Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Why do so many women want to be treated better than men...? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I agree to an extent as well, I have a big issue with some feminist sometimes.

    There was a recent discussion in the newspaper If I can remember about how someone was saying that women need to be treated differently to men in prison just because they are a female. If you did the crime do the bloody time. I don't really see who a female can be treated differently in terms of committing a crime, it's ridiculous.

    I mean, I think some females really pick and choose about what equal rights they should obtain and some feminist aren't working with men to solve issues that need to be addressed such equal pay for women who do the same job as men. But instead all we hear is feminist blaming men for everything when really some females just pick and choose on what should be equal!

    To be honest, I think as females we just need to understand that we are different to men and equality is going to be different for different genders based on basic understanding of men and women. It doesn't mean we have to stop fighting for some equality but men and women are different end of story.

    And on that stupid idea that men have to open the door for women or let them pass first or pay for the date is stupid. Just be polite and do it either way.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IsthatmaryX)
    I agree to an extent as well, I have a big issue with some feminist sometimes.

    There was a recent discussion in the newspaper If I can remember about how someone was saying that women need to be treated differently to men in prison just because they are a female. If you did the crime do the bloody time. I don't really see who a female can be treated differently in terms of committing a crime, it's ridiculous.

    I mean, I think some females really pick and choose about what equal rights they should obtain and some feminist aren't working with men to solve issues that need to be addressed such equal pay for women who do the same job as men. But instead all we hear is feminist blaming men for everything when really some females just pick and choose on what should be equal!

    To be honest, I think as females we just need to understand that we are different to men and equality is going to be different for different genders based on basic understanding of men and women. It doesn't mean we have to stop fighting for some equality but men and women are different end of story.

    And on that stupid idea that men have to open the door for women or let them pass first or pay for the date is stupid. Just be polite and do it either way.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I agree with your last sentence but that kind of thing is surely different to how women are treated in prison? If you are against feminism and in favour of the 'traditional role' of women as child carers first and foremost, wouldn't it follow you'd be against them being sent to prison if they have children to look after?

    Personally I think a regime for how women are treated in any formal or state setting should be pitched according to the capabilities of women, which do slightly differ from men - this is recognised in sport for example.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Imperial_Maniac)
    In what way am I suggesting that men and women shouldn't be equal?!

    I'm making out feminism to be ridiculous because feminism is ridiculous, it is based entirely on the paranoid belief that men are solely responsible for traditional gender roles, despite the obvious fact that traditional gender roles are just as disadvantageous for men as they are for women, if not more so.

    Either make a clear, constructive argument, or go away and do some reading on the subject, then come back.
    Ok maybe that was unfair, but you gave the idea that women have less grounds for equality because their only reasons are not being allowed to be promiscuous, which is completely unfair as women are subject to all sorts of discrimination due to their gender.
    I don't think feminism is based on the belief that men are solely responsible fr traditional gender roles, no one is, it's nature, it's based on the belief that men and women should be equal.
    And fair enough, gender roles are just as disadvantageous for men too, especially in a modern world.
    All I want is equality, not some men Vs women thing.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I agree with your last sentence but that kind of thing is surely different to how women are treated in prison? If you are against feminism and in favour of the 'traditional role' of women as child carers first and foremost, wouldn't it follow you'd be against them being sent to prison if they have children to look after?

    Personally I think a regime for how women are treated in any formal or state setting should be pitched according to the capabilities of women, which do slightly differ from men - this is recognised in sport for example.
    Firstly, you assumed that I was against feminism and that I'm in favour of a 'traditional role' .

    Secondly, the issue of female inmates who have children is obviously sad but why would a mother want to have their child being brought up in prison? and isn't it their own fault for doing a crime knowingly that they have children to look after. Obviously, their are certain circumstances which sadly leave them in that place. If a mother wants to have their child in prison with them then they can within the laws and that can be provided but If I was referring to mothers with children who are in prison I would have said. I was referring to female in general and I believe that if you did the crime then you should do the time regardless, I'm referring to having an equal sentencing that's all.

