The feminism/equality thread

[WorzelG]

Air conditioning is sexist: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/frigid-offices-freezing-women-oblivious-men-an-air-conditioning-investigation/2015/07/23/bdd1b4b4-30ae-11e5-97ae-30a30cca95d7_story.html

http://i.imgur.com/kGpTbDh.gif
My husband had totally the opposite experience than this - he completely resents having to wear what men are expected to wear in the office and the women in his office all came in in summer in skimpy tops and always demanded (and got) the air conditioning turned off and windows closed. He couldn't just take his shirt off! He sweats a lot in the heat. One of the reasons why he liked working from home, which he does now all the time

[Madmya]

It's easier to combat being cold than being hot. I work in a female-centric office and the heat can be unbearable. You feel like you're going to explode and it's all you can think about. My feet sweat like crazy and I'd have to often leave the office. To back up the ageist idea above it generally is at its worst when older ladies are working and they crank up the heat.

[allegro]

It's easier to combat being cold than being hot. I work in a female-centric office and the heat can be unbearable. You feel like you're going to explode and it's all you can think about. My feet sweat like crazy and I'd have to often leave the office. To back up the ageist idea above it generally is at its worst when older ladies are working and they crank up the heat.

Yeah, and it depends HOW old; I used to laugh at the fight between the hot-flashing menopausal ladies and the much-older ladies getting into a screaming match over the thermostat in the winter.

I agree, though, I can always put on a sweater (although "so cold I can't feel my fingers" is fucking ridiculous - honest, 65 in the summer? gtfo) but too hot means I'm falling asleep at my desk.

[Madmya]

They've actually put an end to it at my work because IT attributed the number of dying computers to the people who elevate the air con temperature too much. Sexist bastards.

[telee.kom]

Air conditioning is sexist: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/frigid-offices-freezing-women-oblivious-men-an-air-conditioning-investigation/2015/07/23/bdd1b4b4-30ae-11e5-97ae-30a30cca95d7_story.html

http://i.imgur.com/kGpTbDh.gif

That's got to be some kind of mental diagnosis, when instead of putting a sweater on, you go on a Washington Post to write an article that blames men for you being cold. Also I don't know about Washington, but temperature at workplace (school, hospital, etc.) is usually established in some sort of hygienic norm, so it's not like the men cabal at your corporation can set up whatever temperature they please.

As far as the dress code goes, it depends on the company and on the work you are doing, but there are certainly jobs/companies where you are bound to wear a suit and women do have more options when choosing what to wear. So if you are cold, just put on something that will keep you from being cold maybe? Not even mentioning that it is kind of a big stretch to make this a gender issue. Some people like/don't mind colder temperatures some people like warmer temperatures, that's not dependent on a gender.

Edit: in the vein of "shit that's crazy, but I don't think I find it funny anymore" Tyler, the Creator was banned from Australia (http://www.factmag.com/2015/07/27/tyler-the-creator-is-now-banned-from-australia/) after protest of a feminist group that claims that he is promoting violence against women. Australia is really nuts in this regard, two years ago Australian Target stopped selling GTA 5 due to similar protest. I don't know why Aussies do this. I would expect some loud "fuck off mate" in a strong Australian accent more than anything

[Madmya]

Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk has mandated 50 per cent of board positions on state-owned corporations will be held by women by 2020 – and has called on the private sector to follow suit.
Ms Palaszczuk said Cabinet had endorsed the affirmative action position at a Cabinet meeting on Monday, saying it was the only way to ensure women were adequately represented around the board room table.
"I'm firmly committed to addressing the inequality that we see in government boards but more broadly than that across the spectrum," Ms Palaszczuk said after speaking at an Australian Institute of Company Directors lunch in Brisbane on Tuesday.
"I believe if we are championing equality in Queensland, then the government needs to set the example. And that is why by 2020 I would like to see a target of 50 per cent of women on government boards in this state."


Ms Palaszczuk is the second female premier of Queensland following Anna Bligh from 2007 to 2012. More than half of her 14-member Cabinet is women, including Deputy Premier Jack Trad and Education Minister Kate Jones.

http://www.afr.com/leadership/half-of-queensland-board-positions-to-be-women-by-2020-20150728-gim5lh

Is this what we all want? Quota-driven boardrooms rather than those based on merit? I think we could all agree women are misrepresented on a boardroom level but I'd imagine there is not a 50% split of suitable candidates in such positions which only creates more tension.

Anna Palaszczuk would also want to cut some women and add more men to her Cabinet if she's going down the Quota path.

[Sallos]

http://www.afr.com/leadership/half-of-queensland-board-positions-to-be-women-by-2020-20150728-gim5lh

Is this what we all want? Quota-driven boardrooms rather than those based on merit? I think we could all agree women are misrepresented on a boardroom level but I'd imagine there is not a 50% split of suitable candidates in such positions which only creates more tension.

Anna Palaszczuk would also want to cut some women and add more men to her Cabinet if she's going down the Quota path.

This is pathetic, the state should have no say how private boardrooms (or workplaces) should be composed. Absolutly disgusting. But you won't see them complain how women are being misrepresented in the mining industry and construction sites. You also didn't see them pushing that back when programming was for nerds, but now that people are making millions out of it suddenly women should be into programming.

[Dra508]

You also didn't see them pushing that back when programming was for nerds, but now that people are making millions out of it suddenly women should be into programming.

I don't think this is a fair statement to include. Unequal amount of women in programming or technology is more about earlier education not encouraging girls into STEM. That's pretty much acknowledged.

I don't agree with quotas either.

[Sallos]

I don't think this is a fair statement to include. Unequal amount of women in programming or technology is more about earlier education not encouraging girls into STEM. That's pretty much acknowledged.

I don't agree with quotas either.

I don't think encouragment has anything to do with it. There are just not as many women interested in STEM as there are men.

[Sarah K]

Spaces that are male dominated are often times very threatening and uncomfortable for women.

I've worked in kitchens, and now I'm working in the construction industry, which are both male dominated. You wouldn't believe some of the shit that comes out of their mouths. I always try to point out when they're being shitty, because I can handle myself around them. I won't tolerate any of them harassing anyone as they walk by. Be professional. With that said, I'm not out in the field too often. Usually to collect payments or help when we are plotting for lighting and electrical, doing deliveries, etc. Although the next couple of weeks my boss will be out of town, so I'll be out doing checks a lot more.

I also think a lifetime of being harassed as they walk by construction sites could be reason enough for the vast majority of women to avoid entering that field.

I don't think there is a shortage of women interested in STEM fields at all. There were just very limited opportunities for it.

[telee.kom]

It also begs the question, why STEM fields in particular should have gender quotas? Because pretty much every job (https://espnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/chalabi-datalab-flightattendants-2.png) in the world have gender discrepancy. And there are certain fields, like Computer Sciences, where just isn't that many women interested in this particular work field. If they are interested though, nobody's stopping them.

I know a girl who is studying something like industry automation, she's the only girl in a class full of guys. I specially asked if it is a problem to be surrounded by all male classmates and she said she don't mind it at all and it was never a problem. My (male) best friend studied pedagogic high school, class full of girls, apart from having lots of sex, there wasn't much of an issue with this either.

[Sarah K]

That graph would have been rad if they would have included a median income for each job or something like that.

[Sallos]

I also think a lifetime of being harassed as they walk by construction sites could be reason enough for the vast majority of women to avoid entering that field.

I don't think there is a shortage of women interested in STEM fields at all. There were just very limited opportunities for it.

Man and women are different, if you really believe women don't go into STEM or other male dominated fields becuase they fear being harassed you're thinking very less of women.

The reason why women avoid the construction field is not becuase they're afraid of being harassed, it's because very few of them even see it as a possible carreer choice. You think there are more women in design/fashion because there are less men in this field to harass them? Is that really how women make their choices? No.

[Sarah K]

I think that's one small reason. I don't think it's the main reason by any means.

[Sarah K]

http://www.azcardinals.com/news-and-events/article-2/Cardinals-Add-First-Female-Coach/aa370599-8d8e-4e73-85d3-fc77515bf40a

!!!

The first woman referee and now the first woman hired on as a coach!

[allegro]

Spaces that are male dominated are often times very threatening and uncomfortable for women.

I've worked in kitchens, and now I'm working in the construction industry, which are both male dominated. You wouldn't believe some of the shit that comes out of their mouths. I always try to point out when they're being shitty, because I can handle myself around them. I won't tolerate any of them harassing anyone as they walk by. Be professional. With that said, I'm not out in the field too often. Usually to collect payments or help when we are plotting for lighting and electrical, doing deliveries, etc. Although the next couple of weeks my boss will be out of town, so I'll be out doing checks a lot more.

