putting girls first. Literally, if we was on a burning boat and then suddenly it's women go first into the life boats they won't complain. If we fight in another world war I doubt the feminist would be up in arms saying that women she be forced to fight i.e. conscription if men are. The reason is because it's an advantage to women to have men be disposable.

Feminism is a code word for hating men.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by X_mark_the_spot
That was beautiful. Just saying.

What particularly gets to me, is the fact that society should deem motherhood and child bearing as an inferior role or job, thus allocating it less respect. Why should the perpetuation of the human race be considered less important than closing corporate mergers and acquisitions? Who's going to close those deals if women decide to play the game and have fewer children? And we wonder why birthrates are declining.

Biologically, babies do depend on the mother more, but not to the extent that society currently wants us to believe. Outside of feeding, there's no reason why men should not play a more nurturing and involved role in their child's upbringing. If you want to have children, you must be prepared to partake fully in raising them, not just cutting a cheque at the end of the month, and showing up on weekends to give them a peck on the cheek. This is more or less what I saw many men do last year when I worked at an accountancy firm. These men (senior partners) literally travelled three days out of the week, and worked from 7:00am to about 10:00pm. There's no way they're getting home in time to have any meaningful interaction with their children, let alone wife. I bet she has to work a "less demanding" and perhaps menial job in order to make up for his absence. How is this fair?

Feminism is indeed about addressing these disparities, not giving women more rights than men. In our current society, unfortunately the inequalities are now structural, not direct. So it isn't a matter of a glass ceiling telling women they can't rise to the top, but rather societal practices that serve to ensure that they can't rise to the top, if they also wish to fulfill their roles as mothers and carers etc. As such, I think the dialogue continues...

On a world scale, birth rates are WAY too high, so this is definitely not a bad thing. Also, it is bad that women are expected to just be housewives and raise children - it is not a bad vocation in itself. Equal opportunity is needed, so that individuals, regardless of gender can take up any vocation they want. It is simply not about any vocation being 'inferior', it is just about the freedom to choose vocation, which I dont think you get.
Reply 32
Original post by X_mark_the_spot
What particularly gets to me, is the fact that society should deem motherhood and child bearing as an inferior role or job


Now I think is where I should say that I am against gender equality, I do not think men and women are equal, I believe women are superior, because of motherhood. I don't think a man should neglect his fatherly duties, but I believe that if a woman decides she doesn't want to have a job so she can bring up and take care of her children, and make sure that humanity doesn't go down the drain, then she's entitled too, if she wants to work at the same time then she can as well. But I think that the man should not have this freedom, he should be responsible for making sure his wife and child can live comfortably (shouldn't neglect duties as father either) I don't he should be able to decide to sit on the couch all day and live off of benefits.

(i'm a guy by the way)
As a part of a developing nation where gender discrimination is more conspicuous than any where else, I would have to say that among the biggest discrimination is the fact that women are just automatically assumed solely for the role of a wife and mother. It rarely occurs to people that they can have a career and motherhood. If the world wants to promote equality, the first thing to be done is not cut wages because of maternity benefits. Because come on, women are penalized for continuing the world race while men goes on to become the executives! Not fair!
Original post by moomin_love
I completely disagree and I am female. What about those men who have a child with a woman and the woman uses her sex and the child as a weapon against the father. There's a reason for father's for justice and the drastic measures they take. They are an oppressed group of males. I thought of another oppressed group of males as well when I read your post but it's escaped my mind for the time being, but I'm sure there are loads more and you never see women fighting for equality for the male sex. I don't think feminism should exist, I think equality should exist and is a lot more fair and undiscriminating.

Edit: Just remembered, I wanted to make the point, which I originally forgot, of what about the fact that society do not allow men to have the same amount of paternity leave as the mother's maternity leave. I think it is unfair and unjust and robbing the father and child of something that is highly desired, much needed, and let's face it, a job is nowhere near as important as a child and is something that should be cherished.

So basically, I don't think I really believe in feminism in this day and age. If you look at the problems that women went through throughout history I think it is stupid to complain in this day and age. I feel in no way at a disadvantage compared to men. Also, I like the "stereotypical" roles of men and women in society. It's nice having men being protective and caring of you. I feel like there will always be a difference between men and women because gender is essentially a cultural and social construct, but it doesn't necessarily mean that either gender is at a disadvantage. Fair enough, in some jobs women do get paid less and that should be changed. But is it really that big a deal nowadays? I know I've never been paid less than my male counterparts and I've had a looot of jobs. I don't know, I guess I just think that sometimes feminists just want a reason to moan and complain (not all, as obviously, like some men, some women do have a reason to moan... Sorry if this post is taken to be offensive in any way, it's just I suppose I don't believe in feminism and just wanted to see what people thought of this and whether they just think I'm ignorant or something).

That is just one issue which obviously needs to be addressed. There is no point in basing a comprehensive political viewpoint (i.e. 'masculinism') on such individual viewpoints. Once women are paid the same as men (the statistics don't lie regardless of your personal experience - if someone said to you 'I have shot a lot of heroin in my time and have never been harmed, therefore it is stupid to say that heroin is harmful therefore drugs education should not exist', you would think that they are an obnoxious moron - that is exactly how I have reacted to your post) then we can concentrate on these microcosmic issues of men being 'oppressed' (IMO it is a moot point as I disagree with family values and believe children should be raised communally, eliminating the need for fathers and mothers, making this a non-issue). Anyway, I respect your viewpoint but strongly disagree with just about everything you have said here. Feminism is just a word to describe a set of opinions on a set of issues. Believing in feminism doesn't mean that I don't sympathise with male concerns, I just think that male concerns are less urgent.
Can I just say that in your comment you seem to be implying that women have the same opportunities as men. This is not true and there is no debate there - look at employment/salary statistics and compare them to qualifications statistics. It is a joke to suggest that 'in the past it was worse, so therefore we have improved enough already'. What is your opinion on the black emancipation in the US in the 1960s? Do you think that the likes of Malcolm X and Rosa Parks were wrong to try to give blacks the same opportunities as whites? If you were around in those days, would you have said 'blacks were slaves in history, therefore it is stupid to complain about having to stand up for whites'? You can't deny that gender inequality still exists and that it is worse for women than for men.
Original post by X_mark_the_spot
That was beautiful. Just saying.