    And I agree with you totally in your last point and that's within industry.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sophia 1)
    Ok maybe that was unfair, but you gave the idea that women have less grounds for equality because their only reasons are not being allowed to be promiscuous, which is completely unfair as women are subject to all sorts of discrimination due to their gender.
    I don't think feminism is based on the belief that men are solely responsible fr traditional gender roles, no one is, it's nature, it's based on the belief that men and women should be equal.
    And fair enough, gender roles are just as disadvantageous for men too, especially in a modern world.
    All I want is equality, not some men Vs women thing.
    I want gender equality too, feminists don't, feminism is a pressure group for angry women.

    Has any feminist group ever protested against the continual imagery of male genital mutilation in the media? I doubt it, they probably think it's funny.

    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Imperial_Maniac)
    I'm talking about how women are far more likely to gain custody of their children and:

    1) A man convicted of murder is 25 times more likely to receive the death penalty than a woman.

    2) No woman who has killed only men has been executed in the U.S since 1954.

    3) Since the 1976 reinstatement of the death penalty, 120 men- and only 1 woman- have actually been executed. The woman, from North Carolina, said she preferred to be executed.

    4) 23 Americans have been executed and later found innocent, all 23 were men.

    5) When women commit homocide, almost 90 percent of their victims are men.

    6) Marjorie Filipiak and 16-year old Heath Wilkins both please guilty to being co-conspirators in a murder. Neither was a hardened criminal. Heath Wilkins got the death sentence; Marjorie Filipak went free.

    7) When Health Wilkins was found to have been a victim of child sexual abuse, it did not deter the judge from giving him the death sentence. When Josephine Mesa was found to have been the victim of child abuse, the jury freed her. Josephine Mesa had killed her 23-month old son with a toilet plunger.

    (8) Any given man in prison is still 1,000 percent more likely as any given woman to die via suicide, homicide, or execution.

    9) When women go free on probation while men get prison sentences, the state commissions on gender bias say women are victims of discrimination because women receive longer periods of probation.
    My apologies - I thought you were talking about treatment towards men in the army, and completely misinterpreted the post.

    I'm just going to throw it out that you can be a feminist and believe in what you're arguing - i.e I think some of the claims feminists make are wrong and they ignore inequalities towards men, but I am far more likely than many other people I know to identify as a feminist. Feminism is a really large spectrum of ideas - even the definition of feminism is different for individuals (I see it as fighting for gender equality; some for female equality; a minority for matriarchy). So what you and many, many other TSR users are doing is confusing feminism with a feminist ideology. It's like hating Religion because of Christianity, when there are so many other religions which believe a variety of things, so arguments against the Bible wouldn't apply to them at all, if you see where I'm going.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Imperial_Maniac)
    I want gender equality too, feminists don't, feminism is a pressure group for angry women.

    Has any feminist group ever protested against the continual imagery of male genital mutilation in the media? I doubt it, they probably think it's funny.

    Yes, sad truth. I think many feminists would be horrified by this too though-many feminists are mothers themselves, it's not fair to demonize them.

    Feminism is for gender equality in general- you're right it's unfair to focus solely on women's rights, I think it'd be much better if it was for all gender rights in general.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by brendonbackflip)
    My apologies - I thought you were talking about treatment towards men in the army, and completely misinterpreted the post.

    I'm just going to throw it out that you can be a feminist and believe in what you're arguing - i.e I think some of the claims feminists make are wrong and they ignore inequalities towards men, but I am far more likely than many other people I know to identify as a feminist. Feminism is a really large spectrum of ideas - even the definition of feminism is different for individuals (I see it as fighting for gender equality; some for female equality; a minority for matriarchy). So what you and many, many other TSR users are doing is confusing feminism with a feminist ideology. It's like hating Religion because of Christianity, when there are so many other religions which believe a variety of things, so arguments against the Bible wouldn't apply to them at all, if you see where I'm going.
    That's why feminists which genuinely believe in gender equality should identify as "gender equalityists" rather than femninists, so they aren't mixed up with those feminists that aren't genuinely interested in equal rights for both sexes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by newts2k)
    Why do so many women want to be treated better than men...?
    Well, because we're worth it!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by newts2k)
    but want to be treated like men at the same time with all the same opportunities etc. They basically want the best of both worlds, do they not realise its either one or the others?