I also think a lifetime of being harassed as they walk by construction sites could be reason enough for the vast majority of women to avoid entering that field. .

I've worked with female OWNERS of home builder companies here in Chicago for nearly 30 years, as well as with females who coordinate construction projects, construction contract management, etc. The female owners I know are 2nd and 3rd generation in the business. The others started in some other aspect of project management and moved into new construction. There are MANY really high-powered women in construction in this area. If young women limit themselves to thinking only about traditional roles and traditional jobs, they miss out on many valuable career opportunities.

Here's the Federation of Women Contractors (http://www.fwcchicago.com/)

Like, look at this: women IN THE TRADES (http://chicagowomenintrades2.org/)

See also this (http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/lgbt/Chicago-Women-in-Trades-forges-new-nontraditional-lives/50340.html)

That's the same for STEM. Look at the young females who have been geared toward STEM fields from a very young age: Asian and Indian cultures. If young white, black, or latina women don't go into the STEM fields, it's not the fault of the STEM fields: we have failed, in our respective cultures, to show these young women the value and possibilities in these fields.

Look what happened to Law and Medicine: There has been a HUGE INCREASE of females in these fields, nearly outnumbering the males in certain areas.

50 years ago, females were primarily secretaries, teachers and nurses.

If scarcity and adversity was too big a problem, we'd all still be secretaries, teachers and nurses.

[playwithfire]

Hello. I work in internal recruiting for a very picky successful software company. Our interview process is notoriously thorough, and we're known for being choosy.

We're very hungry for awesome talented female devs. At the moment we have one female developer, and that was a BIG win for us. We definitely Do Things. We have a mentorship program for female graduates who've recently learned to code where we give them space in our awesome offices and some of the most skilled developers in the country as mentors. The job placement has been insanely high, but we don't really have junior roles available. We want to do our part, we want to help, and we hope that when they have more experience, that they'll think of us. We host events in our space, sponsor conferences, all sorts of stuff.

Sexism in my workplace just like... isn't a thing. A lot of us our queer, most very liberal, there are some awesome women, but they aren't developers (the single female dev is delightful). I don't experience soft sexism from my coworkers EVER. Literally ever. We are not the norm.

The lack of women in STEM fields has very little to do with like "girls just don't like it as much." It's INCREDIBLY complicated and multi-faceted. A *big* part of it is that women feel alienated, and are often guilty of Impostor Syndrome (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome).

Here's a great little read that came up in a newsletter about women/minorities in tech I subscribe to for work: https://medium.com/@saraheadler/never-read-the-comments-9cba93b5712a

[allegro]

But, here are a bunch of awesome female computer nerds:

* Rear Admiral Grace M. Hopper (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Hopper), 1906 - 1992, THE ultimate computer nerd. If you were into computers in the '80s, you'd remember that Adm. Hopper was worshipped like a GODDESS. (she still IS.)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ad/Commodore_Grace_M._Hopper%2C_USN_%28covered%29.jpg/220px-Commodore_Grace_M._Hopper%2C_USN_%28covered%29.jpg

* Ada Lovelace (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_Lovelace), the world's first computer programmer (she wrote the first machine algorithm for Charles Babbage’s analytical engine).

* Actually, all computer programming used to be women's work (http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/computer-programming-used-to-be-womens-work-718061/?no-ist)

http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews/files/2013/10/Two_women_operating_ENIAC.gif
Two women operating ENIAC

http://i.imgur.com/kCOIHPo.jpg

[Dra508]

I work in telecom and I can count on my hands the number of woman in my area. It's not for lack of interest.

[allegro]

One of my closest friends of over 30 years is a female who owns her own internet marketing consulting business and she does primarily SEO and PPC and was certified in Google analytics, and she's very successful and has been in tech since the late-70s.

My best friend is a female who has a BS in chemical engineering and she did that for many years and was successful and made a lot of money (in "corporate America"), but she got bored with it and left and wanted to "work with her right brain" and she got her MFA and became (and still is) a college art professor.

In the early-80s, I worked for a company in Ann Arbor, MI that bought and sold new and used Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) computers and it was 80% females.

[allegro]

I work in telecom and I can count on my hands the number of woman in my area. It's not for lack of interest.The house behind me is worth a million bucks* and is owned by a woman in telecomm (Comcast). Her property taxes are $24,000 per year. Her husband (a lazy asshole) is a (air quotes) stay-at-home dad.

We have a big WICT group, here, though (https://www.wict.org/MCS/CHAPTERS/CHICAGO/Pages/default.aspx#.VbgGhWRVhBc).

(*A funny aside: I did the closing on the purchase of that lot, then the closings on the sale of the two houses on that lot, we represented the builder: The builder is a female.)

In law, women lawyers have run into problems working in male-dominated law firms. So you know what women lawyers have been doing? Starting their own law firms. It's amazing what the refusal to be daunted by adversity can do.

Even as recent as the 1970s, women couldn't get a small business loan without a male co-signer.

My mother had a hell of a time getting a mortgage for a condo purchase as a single mother in 1973.

We've come a long way, baby.

From the above-linked Smithsonian article:

As late as the 1960s many people perceived computer programming as a natural career choice for savvy young women. Even the trend-spotters at Cosmopolitan Magazine urged their fashionable female readership to consider careers in programming. In an article titled “The Computer Girls,” the magazine described the field as offering better job opportunities for women than many other professional careers. As computer scientist Dr. Grace Hopper told a reporter, programming was “just like planning a dinner. You have to plan ahead and schedule everything so that it’s ready when you need it…. Women are ‘naturals’ at computer programming.” James Adams, the director of education for the Association for Computing Machinery, agreed: “I don’t know of any other field, outside of teaching, where there’s as much opportunity for a woman.”

Now, it’s not that managers of yore respected women more than they do now. They simply saw computer programming as an easy job. It was like typing or filing to them and the development of software was less important than the development of hardware. So women wrote software, programmed and even told their male colleagues how to make the hardware better. (It turns out programming is hard, and women are actually just as good at it as men.)

What changed? Well, male programmers wanted to elevate their job out of the “women’s work” category. They created professional associations and discouraged the hiring of women. Ads began to connect women staffers with error and inefficiency. They instituted math puzzle tests for hiring purposes that gave men who had taken math classes an advantage, and personality tests that purported to find the ideal “programming type.” Frink writes:


According to test developers, successful programmers had most of the same personality traits as other white-collar professionals. The important distinction, however, was that programmers displayed “disinterest in people” and that they disliked “activities involving close personal interaction.” It is these personality profiles, says Ensmenger, that originated our modern stereotype of the anti-social computer geek.

[Dra508]

ok allegro, pretty sure no one else caught the Virginia Slims reference. ;)

Finally, Cosmo does something worthwhile. That mag has always bothered me. Honestly, I didn't know it was still around.

men reacting to their girl friends being cat calls (]http://youtu.be/oWEKD493IxY)

[allegro]

ok allegro, pretty sure no one else caught the Virginia Slims reference. ;)
LOL I love you.

[Dra508]

LOL I love you.

Let's have an after glow cig now.

[eversonpoe]

ok @allegro (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=76) , pretty sure no one else caught the Virginia Slims reference. ;)

Finally, Cosmo does something worthwhile. That mag has always bothered me. Honestly, I didn't know it was still around.

http://youtu.be/oWEKD493IxY]men reacting to their girl friends being cat calls

while i like the idea and the fact that the boyfriends are unhappy about it, it seems like the first and third guy are reacting in a "that's my property, how dare you!" kind of way, whereas the second guy (my favorite) is reacting in a "that is fundamentally fucked up and i'm sorry you have to deal with it" way. also, the third guy's argument about "that's someone's daughter, someone's sister" is a typical thing where men relate it back to other men, rather than just treating a woman like an autonomous, whole person. the reason you shouldn't disrespect women is because they don't deserve to be disrespected, not because they're related to or dating other men.

[Madmya]

while i like the idea and the fact that the boyfriends are unhappy about it, it seems like the first and third guy are reacting in a "that's my property, how dare you!" kind of way, whereas the second guy (my favorite) is reacting in a "that is fundamentally fucked up and i'm sorry you have to deal with it" way. also, the third guy's argument about "that's someone's daughter, someone's sister" is a typical thing where men relate it back to other men, rather than just treating a woman like an autonomous, whole person. the reason you shouldn't disrespect women is because they don't deserve to be disrespected, not because they're related to or dating other men.
Here's an idea: do you think that just maybe these aren't socially-derived reactions and maybe just the natural male instinct?