What particularly gets to me, is the fact that society should deem motherhood and child bearing as an inferior role or job, thus allocating it less respect. Why should the perpetuation of the human race be considered less important than closing corporate mergers and acquisitions? Who's going to close those deals if women decide to play the game and have fewer children? And we wonder why birthrates are declining.

Biologically, babies do depend on the mother more, but not to the extent that society currently wants us to believe. Outside of feeding, there's no reason why men should not play a more nurturing and involved role in their child's upbringing. If you want to have children, you must be prepared to partake fully in raising them, not just cutting a cheque at the end of the month, and showing up on weekends to give them a peck on the cheek. This is more or less what I saw many men do last year when I worked at an accountancy firm. These men (senior partners) literally travelled three days out of the week, and worked from 7:00am to about 10:00pm. There's no way they're getting home in time to have any meaningful interaction with their children, let alone wife. I bet she has to work a "less demanding" and perhaps menial job in order to make up for his absence. How is this fair?

Feminism is indeed about addressing these disparities, not giving women more rights than men. In our current society, unfortunately the inequalities are now structural, not direct. So it isn't a matter of a glass ceiling telling women they can't rise to the top, but rather societal practices that serve to ensure that they won't, at least not if they also wish to fulfill their roles as mothers and carers etc. As such, I think the dialogue continues...


Chances are the extra hours those men work pay the mortgage and support the families standard of living. The wives of senior partners probably don't have to work at all, and once their children are at school, well, it's a pretty easy life. Very few people like working or their job, they just do it to get by.
Reply 36
feminism... is sexy :P
Original post by Samurai_Jack
As a part of a developing nation where gender discrimination is more conspicuous than any where else, I would have to say that among the biggest discrimination is the fact that women are just automatically assumed solely for the role of a wife and mother. It rarely occurs to people that they can have a career and motherhood. If the world wants to promote equality, the first thing to be done is not cut wages because of maternity benefits. Because come on, women are penalized for continuing the world race while men goes on to become the executives! Not fair!


Why should companies subsidise women for having children? I don't think it's a human right or particularly noble. How about companies subsidise everyone for a year, you can spend that year how ever you like, travel the world, learn chinese, read shackespeare...or just watch TV if you like! I don't see any of these as inherantly of less merit than breeding.

OR more sensibly we could just share parental leave between mother and father, better for everyone involved imo

Also girls are told from a very young age they have a choice to work, be a mother or both. Boys aren't told they have a choice, it's just work work and work until you die.
Original post by Xarren
feminism... is sexy :P


I agree,i always wanted to just plough a feminist girl
Original post by When you see it...
That is just one issue which obviously needs to be addressed. There is no point in basing a comprehensive political viewpoint (i.e. 'masculinism') on such individual viewpoints. Once women are paid the same as men (the statistics don't lie regardless of your personal experience - if someone said to you 'I have shot a lot of heroin in my time and have never been harmed, therefore it is stupid to say that heroin is harmful therefore drugs education should not exist', you would think that they are an obnoxious moron - that is exactly how I have reacted to your post) then we can concentrate on these microcosmic issues of men being 'oppressed' (IMO it is a moot point as I disagree with family values and believe children should be raised communally, eliminating the need for fathers and mothers, making this a non-issue). Anyway, I respect your viewpoint but strongly disagree with just about everything you have said here. Feminism is just a word to describe a set of opinions on a set of issues. Believing in feminism doesn't mean that I don't sympathise with male concerns, I just think that male concerns are less urgent.
Can I just say that in your comment you seem to be implying that women have the same opportunities as men. This is not true and there is no debate there - look at employment/salary statistics and compare them to qualifications statistics. It is a joke to suggest that 'in the past it was worse, so therefore we have improved enough already'. What is your opinion on the black emancipation in the US in the 1960s? Do you think that the likes of Malcolm X and Rosa Parks were wrong to try to give blacks the same opportunities as whites? If you were around in those days, would you have said 'blacks were slaves in history, therefore it is stupid to complain about having to stand up for whites'? You can't deny that gender inequality still exists and that it is worse for women than for men.


The gender pay gap doesn't exist, at least not in the black and white terms you think of it. It's fairly well established that once you take into account the fact that men work longer hours, at less sociable times, in more uncomfortable conditions the gender pay shrinks to virtually nothing. Actually women without children are paid more than men without children which would indicate that rather than sexism it's the lifestyle choices made by mothers. The idea that women are paid less for the same work is a fantasy.

It wont let me post links for some reason but there is plenty of infomation out there to verify this.

I'm also intrested in how you came to the conclusion that women are better qualified than men; are we talking hands on experience or academic degrees? If the latter, are you distinguishing between a degree in social studies and a degree in mathematics? One is clearly more useful to a company than the other, no suprise that CEOs tend to have a background in science or mathematics.

Latest