    Classsic example, I was speaking to a feminist the other day and I asked her one simply question,' Should women be fighting in the front line?' To which she said 'no' and I said 'why not, equal rights, equal treatment and all that.'

    It seems women in the west think they can just 'nit pick' the best of everything like expecting men to do all the approaching/courting and paying for things etc., it doesnt really work like that. I may get panned for this by some of the women here but I couldn't give a ****
    Nearly all of this is a straw-man. Stop using blanket gestures (i.e. they or women) to draw homogeneising conclusions about female perceptions and actions.

    Firstly, to the 'feminist' (fictive or not) who thought female front-line service was unwise, she speaks for no one beyond herself. As an aside, just because you accept a broad foundational premise of sex and gender neutral equality does not mean that your are logically compelled to endorse sex or gender blind policies.

    Secondly, just because a lot of females adhere to patriarchal norms does not somehow render patriarchy non-existant. For a feminist, those females are the subject of ideational/discursive liberation insofar as any male is.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Women are objectified for sexual provocation by a very large industry for sales purposes. It's a little depressing that industry is also now seeking to objectify men in that way, but hardly a cause for celebration. Can they really not sell things without constantly resorting to sex and can we not have a public media that treats women as people rather than sex objects? Just a thought.
    I don't know about "now" - let's take James Bond, certainly the longest-running film character. His character has always been fantastical and one-dimensional, and just as likely to cause men to feel that they are not good enough, just in a different way to how the girls at his side have done the same to women.

    It's true that the male characters are not as disposable as the female characters because the males do stereotypical things (shoot guns, fight, be heroic) and the females look like stereotypical things (hot, skinny, boobs). This mirrors the different things women and men look for in the opposite gender, which is where objectification comes from. Male characters are slightly less objectified because at least they are driving the plot, but still, the simpler his character, the more he is objectified.

    Men are also, these days, objectified for their looks in films. Not to the same extent as women, of course, but it is there. My point is that characters do not need to show skin to be objectified.

    I'm not sure they can sell things without resorting to sex, however, I think it's plausible to say that if our culture in general could abandon some of its hang-ups about sex we would not be quite so obsessed by it in our media.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wilson_smith)
    Nearly all of this is a straw-man. Stop using blanket gestures (i.e. they or women) to draw homogeneising conclusions about female perceptions and actions.

    Firstly, to the 'feminist' (fictive or not) who thought female front-line service was unwise, she speaks for no one beyond herself. As an aside, just because you accept a broad foundational premise of sex and gender neutral equality does not mean that your are logically compelled to endorse sex or gender blind policies.

    Secondly, just because a lot of females adhere to patriarchal norms does not somehow render patriarchy non-existant. For a feminist, those females are the subject of ideational/discursive liberation insofar as any male is.
    *facepalm*

    You claim that OP is being generalist and then claim that society is patriarchal. Borderline moronic.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    The one woman the OP mentioned surely represents the billions of other women who inhabit the west...

    I guess by this logic the women on here can conclude from this thread that most men are idiots.

    Anecdotes all around, I guess.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    No, they are not as free as you think, due to the way women have the power in the sexual marketplace. You can't point to a law and claim freedom. You have to be aware of coercion, that is, shades of grey in between freedom and oppression.

    That is what the majority of civil rights arguments are about, since most groups are now in fact "equal" under the law. Your position is tantamount to brushing it under the carpet.
    Women don't hold any legally sanctioned 'power' in the sexual marketplace. Any power that is held is as a result of someone willing to be manipulated by them. For example, I may sell desirable products but do not have the power to physically force people to buy these products from me.

    As men we are perfectly entitled to ignore women and thus deprive them of this supposed 'power' you assume they have in the sexual marketplace.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by effofex)
    Women don't hold any legally sanctioned 'power' in the sexual marketplace. Any power that is held is as a result of someone willing to be manipulated by them. For example, I may sell desirable products but do not have the power to physically force people to buy these products from me.