[botley]

Here's an idea: do you think that just maybe these aren't socially-derived reactions and maybe just the natural male instinct?
Absolutely not; that's locker room folklore, easily debunked by anthropology. This proprietorial response to unwelcome male interest in a female partner occurs far less in societies based around truly liberated sexual interaction — where anyone can choose the sexual partners they want at all times (such as in tribal hunter-gatherers, I believe examples of which still exist in Papua New Guinea, sub-Saharan Africa, and Amazonian South America), without fear of being shamed or judged for a perceived break away from some monogamous ideal — unlike in ours, which is based around Eurasian-descended, patriarchal, enforced gender roles that root social credentials of masculinity around "owning" sexual access to a partner, with perpetual exclusivity.

[Sallos]

without being shamed/judged for breaking some monogamous ideal, such as in tribal hunter-gatherers in Papua New Guinea, sub-Saharan Africa, and Amazonian South America —

So thats why they didn't discover the wheel...

[botley]

So thats why they didn't discover the wheel...
If you were getting laid all the time, and eating a super high-protein diet, why would you ever need one?

#IDontNeedFeminismBecause my hunter-gatherer society is free from patriarchy, three dudes came inside my fertile womb last night, and lots of tasty fish are jumping in the river.

[Sallos]

If you were getting laid all the time, and eating a super high-protein diet, why would you ever need one?

#IDontNeedFeminismBecause my hunter-gatherer society is free from patriarchy, three dudes came inside my fertile womb last night, and lots of tasty fish are jumping in the river.

Uuuck, fuck that rather take my chances in the evil patriarchy western society.

[Madmya]

Absolutely not; that's locker room folklore, easily debunked by anthropology. This proprietorial response to unwelcome male interest in a female partner occurs far less in societies based around truly liberated sexual interaction — where anyone can choose the sexual partners they want at all times (such as in tribal hunter-gatherers, I believe examples of which still exist in Papua New Guinea, sub-Saharan Africa, and Amazonian South America), without fear of being shamed or judged for a perceived break away from some monogamous ideal — unlike in ours, which is based around Eurasian-descended, patriarchal, enforced gender roles that root social credentials of masculinity around "owning" sexual access to a partner, with perpetual exclusivity.

So all races are inherently the same?

[playwithfire]

Literally why.

[Madmya]

Why have gender-based discussion in a gender-based thread?

[Sarah K]

gender based thread wat

[Madmya]

Thread has nothing to do with gender?

[Madmya]

I'm sorry if my comprehension skills are failing, but what's the problem?

[allegro]

The thread was created as an offshoot of another thread, and is the 'feminist' thread, meaning female equality. So it is not a 'gender' thread, and it was intended to deal primarily with female legal equality. The perhaps ambiguous title was created by somebody on the fly when the original thread was split.

To answer your question: race is 100% a social construct - so, yes - all "races" are exactly the same from a biological standpoint.

Each culture can be different as far as it being patriarchal or matriarchal, or the level of same. Most of what we think is "male instinct" is just learned male gender quality. The same with females. We don't come out of the womb wanting to put on makeup, wear dresses, knowing how to cook and clean, and how to locate lost items.

It's like I used to say at work: My uterus is not a honing device (when all the males in the office wanted me to help them "find" things).

[playwithfire]

It's like this is the "Cars" thread and y'all are like "But why not bikes?"

[Madmya]

I cannot believe that. When you see black people dominating athletics, white people dominating the pool, you can't tell me we are exactly the same from a biological standpoint.

[Sarah K]

#alllivesmatterrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

[allegro]

I cannot believe that. When you see black people dominating athletics, white people dominating the pool, you can't tell me we are exactly the same from a biological standpoint.
That's not race, that's WHERE THEY CAME FROM.

I'm from an area of the world where it was important to survive cold, so my skin type and body type reflects that. And, frankly, the pool is probably reflected more by socioeconomics.

Black people come from Africa where they had to run for whatever reason, and they had to be out in the sun, so their bodies and skin types reflect that.

The only way we are different is where we had to survive, many many years ago. Otherwise, we are all exactly the same. The only things that are different are reflected in our abilities to survive.

There are some rather minor physical differences, but otherwise we are exactly the same. If you test our blood, you can't tell the difference (except for a few rare race-specific diseases).

But, really, this is drift in this thread.

[Sallos]

That's not race, that's WHERE THEY CAME FROM.

I'm from an area of the world where it was important to survive cold, so my skin type and body type reflects that. And, frankly, the pool is probably reflected more by socioeconomics.

Black people come from Africa where they had to run for whatever reason, and they had to be out in the sun, so their bodies and skin types reflect that.




I cannot believe that. When you see black people dominating athletics, white people dominating the pool, you can't tell me we are exactly the same from a biological standpoint.



Something to do with center of gravity i heard.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/7884135/Centre-of-gravity-theory-for-dominance-of-black-sprinters-and-white-swimmers.html

(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/7884135/Centre-of-gravity-theory-for-dominance-of-black-sprinters-and-white-swimmers.html)

[playwithfire]

Oh my god.

[allegro]

that's a bunch of CRAP.

Everybody knows the old saying "black people can't swim" and it's mostly because black people are NEVER AROUND WATER due to socioeconomic situations. Their schools didn't have pools, they were discouraged from swimming, it's a meme that's passed down through their own culture. THAT SAME MEME was passed down through my husband's WHITE-ASS Polish-American family, the whole damned family is TERRIFIED of water, a bunch of CANDY-ASSES who won't go near a fucking pool. I taught my husband to swim (well, almost, we're still working on it), while I've been around water my entire life, since I was literally a BABY. Now, here in Chicago, you see lots and lots of black people defying that stereotype and swimming in Lake Michigan. But, it's a very very old fear that has been passed down through GENERATIONS of black people, and it will take a very long time to get black people anywhere NEAR water, never mind getting pools in ghetto schools, wherein the nice white school like in OUR AREA was recently completely re-built because rich white little fuckers wanted a whole new one (like the old one wasn't good enough) and my taxes went up.



Here, see this article (http://www.wlwt.com/news/wlwt-investigates-why-black-people-are-less-likely-to-learn-to-swim/27363304).

[Sallos]

that's a bunch of CRAP.

Everybody knows the old saying "black people can't swim" and it's mostly because black people are NEVER AROUND WATER due to socioeconomic situations. Their schools didn't have pools, they were discouraged from swimming, it's a meme that's passed down through their own culture. THAT SAME MEME was passed down through my husband's WHITE-ASS Polish-American family, the whole damned family is TERRIFIED of water, a bunch of CANDY-ASSES who won't go near a fucking pool. I taught my husband to swim (well, almost, we're still working on it), while I've been around water my entire life, since I was literally a BABY. Now, here in Chicago, you see lots and lots of black people defying that stereotype and swimming in Lake Michigan. But, it's a very very old fear that has been passed down through GENERATIONS of black people, and it will take a very long time to get black people anywhere NEAR water, never mind getting pools in ghetto schools, wherein the nice white school like in OUR AREA was recently completely re-built because rich white little fuckers wanted a whole new one (like the old one wasn't good enough) and my taxes went up.


Here, see this article (http://www.wlwt.com/news/wlwt-investigates-why-black-people-are-less-likely-to-learn-to-swim/27363304).


http://www.livescience.com/10716-scientists-theorize-black-athletes-run-fastest.html

(http://www.livescience.com/10716-scientists-theorize-black-athletes-run-fastest.html)
Although there are also cultural factors at work, it all comes down to body makeup, Jones said.
"Blacks tend to have longer limbs with smaller circumferences, meaning that their centers of gravity are higher compared to whites of the same height," said Adrian Bejan, Jones' co-author, an engineering professor at Duke University. "Asians and whites tend to have longer torsos, so their centers of gravity are lower."
"These differences are small, and we don't really see them when we look at someone," Bejan told Life's Little Mysteries. "We are only rarely struck by how long someone's legs are."
But these small differences certainly matter in races lasting less than 10 seconds, Bejan said.



My father who lived in africa till his late teens was the fastest swimmer at his school, followed by a mulato. And back then, in the 60's there already jokes about black people being lousier swimmers.

ANd this was near mozambique's coastline, where everyone had acess to the ocean

(http://www.livescience.com/10716-scientists-theorize-black-athletes-run-fastest.html)

[Madmya]

Keep up those one-liners, Sarah K.

I don't think this is going off-topic. My main gripe about feminism of the past 3 years or so is that it seems to completely neglect fundamental biological differences between men and women. Feminism wants us to be the same when we are fundamentally not the same.

Anyway, I don't get it allegro, I thought the whole 'what they did to survive' all those years ago is what spawned the different races. An article on Time suggests that there is evidence where your statement on race being a 100% social construct is not right. I don't know how much water it holds, the article is linked underneath if you'd like to read it. I was going to quote it but thought it's best I don't.

http://time.com/91081/what-science-says-about-race-and-genetics/

[allegro]

Although there are also cultural factors at work, it all comes down to body makeup, Jones said.
"Blacks tend to have longer limbs with smaller circumferences, meaning that their centers of gravity are higher compared to whites of the same height," said Adrian Bejan, Jones' co-author, an engineering professor at Duke University. "Asians and whites tend to have longer torsos, so their centers of gravity are lower."
Yes, that could very well be why they run faster which again comes down to the ancestry of survival, as stated above. But, swimming has not been tested because of cultural reasons. As stated in the above-linked article, as many as 70% of American black children do not learn how to swim.

But, see Cullen Jones (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/black-womens-health-and-happiness/201305/most-blacks-dont-swim-they-need-learn), "American competition swimmer and Olympic gold medalist who specializes in freestyle sprint events. As part of the American team, he holds the world record in the 4×100-meter freestyle relay (long course). At the 2012 Summer Olympics, he won silver medals in the 4 x 100 meter freestyle relay and the 50-meter freestyle, as well as the gold in the 4 x 100 metre medley."

See also Anthony Ervin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Ervin).

See also this (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/black-womens-health-and-happiness/201305/most-blacks-dont-swim-they-need-learn)

ALSO, THIS IS DRIFT IN THIS THREAD. THIS IS THE FEMALE EQUAL RIGHTS THREAD.

[allegro]

Feminism wants us to be the same when we are fundamentally not the same.

"Feminism" does not want us to be "the same." I don't know what brand of "feminism" you're reading about, but that's just not correct. Feminism just wants equality; equal pay, equal opportunities, equal education, etc. Feminism wants women to be treated as equal.

It never says that we are always "the same." Although, frankly, there are very few biological differences that make us different. We are, in fact, all human, and deserving of equality and respect. That's all "feminists" are asking.

[Sallos]

Yes, that could very well be why they run faster which again comes down to the ancestry of survival, as stated above. But, swimming has not been tested because of cultural reasons. As stated in the above-linked article, as many as 70% of American black children do not learn how to swim.

But, see Cullen Jones (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/black-womens-health-and-happiness/201305/most-blacks-dont-swim-they-need-learn), "American competition swimmer and Olympic gold medalist who specializes in freestyle sprint events. As part of the American team, he holds the world record in the 4×100-meter freestyle relay (long course). At the 2012 Summer Olympics, he won silver medals in the 4 x 100 meter freestyle relay and the 50-meter freestyle, as well as the gold in the 4 x 100 metre medley."

See also Anthony Ervin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Ervin).

See also this (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/black-womens-health-and-happiness/201305/most-blacks-dont-swim-they-need-learn)

ALSO, THIS IS DRIFT IN THIS THREAD. THIS IS THE FEMALE EQUAL RIGHTS THREAD.

Indeed, i would just like to point out though that if the ancestry you spoke of is exactly what makes us different. Swimming has not been tested, again you keep bringing up the paradigm in the US to justify it. There are black swimmers other than the US. If they run faster because of said differences, does that mean that whites don't run as much due to cultural reasons?

Cullen Jones is more half bread from what i read about him, and again, having a "disavantage" at swimming doesn't mean it can't be overcomed through training.

[allegro]

An article on Time suggests that there is evidence where your statement on race being a 100% social construct is not right. I don't know how much water it holds, the article is linked underneath if you'd like to read it. I was going to quote it but thought it's best I don't.

http://time.com/91081/what-science-says-about-race-and-genetics/
I suggest that you read the comments under that article.


If they run faster because of said differences, does that mean that whites don't run as much due to cultural reasons?
Having a "disavantage" at swimming doesn't mean it can't be overcomed through training.


That is entirely possible and absolutely true, yes, with running and swimming. So far, a lot of the "science" that has been published is junk science.

AND THIS IS DRIFT IN THIS THREAD.

PLEASE, CAN WE GET BACK TO THIS THREAD'S TOPIC? YOU CAN START ANOTHER THREAD IF YOU WANT. :)

THANKS!

[Sallos]

"Feminism" does not want us to be "the same." I don't know what brand of "feminism" you're reading about, but that's just not correct. Feminism just wants equality; equal pay, equal opportunities, equal education, etc. Feminism wants women to be treated as equal.

It never says that we are always "the same." Although, frankly, there are very few biological differences that make us different. We are, in fact, all human, and deserving of equality and respect. That's all "feminists" are asking.

Regardin equal pay, hasn't that been debunked? Regarding same pay for same work that is. Reason why men make more money than women is because they choose different career paths and also are better or more agressive when it comes to negotiating their contracts. Or is this not true at all? If it is true then what the feminists are asking is actually for men to be paid less. I read somewhere, think it was a reddit CEO, that actually banned contract negotiation for that very same reason.

[allegro]

Regardin equal pay, hasn't that been debunked? Regarding same pay for same work that is. Reason why men make more money than women is because they choose different career paths and also are better or more agressive when it comes to negotiating their contracts. Or is this not true at all? If it is true then what the feminists are asking is actually for men to be paid less. I read somewhere, think it was a reddit CEO, that actually banned contract negotiation for that very same reason.

No, it hasn't been debunked. It was debunked by a few questionable sources that didn't take into account deliberately poor performance reviews for women that affected their pay, etc. No, feminists aren't asking for men to be paid less; the budgeting is up to the companies. It's complicated, but I had already linked an article, here, where a fictitious resume was created and a male and a female name was put at the top, and even female managers offered less starting pay to the female than to the male, and all of the managers viewed the female's qualifications as substandard, but viewed the very same qualifications as great on the male's resume. It's due to some kind of subconscious gender-based discrimination of which people aren't even necessarily aware.

It is very true that females can be better at negotiating. I don't like to use the word "aggressive" -- perhaps the word "assertive" is better, here. Women are forced to walk a fine line between being a "bitch" and being too wimpy, between trying to be "too male" and being "too female" in the workplace. That's not even their fault, it's how they are perceived and how males want them to be perceived in their female roles. While females are advised to be more assertive, the minute they do that, they are thought to be "too aggressive" or "a bitch."

As I said, before, in this thread, if I showed any anger at work (an emotion not regularly associated with females), I was told that I needed to contain it, even though nearly ALL of the males in my office were regularly showing anger. When I pointed out this double-standard, I was told "that's just the way it is." This could affect my performance review, which could affect my salary. This wouldn't happen with a male, when the company is looking to sandbag the budget in favor of the Old Boy's Network.

[Sallos]

No, it hasn't been debunked. It was debunked by a few questionable sources that didn't take into account deliberately poor performance reviews for women that affected their pay, etc. No, feminists aren't asking for men to be paid less; the budgeting is up to the companies. It's complicated, but I had already linked an article, here, where a fictitious resume was created and a male and a female name was put at the top, and even female managers offered less starting pay to the female than to the male, and all of the managers viewed the female's qualifications as substandard, but viewed the very same qualifications as great on the male's resume. It's due to some kind of subconscious gender-based discrimination of which people aren't even necessarily aware.

I'm against any intervention from the state in private business dictating what they should pay their employees. If a woman employee who out performs her male collegues isn't being payed the same, while being a higher asset for the company than the market will sort it out, surely some company, if not even the same one, in risk of loosing her will be able to pay what she's worth.

Men and women alike in the workforce are paid what their worth. Women in fashion and porn get payed more than men, care to guess why? It all comes down to supply and demand. That's not to say that are cases where female employees are being paid less just because they are female, but i higly doubt that's the norm.

Also you said it was debunked by questionable sources, why were they questionable?

[Sarah K]

The thing is, the market *won't* sort it out. History has shown us that time and time again. Ignoring problems and hoping that they go away is never a valid solution.

[playwithfire]

My company doesn't do salary negotiation with small exceptions (like equity or whatever). I'm absolutely for not supporting that. Why should someone get paid more just because they're more aggressive?

We have a very elaborate and constantly refined leveling system that is transparent. Everyone at the same level gets paid the same. All levels' compensation is competitive against the market salaries. It works *very well*.

[Sallos]

The thing is, the market *won't* sort it out. History has shown us that time and time again. Ignoring problems and hoping that they go away is never a valid solution.

Dictating companies budget is a problem as much as women not being paid what they're worth. What's also a problem is dictating a companies gender make up to make it more diverse when diversity should't be an issue for most companies to have to deal with. Companies are in the making profit business that's what their for, if women did in fact were paid less than men than there would be more companies hiring women.

[Sarah K]

Yep. It would be great if we lived in a world where all of the things that shouldn't happen, don't happen. But here we are, so we have to take the steps that we can to ensure that everyone is given equal opportunity.

[Sallos]

My company doesn't do salary negotiation with small exceptions (like equity or whatever). I'm absolutely for not supporting that. Why should someone get paid more just because they're more aggressive?