    As men we are perfectly entitled to ignore women and thus deprive them of this supposed 'power' you assume they have in the sexual marketplace.
    Don't be stupid. As a parallel, we are coerced into buying food from Tesco because of the ubiquity of their stores, and as another, we are coerced into voting for either Conservative or Labour because of the electoral system. You or I could shop at the local greengrocer or vote for the local Green candidate, but it is just pointless because nobody else is going to do it, as they have come to the very same conclusion (elementary game theory).

    To ignore women, and thereby break their power in the sexual marketplace would require an organised campaign which is literally impossible to co-ordinate, not least with such a disparate, individualistic and downright horny group as men.

    All one can do is fight for one's own principles, make sure as many people, including those perpetrating it, are aware of the injustice, and be patient in the hope that society evolves (but this takes a damn long time).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Fighting in the front lines is a choice not an obligation. In the UK at least, no-one is forced to fight in the front lines. So not allowing women to fight in the front lines just takes away an option for them that is available for men - therefore it is bad for women!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Imperial_Maniac)
    *facepalm*

    You claim that OP is being generalist and then claim that society is patriarchal. Borderline moronic.
    Care to point out where I said that? Though, incidentally, I might be liable to call society (here and now) patriarchal, for it is discursively and materially infused with, and sustains, patriarchy. This is not particularly controversial, the only potential contention being over the definition of society.

    Also, you are mis-using the word 'generalist'. And that *facepalm* thing is weird and lame.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    There's a school of thought within feminism called 'equality in difference', which I think applies here.

    It's my personal belief that women should be treated as equals with men wherever possible. So while that includes things like employment, education and sport, it naturally excludes biological things like motherhood.

    There are times when women will get preference over men because of their sex, and vice versa. As somebody has mentioned, men may be benefited in physical pursuits because they are (on average) physiologically stronger, whereas women may be benefited in, for instance, childcare because they are considered to possess better natural insists. There are exceptions in both cases, of course.

    That said, you also have to factor in choice. Women should be allowed to fight in the front line if they choose to and if they fulfil the requirements to do so. Likewise, despite being male, I don't fight in the front line because I choose not to.

    If you read any historical feminist writings, such as Mary Astell, Mary Wollestonecraft or Simone de Beauvoir, among others, you'll find that the majority recognise - and even emphasise - the natural roles assigned to either sex. They speak of the ideal society as women and men living alongside one another as supplementary sexes rather than striving to be exactly the same.

    In the modern day, however, the true message of feminism has been lost. Some women profess to being feminists when they have no idea of what it actually means to be one. The object should not be to compete with or better men simply because they are men, as this focus on gender only replicates the historical subjection of women (albeit with lesser force.)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Topic starter said that woman can not oprate in war time, but womans can be extremely good in making telephone calls ( multitasking ) and u need telephoners in war time !!!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wilson_smith)
    Care to point out where I said that? Though, incidentally, I might be liable to call society (here and now) patriarchal, for it is discursively and materially infused with, and sustains, patriarchy. This is not particularly controversial, the only potential contention being over the definition of society.

    Also, you are mis-using the word 'generalist'. And that *facepalm* thing is weird and lame.
    The idea that society is patriarchal is a paranoid generalisation. Hence why I was stupefied by you using the concept directly after you accused someone else of over-generalising feminists.

    Patriarchy: The idea that society is ruled by men, to advantage of men.

    It is ludicrous, and the fact that this widely held belief is so common worries me greatly.

    I posted some statistics earlier, go have a look at them. Society perpetuates the "men as guilty, women as innocent." stereotype, feminism does nothing to combat this. Men, on average, get more pay, but men also work more hours, work in more unsatisfying jobs, are more likely to be alcoholics, die an average of 7 years earlier than women and are more likely to commit suicide.

    And why do they do this? Because they're trying to impress women, because most women expect every man to be a successful money making cash cow, and if they aren't, then they leave them and go **** someone who's more "financially secure." As well of course, expecting them to be mentally and physically healthy all of the time- or just good at hiding it. And then they wonder why men don't connect with their emotions??

    Men are disposable in our society, men are expected to die to save a woman, they are expected to work themselves to the death for women- but if society expects women to have shaved legs then the feminists go on a rampage about how evil men are. It's bull****, complete bull****.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources
AtCTs

Ask the Community Team

Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

Welcome Lounge

Welcome Lounge

We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.