We have a very elaborate and constantly refined leveling system that is transparent. Everyone at the same level gets paid the same. All levels' compensation is competitive against the market salaries. It works *very well*.

If an employer can make a case for why he/she should be get paid more i don't see any problem with that. Contracts are negotiated all the time in every business aspect. Why should hiring be any different? Because some people get paid less that way? Next you'll be telling me job interviews aren't important. Why should someone that did better at a job interview get the job against someone that did poorly?

Your company might work well with your leveling system, but not every company can function like that. For instance, a football (soccer) club might be willing to pay more for a player that's clearly a much more valuable asset than the other players. But should't he get paid more for his greater role in the team? Because if he doesn't some other team will hire him.

[allegro]

Also you said it was debunked by questionable sources, why were they questionable?
Because there is no way you can get totally accurate data that fully supports the real truth.

For instance, the Lilly Ledbetter Case (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ledbetter_v._Goodyear_Tire_%26_Rubber_Co.) which is a very typical lawsuit here in the U.S.


In 1979 Lilly Ledbetter, the plaintiff, began work at the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company in its Gadsden, Alabama location, a union plant. She started with the same pay as male employees, but by retirement, she was earning $3,727 per month compared to 15 men who earned from $4,286 per month (lowest paid man) to $5,236 per month (highest paid man). During her years at the factory as a salaried worker, raises were given and denied based partly on evaluations and recommendations regarding worker performance. From 1979-1981 Ledbetter received a series of negative evaluations, which she later claimed were discriminatory. Although her subsequent evaluations were good, in part as a result of those early negative evaluations, her pay never reached the level of similar male employees. All merit increases had to be substantiated by a formal evaluation. In March 1998, Ledbetter inquired into the possible sexual discrimination of the Goodyear Tire Company. In July she filed formal charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. In November 1998, after early retirement, Ledbetter sued claiming pay discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Pay Act of 1963. The Supreme Court did not rule on whether this was discrimination, just the statute of limitations to sue.

Lower court proceedings[edit]
The District Court found in favor of Goodyear on the Equal Pay Act claim, because that Act allows pay differences that are based on merit. The court allowed the Title VII and other claims to proceed to trial. Ledbetter claimed that she had been evaluated unfairly because of her sex and therefore had been paid significantly less than her male colleagues. Goodyear claimed that their evaluations were non-discriminatory and focused only on worker competence. The jury found for Ledbetter and awarded back pay and damages. Goodyear appealed, arguing that all claims to damages before September 26, 1997 were void due to the statute of limitations placed on discrimination claims.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed the lower court's decision stating that Ledbetter could sue only for allegations regarding pay decisions that occurred less than 180 days before her beginning the EEOC process in March 1998. Ledbetter, as the court ruled, could not sue on decisions that merely affected pay in the 180 day period. Furthermore, all decisions made concerning pay in the 180 day period could not be unequivocally linked to her gender. Ledbetter sought a writ of certiorari, but did not contest the sufficiency of the evidence concerning decisions in the 180 day period. The Supreme Court granted the writ and heard the appeal.

It's a sneaky way of paying women less. Here in the U.S., it's very common for people to never compare salaries, so people can go for years, decades, without knowing what their coworkers are making. In fact, many terms of employment contracts include non-disclosure agreements. So, you give a female employee a non-warranted shitty merit evaluation, and that affects her pay for decades. Or, you give her a lower starting salary in the first place and she doesn't ever know about it. Hell, the guys don't even know about it. It's all totally secret. And it's all mostly about budgeting, really. They have "this much" money to spend that year, and they spend "this much" on males and "this much" on females. It's like the salary cap in the NHL.

[allegro]

My company doesn't do salary negotiation with small exceptions (like equity or whatever). I'm absolutely for not supporting that. Why should someone get paid more just because they're more aggressive?

We have a very elaborate and constantly refined leveling system that is transparent. Everyone at the same level gets paid the same. All levels' compensation is competitive against the market salaries. It works *very well*.
If all systems worked that way, the world would be a better place.

Unfortunately, the world sucks. :(

[Sallos]

Because there is no way you can get totally accurate data that fully supports the real truth.

For instance, the Lilly Ledbetter Case (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ledbetter_v._Goodyear_Tire_%26_Rubber_Co.) which is a very typical lawsuit here in the U.S.



It's a sneaky way of paying women less. Here in the U.S., it's very common for people to never compare salaries, so people can go for years, decades, without knowing what their coworkers are making. In fact, many terms of employment contracts include non-disclosure agreements.

Well it seems to me like ending that non-disclousure agreement regarding salary would be a way to tackle this, even though i'm sure there are plenty of reasons why that same clause exists.

[allegro]

Well it seems to me like ending that non-disclousure agreement regarding salary would be a way to tackle this, even though i'm sure there are plenty of reasons why that same clause exists.

Yeah, it exists so they can move numbers the way they want and be sneaky, that's why. They're in the business for PROFIT, not for cushy feelings.

Hey, I'm in law, dude. They don't call it Dewey Cheatem and Howe for nothing, LOL>.

[Sallos]

Yeah, it exists so they can move numbers the way they want and be sneaky, that's why. They're in the business for PROFIT, not for cushy feelings.

Hey, I'm in law, dude. They don't call it Dewey Cheatem and Howe for nothing, LOL>.

I don't know about you but knowing im getting paid less would drive me to do better, so it would probably increase the workplace competitiveness, and competitiveness equals profit.

[playwithfire]

Fuck encouraging workplace competitiveness. Feeling like you're in it together is waaaay better.

This is great: https://medium.com/@racheltho/if-you-think-women-in-tech-is-just-a-pipeline-problem-you-haven-t-been-paying-attention-cb7a2073b996


Next you'll be telling me job interviews aren't important. Why should someone that did better at a job interview get the job against someone that did poorly?

I *will* tell you that employers need to make sure their interview process doesn't support unfair biases.

Recurse Center (https://www.recurse.com/) does this really well. They pull out identifying things from initial resume reviews like names.

[allegro]

I don't know about you but knowing im getting paid less would drive me to do better, so it would probably increase the workplace competitiveness, and competitiveness equals profit.

My grandfather always said, "you never get rich working for somebody else."

Take from that what you will.

When I discovered I was working for a really sexist firm or for a really sexist company, I quit.

I don't even want to be AROUND shit like that.

I mean, when the coffee ran out, HONEST TO GOD, the male attorneys would just leave the coffee pot on the burner waiting for one of the females in the office to remove it from the burner. One day, I told an old fart male attorney who'd left it there, "you know, that pot is going to explode on that burner" (it will) and he said, "not my problem" and walked away.

Because, you know, coffee pots are women's jobs. They actually expected the female attorneys to do that shit.

[playwithfire]

Soft sexism makes me so mad.

[allegro]

Sexism makes me madder than less pay.

Seriously, YOU make more coffee, you old male fucker.

My uterus is not a coffee-making device. And it's not in my job description.


Fuck encouraging workplace competitiveness.
Unfortunately, law is NOTHING BUT competition, ESPECIALLY in the law firm environment where you have billable hour quotas. Usually, you have to submit at least 145 billable hours per month, and then there is this competition not only between departments in the firm but between people in the departments and those billable hours dictate your ability to make partner, etc. Even the paralegals have billable hour quotas.

This drove me to get out of all of this and now I work for a sole practitioner and we telecommute and I can work from home in my yoga pants. I have priorities, you know. :p

[Madmya]

"Feminism" does not want us to be "the same." I don't know what brand of "feminism" you're reading about, but that's just not correct. Feminism just wants equality; equal pay, equal opportunities, equal education, etc. Feminism wants women to be treated as equal.

It never says that we are always "the same." Although, frankly, there are very few biological differences that make us different. We are, in fact, all human, and deserving of equality and respect. That's all "feminists" are asking.

Then why are we dissecting how these men in the video below react? Does their instinctive reaction to protect impinge on a female's ability to equal opportunity?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=101&v=oWEKD493IxY

[Madmya]

I suggest that you read the comments under that article.


Unless you want me to thoroughly read all 77 comments, I didn't notice anything in the first half that debunked the article.

[allegro]

Unless you want me to thoroughly read all 77 comments, I didn't notice anything in the first half that debunked the article.

There are lots indicating bad science. (Or, at least, click-bait social science and not hard science. Yes, I actually read all 77 comments.)

[allegro]

Then why are we dissecting how these men in the video below react? Does their instinctive reaction to protect impinge on a female's ability to equal opportunity?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=101&v=oWEKD493IxY

I wasn't doing that so I don't know. I don't know that it's "instinctive" (vs. learned) although I do think instinct is involved in protecting family. (We are all, for instance, genetically programmed to respond to the sound of a crying baby. Except my stepsister, who was born without that gene and I had to get up to give her baby a bottle while my stepsister slept through the whole thing.)

I personally believe that respect starts at home; if a man respects his mother, sister, etc., he's perhaps more likely to respect all females?

And that respect begets equal treatment?

[Madmya]

I wasn't doing that so I don't know. I don't know that it's "instinctive" (vs. learned) although I do think instinct is involved in protecting family. (We are all, for instance, genetically programmed to respond to the sound of a crying baby. Except my stepsister, who was born without that gene and I had to get up to give her baby a bottle while my stepsister slept through the whole thing.)

I personally believe that respect starts at home; if a man respects his mother, sister, etc., he's perhaps more likely to respect all females?

And that respect begets equal treatment?

I know you haven't been doing that, most people haven't been doing that either, but this is the kind of feminism I'm reacting to and what I mean above. The problem is the person who believes in this form of feminism hasn't responded in any way other than to hide behind their facepalms.

[Sarah K]

Are you passive aggressively referring to me? What would you like clarification on? I don't even remember what you're talking about. Haha. I remember you saying weird things, though... So I prob facepalmed you, for sure.

[Madmya]

I'm not, I'm talking about eversonpoe (sp?).

[Sarah K]

Well, he's rad as fuck, too!

I won't speak for him but I do understand where he was coming from. Many men only stop and pause to think of the impact that street harassment(or sexism in general) has on women when it is framed as it being against someone that they care about. They don't care about women being harassed as a whole, they only care when it is someone who is in their life. Therefore, women are only valuable because of the men that they are associated with, instead of having value as individuals.

[Madmya]

I'm sure he is.

Many PEOPLE only stop to care about anything when it impacts someone that they care about. To have a go at these guys for getting their backs up when they see their partner being treated like a piece of meat on display for others is ridiculous and unfair because this will naturally cause a male to react this way. The same thing would happen if it was their little brother walking down and copping it. Guys naturally want to protect those around them and it's completely unfair that feminism will attack them because of it. You're turning a greater societal issue of people not caring about their fellow person into something that is specifically about women.

[allegro]

Guys All compassionate human beings naturally want to protect those around them and it's completely unfair that feminism will attack them because of it.
"Feminism" does no such thing. Really, it doesn't. Ask Gloria Steinem.

Many men, when viewing or conducting catcalling, don't think "what if that was my mother or sister?" If that same protectiveness we're talking about extended beyond the immediate family (the thought that every woman is somebody's daughter, somebody's sister, maybe somebody's mother), the practice might end? That's the abstract thought, anyway.

But some say that morality, alone, dictates that catcalling is wrong (sans instinctive protectiveness). That with morality and respect, we would not need that subsequent thought about protection?

This is not "attacking" men but, on the contrary, attempting to cease the unwarranted verbal assault on women, since women are the primary target of catcalling.

I wouldn't take facepalming too seriously, here. I, personally, wish we did not have that button, as I believe it instigates too much hostility and aggression. It wasn't on the old board, and I really don't like it.

[elevenism]

once, i was walking home from getting something to eat with my ex girlfriend, fairly late at night.
we weren't in the best of neighborhoods.

Anyway, i have very long hair. SO...i got to experience it first hand.

This creepy man rolled up on us and said "hey sexy ladies, it's cold out here! want to get in my car where it's warm? do you need some food?"

He had mistaken us for two women!

I whirled around, enraged, bellowing at him, and realizing his mistake, he got the hell out of there.

But this was perhaps beyond catcalling? i don't know. does creepy shit like this happen to you ladies?

The girlfriend i was living with told me that shit like that happened to her ALL THE TIME. She had a habit of going out for walks when we were arguing, so as to cool down.

It wasn't an awful neighborhood, but it wasn't exactly the track, you know?

Anyway, i had the tiniest little touch of what it would be like, and i damn sure don't envy you ladies!

[playwithfire]

Unlike many of my friends, I almost never get catcalled, and I've *still* had some really stupid experiences.

I used to open my store sometimes, when I'd work for Starbucks, and I had to walk to the train at 3ish in the morning. Most of my hoodies are black, but I had this green one that was slightly more form fitting. If I wore that one instead of my other one, the likelihood of getting catcalled (on a dark street at 3am) went up. People are idiots.

[Sarah K]

I don't buy into men protecting women as instinct. I'd that held true, they would step in when they saw other men harassing women.

[allegro]

I don't buy into men protecting women as instinct. I'd that held true, they would step in when they saw other men harassing women.

Lots of men DO. We instinctively protect each other, as a species.

But, the instinct is often overwhelmed / outweighed by gender socialization. Males don't come out of the womb wanting to hurt females.

Cat-calling is a learned behavior. It's sometimes something males do to impress other males.

Females tend to keep the "nurturing" characteristic due to reinforced gender socialization. But males are also born to be nurturing human beings. Anything opposite is a learned behavior.

When I was being emotionally abused by my ex-husband, several male platonic friends encouraged me and helped me get out of that relationship; they even risked their own hide by helping me move.

Also, this is all more complicated by a more relatively recent phenomenon called bystander effect (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect).


The bystander effect was first demonstrated in the laboratory by John Darley and Bibb Latané in 1968 after they became interested in the topic following the murder of Kitty Genovese in 1964. These researchers launched a series of experiments that resulted in one of the strongest and most replicable effects in social psychology. In a typical experiment, the participant is either alone or among a group of other participants or confederates. An emergency situation is staged and researchers measure how long it takes the participants to intervene, if they intervene. These experiments have found that the presence of others inhibits helping, often by a large margin. For example, Bibb Latané and Judith Rodin (1969) staged an experiment around a woman in distress. 70 percent of the people alone called out or went to help the woman after they believed she had fallen and was hurt, but when there were other people in the room only 40 percent offered help.

[Madmya]

"Feminism" does no such thing. Really, it doesn't. Ask Gloria Steinem.

Many men, when viewing or conducting catcalling, don't think "what if that was my mother or sister?" If that same protectiveness we're talking about extended beyond the immediate family (the thought that every woman is somebody's daughter, somebody's sister, maybe somebody's mother), the practice might end? That's the abstract thought, anyway.

But some say that morality, alone, dictates that catcalling is wrong (sans instinctive protectiveness). That with morality and respect, we would not need that subsequent thought about protection?

This is not "attacking" men but, on the contrary, attempting to cease the unwarranted verbal assault on women, since women are the primary target of catcalling.

I wouldn't take facepalming too seriously, here. I, personally, wish we did not have that button, as I believe it instigates too much hostility and aggression. It wasn't on the old board, and I really don't like it.

I'm aware that "feminism" in its definition doesn't do that. I don't have a problem with feminism, my problem stems from over-zealous feminists who attack (I'm going to use that word) men for what I think is just a trait of men.

Yeah I'd say you're right about these guys not thinking about any of that. Most men don't think, we're a lot more brash than women. But when I watch that video I see shit people doing shit things. I see guys that would make me nervous because I would assume they'd be keen for a fight. They seem like shit people who just don't give a shit about anyone else. We all agree it's about respect, but I'd bet these blokes only respect their close mates and not much else. I don't see how this relates to women not getting equal opportunity. It's people not having respect for themselves or others.

[Madmya]

I don't buy into men protecting women as instinct. I'd that held true, they would step in when they saw other men harassing women.

In my experience, women have a much lower threshold for what is deemed to be harassment than men. If I were in the situation shown in the video I wouldn't intervene. I'd probably watch closely to make sure nothing gets physical, but they all quit within a reasonable enough time that I'd just let it go. It's not worth risking a fight for a few words flung at someone else.

[allegro]

I don't see how this relates to women not getting equal opportunity. It's people not having respect for themselves or others.
Well, okay, but this thread also extends to women not being subjected to things like that ... being treated as "equal" means not having to put up with that kind of shit, yes?

The subject of this thread has encompassed sexist topics, occasionally, which is under the heading of feminism. The topic of cat-calling came up a few pages ago, kind of died out, and it was just brought up, again.

But, this is not really a "gender" thread, otherwise it could branch out into the trans category, and we already have a thread for that.

But, yes, I agree, cat-calling is probably done by people who don't have respect for others. Not sure about the self-respect part, but you have a good point.

[Madmya]

... being treated as "equal" means not having to put up with that kind of shit, yes?

No, because you have no idea that these idiots don't treat everyone shit.

[Sarah K]

In my experience, women have a much lower threshold for what is deemed to be harassment than men.

As a general rule, men are not dealing with it on a consistent basis, though. It's just like anything. If it happens once or a few times, it's not a big deal. But when it happens time after time after time, that little poke becomes unbearable.

[Madmya]

True, point taken.

[allegro]

No, because you have no idea that these idiots don't treat everyone shit.

I don't understand what that means. We can only view the nasty variety of cat-calling as sexual harassment, and we can discuss this under this thread (per agreement by the feminists herein). This doesn't mean that we are viewing ALL MEN as people who cat-call. We aren't doing that. That is stupid. All men don't cat-call. Let's not nitpick this, anymore, this is kind of a dumb discussion, here. You're acting offended as if we are viewing all men as potential cat-callers and I don't think anybody, here, did that. Like, males come out of the womb with cat-calling genes, and that's just faulty logic. Also, it's faulty logic to state that men who cat-call are just overall assholes, because that may not be true; these men may simply not know that what they are doing is not attractive to females. There were a few other videos we posted, here, where guys said they thought it was a way of communicating "interest" to females, like some kind of "mating call." In these cases, it's just bad information and these guys simply need to be better informed, better educated. Some of the other males in the videos indicated that they did it to look cool in front of other males, like peacocks strutting. Again, it's like a mating ritual thing, which is - again - something that needs to be unlearned but doesn't necessarily define "general asshole." Sure, there were guys who just fall into the "stupid" category ("she looks good and I have the right to make noises with my mouth, the same noises that I use to call my dog, to tell her that I think she looks good") and there is just no cure for stupid.

[Madmya]

I don't understand what that means. We can only view the nasty variety of cat-calling as sexual harassment, and we can discuss this under this thread (per agreement by the feminists herein). This doesn't mean that we are viewing ALL MEN as people who cat-call. We aren't doing that. That is stupid. All men don't cat-call. Let's not nitpick this, anymore, this is kind of a dumb discussion, here. You're acting offended as if we are viewing all men as potential cat-callers and I don't think anybody, here, did that. Like, males come out of the womb with cat-calling genes, and that's just faulty logic. Also, it's faulty logic to state that men who cat-call are just overall assholes, because that may not be true; these men may simply not know that what they are doing is not attractive to females. There were a few other videos we posted, here, where guys said they thought it was a way of communicating "interest" to females, like some kind of "mating call." In these cases, it's just bad information and these guys simply need to be better informed. Some of the other males in the video indicated that they did it to look cool in front of other males, like peacocks strutting. Again, it's like a mating ritual thing, which is - again - something that needs to be unlearned but doesn't necessarily define "general asshole."

You don't understand what it means? It means, and this is the crux of my issue, that many feminists these days over-reach. They find these instances and lump it into feminism. We've got a person here who found issue with the way some guy was dealing with distress over someone he cared about and made it an issue of feminism. The cat-calling from those blokes... you're right it's sexual harassment. For the record, I know you aren't assuming all men cat-call and I'm pretty sure that's an assumption you've made yourself, but you're right - I can now see how my argument is logically faulty. I'll read your reply but I'll try refrain from posting about this anymore, I think we're all over my pedantic issues. Which I might add is the product of being surrounded by feminist issues I don't agree with too often, like the 50% quotas on company boards announced a couple of days ago in my state.

[playwithfire]

Why do we even need to placate dudes with "don't worry, we're not saying *all* men catcall"? Why do we have to placate dudes about all sorts of shit while we're just over here trying to get some equality?

I think something a lot of people do with feminism is like... okay, y'all can vote and we're dealing with the big issues. Equality! We did it! Why are you still annoyed by gender roles being so prevalent and standardized? That's just *too much*.

[allegro]

It means, and this is the crux of my issue, that many feminists these days over-reach. Which I might add is the product of being surrounded by feminist issues I don't agree with too often, like the 50% quotas on company boards announced a couple of days ago in my state.
I don't agree with a 50% quota, either, but I don't believe that "many feminists 'these days' over-reach." And coming into a feminist thread and complaining is just, well, trolling? :p

And the feminist movement isn't like some giant conspiracy theory.

But there is a limit as to how long we need to continuously beat that dead horse of "feminists suck." The people who think that shouldn't be in this thread, just like the people who don't like a band shouldn't be in that band thread (that = trolling).

http://i.imgur.com/kGpTbDh.gif http://i.imgur.com/kGpTbDh.gif http://i.imgur.com/kGpTbDh.gif http://i.imgur.com/kGpTbDh.gif This been the recurring theme in this thread.

especially since the original cat-calling poster was YOU (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/threads/491-The-feminism-equality-thread?p=263859#post263859)

[Madmya]

It's important that you know the 50% quota is not a law. It's also important that you know, and I've said this on more than one occasion but for some reason you need constant reminding, that I'm aware that my issues do not pertain to the fundamentals of feminism. I've never said "feminism sucks" nor do I think I've alluded to that (another assumption). All I'm stating, and I've said it multiple times, is that the viewpoint of a particular person in this thread, one that I see quite often these days, sucks. You don't suck, people standing up for equality don't suck, but people who over-reach suck. I originally posted my issue directly to the person who chose not to respond, instead you've taken it on and, I don't know, assumed that it is my issue with the greater theories of feminism?

[playwithfire]

I think eversonpoe is an amazing feminist and I for one am super, super appreciative to be able to call them an internet friend. And from what I can tell, our views line up, so.

[Madmya]

You can't get facepalmed without posting first, so I'd like to think it's easy to realise the wheels were in motion long before that. But then again, it wouldn't be an allegro post without making a gross assumption.

[allegro]

Oh, yeah, that's me. Miss Gross Assumptions.

[Mantra]

yeah i always thought eversonpoe was a pretty solid dude, and his post about the guys in that video reacting with a "that's my property" attitude seems pretty spot on. also, he seemed pretty mild about the whole thing, not like he said they should be dragged into the street and shot. i don't see what the issue is.

and "it wouldn't be an allegro post without making a gross assumption"??...wtf

[botley]

No you are wrong let's all be brutal ignoramuses

[Sarah K]

http://nymag.com/thecut/2015/07/womens-museum-becomes-womens-killer-museum.html?mid=twitter_nymag

A museum that was approved to be built for women's history turns into a museum about Jack the Ripper instead.

This is an actual quote


"It is absolutely not celebrating the crime of Jack the Ripper but looking at why and how the women got in that situation in the first place."

WHY AND HOW THE WOMEN GOT IN THAT SITUATION.

[playwithfire]

I'd just like to say that I meant to facepalm that post, not like it. Now I've done both.

[Ryan]

Oh, yeah, that's me. Miss Gross Assumptions.


Can I call you MGA for short?

[eversonpoe]

It's important that you know the 50% quota is not a law. It's also important that you know, and I've said this on more than one occasion but for some reason you need constant reminding, that I'm aware that my issues do not pertain to the fundamentals of feminism. I've never said "feminism sucks" nor do I think I've alluded to that (another assumption). All I'm stating, and I've said it multiple times, is that the viewpoint of a particular person in this thread, one that I see quite often these days, sucks. You don't suck, people standing up for equality don't suck, but people who over-reach suck. I originally posted my issue directly to the person who chose not to respond, instead you've taken it on and, I don't know, assumed that it is my issue with the greater theories of feminism?

firstly, i've driven over 1000 miles in the last two days to go out of town for a wedding. responding to you on this board is not my priority. get over yourself.

secondly, i have NO IDEA what issue you're trying to get me to address. what problem do you have with me? you claim that i was over-reaching...how so? i said that two of the three men in that cat-calling video responded as if other men were disrespecting THEM (by proxy of disrespecting something that belongs to them) rather than acknowledging that those men were simply disrespecting their girlfriends. what is controversial about that? it's a simple analysis (and one that many people agree with...you should have seen the wonderfully positive discussion this started when i posted the video on facebook with the same opinion), and i stand by it firmly. it has EVERYTHING to do with feminism, and nothing to do with over-reaching outside the confines of this discussion. so, yeah...sorry that my observations ruffled your feathers?

thirdly, @Mantra (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=925) @playwithfire (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=15) @allegro (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=76) sarah K (whom it won't let me tag...that's annoying as hell) & @Khrz (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=2023) you are all wonderful humans.

[Madmya]

firstly, i've driven over 1000 miles in the last two days to go out of town for a wedding. responding to you on this board is not my priority. get over yourself.

secondly, i have NO IDEA what issue you're trying to get me to address. what problem do you have with me? you claim that i was over-reaching...how so? i said that two of the three men in that cat-calling video responded as if other men were disrespecting THEM (by proxy of disrespecting something that belongs to them) rather than acknowledging that those men were simply disrespecting their girlfriends. what is controversial about that? it's a simple analysis (and one that many people agree with...you should have seen the wonderfully positive discussion this started when i posted the video on facebook with the same opinion), and i stand by it firmly. it has EVERYTHING to do with feminism, and nothing to do with over-reaching outside the confines of this discussion. so, yeah...sorry that my observations ruffled your feathers?

thirdly, @Mantra (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=925) @playwithfire (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=15) @allegro (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=76) sarah K (whom it won't let me tag...that's annoying as hell) & @Khrz (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=2023) you are all wonderful humans.

My original response was purely a reaction (I think it reads that way, too) and I think that amount of time this has dragged on and me having to constantly re-state my position has given its importance an artificial weighting, and seemed like I was after your blood which wasn't the case. Nor at any point have I demanded a response from you, however you have to understand that not responding to a discussion other than facepalming acknowledges that you've read the discussion and gives the impression you're intentionally not replying. I thought it was pretty weak.

I simply disagree with your assessment. I see men being filmed in an uncomfortable situation and seeing their basal instincts come to the fore to want to protect. That's not a crime.

[Dra508]

http://www.upworthy.com/a-short-comic-strip-explains-how-our-double-standard-about-feelings-hurts-men-too


There are some corners of the Internet that unfortunately conflate the idea of feminism with the oppression of men, but that couldn't be further from the truth.

[playwithfire]

Bust Magazine has been asking celebrities if they're feminists for 22 years. Here are their answers. (http://bust.com/are-you-a-feminist-celebrity-answers-from-bust-magazine-s-22-year-archive-may-surprise-you.html) This is just awesome.

[playwithfire]

Also saw this today:

"Feminism didn’t teach me to hate men, but it did teach me to stop prioritising them over women.

And it turns out a lot of men think that’s the same thing as hatred."

YEPPPPPP

[DigitalChaos]

http://i.imgur.com/kGpTbDh.gif http://i.imgur.com/kGpTbDh.gif http://i.imgur.com/kGpTbDh.gif http://i.imgur.com/kGpTbDh.gif This been the recurring theme in this thread.


I will absolutely be making this a new ETS smilie, fyi.
just gotta find a few more.

[elevenism]

But then again, it wouldn't be an allegro post without making a gross assumption.
That ain't cool. Why in the fuck would you say something like that?

[Timinator]

Oh, yeah, that's me. Miss Gross Assumptions.
I think your assumptions are rather adorable.

[telee.kom]

Bust Magazine has been asking celebrities if they're feminists for 22 years. Here are their answers. (http://bust.com/are-you-a-feminist-celebrity-answers-from-bust-magazine-s-22-year-archive-may-surprise-you.html) This is just awesome.

Gotta love Bjork. Anyway, this reminded me of the time when Kaley Cuoco said she doesn't consider herself a feminist and actually like to just go home and cook dinner for her husband (or something along the lines) and was harassed on twitter until she apologized(!) for not being a feminist. That's not that awesome.

[Sarah K]

I think that was more about her not understanding what feminism actually was, as evidenced by that statement. But not entirely sure. I only remember hearing about it briefly.

[telee.kom]

Lot of people say "you don't understand what feminism is" but not even feminists can really tell you what feminism is, because feminism means different things for different people. And even if she doesn't understand, nobody should be forced to apologize for not being feminist (vegetarian, environmentalist, republican, democrat, whatever).

[allegro]

Lot of people say "you don't understand what feminism is" but not even feminists can really tell you what feminism is, because feminism means different things for different people. And even if she doesn't understand, nobody should be forced to apologize for not being feminist (vegetarian, environmentalist, republican, democrat, whatever).

There is one basic definition of feminist: A feminist advocates or supports the rights and equality of women.

Any stuff or complications beyond that is just complications, including whether or not Kaley can go cook her husband dinner and still be a feminist (she absolutely can).

[telee.kom]

Those "complications" are the reason why people may not feel like consider themselves feminists though. I support this concept (of equality) but I don't want to call myself a feminist.

[Sarah K]

Saying you support equality while complaining about it on a pretty consistent basis kinda nulls that claim, though.

She has(had?) a misunderstanding of what feminism is if she believes(ed) that being a feminist means that she can't cook her husband dinner.

[telee.kom]

I've never ever complained about equality, if you find me one comment where would I be in favor of inequality, I will apologize and buy a t-shirt with "I <3 feminism" printed on it. You can criticize certain aspects of feminism and still have the concept of equality as one of your core values. I know I have, but that doesn't mean I will blindly follow everything that is considered "feminist" without any critical thinking.

[allegro]

Yes, some people have perhaps different definitions of feminism that include ideas that reach far beyond the basic principles. And, it's a label and lots of people feel very uncomfortable about labels, no matter what they are; and that's okay, too. I felt uncomfortable with being called a feminist during the 80s when a whole lot of feminists were clinging to a lot of man-hating ideas that didn't fall under the basic principals of feminism. In the 60s, lots of women were afraid to call themselves feminists because of the media-created image of bra-burning "liberated" women who would allegedly (eventually) refuse to make dinner and would abandon their husbands and children. It made feminists go into the shadows; the fear of labeling oneself as a feminist was created by the patriarchy-controlled media, to suppress the movement.

See this Time Magazine article (http://time.com/2853184/feminism-has-a-bra-burning-myth-problem/). See also this (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94240375).

I eventually swung back around to feeling comfortable calling myself a feminist, since I feel that as a female it's silly to NOT be one. But, again, it's a label and a lot of people just don't like any "isms" no matter what they are, just like they don't like any religion. And that's okay.

But, saying I am a feminist doesn't mean I subscribe to every idea that every feminist has about feminism. Just like saying that somebody who is religious does not believe in all ideals of every religion. Feminists also have the right to disagree; that's one of the interesting things about being a feminist: We don't have to agree about everything. We are human beings, foremost; we have the right to be human beings with intelligent opinions and we should respect each other. Critical thinking should never be discouraged, so long as it's within the context of equal rights for women. Ultimately, we are all there for one main cause: equality for women. I respect the other feminists' passionate take on the cause, and we can respectfully disagree about certain issues so long as we ultimately agree on that basic premise.

For example, there is something of a schism between (so-called) second-wave and third-wave feminists when it comes to porn or the sex trade. Camille Paglia (whom I can't stand, but whom some consider third-wave) was saying all kinds of shitty things about (second-wave) Gloria Steinem, who does not buy into Paglia's "strippers are in a position of power over men (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_Personae)" stance (of course, as is well-known, Steinem infiltrated Playboy (http://dlib.nyu.edu/undercover/bunnys-tale-gloria-steinem-show-magazine)).

[allegro]

Speaking of Playboy, I just got Holly Madison's book on Kindle (http://www.buzzfeed.com/kateaurthur/holly-madison-burns-it-down#.kbODR8Yvb). Can't wait to read it!

[Dra508]

Speaking of Playboy, I just got Holly Madison's book on Kindle (http://www.buzzfeed.com/kateaurthur/holly-madison-burns-it-down#.kbODR8Yvb). Can't wait to read it!

I think if I read that book, I'd have to take a shower after every shower.

[allegro]

I think if I read that book, I'd have to take a shower after every shower.

I don't think he makes 'em do it; I think he just makes 'em stay in the house all the time ... AND NEVER LEAVE, EVERRRRRRRRR. It's like Hugh Hefner's Hotel California.

(But they have unlimited room service. Which you can never use if you want to stay 100 pounds. So it's, like, torture.)

[tony.parente]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNH0bmYT7os
Goddamn patriarchal air conditioners!

[allegro]

Goddamn patriarchal air conditioners!
Dude, that's so fucking 5 pages and July 27th ago (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/threads/491-The-feminism-equality-thread?p=264727#post264727), duh.

[tony.parente]

Dude, that's so fucking 5 pages and July 27th ago (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/threads/491-The-feminism-equality-thread?p=264727#post264727), duh.
Fuck.
My bad, I don't monitor this thread very often because i'm not a lady.

[orestes]

Oh for fuck's sake.

[playwithfire]

This is how I gauge whether it's cool for someone to not call themselves a feminist.
http://everydayfeminism.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/what_they_mean-final-1.png

[telee.kom]

Or maybe they just mean they're not a feminist

[Sallos]

Or maybe they just mean they're not a feminist

i'll let the women whisperes figure that one out.

[Sarah K]

That's a very good plan.

[playwithfire]

"Here's how I gauge whether it's cool if someone doesn't identify as a feminist."

"Maybe they just aren't a feminist."

BUT ARE THEY COOL????

[tony.parente]

This is how I gauge whether it's cool for someone to not call themselves a feminist.
Well it depends on your definition of cool.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNErQFmOwq0

[playwithfire]

Yeah, that's not cool.

[playwithfire]

Wish I could like my own posts.

BUT WAIT, I do have a response after choosing to be a dick:

Feminism works on two levels for me.

1.) The advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.

2.) Patriarchy is a world out of balance. Patriarchy. Hurts. Everyone. Please see this post if you'd like an explanation of patriarchy (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/threads/491-The-feminism-equality-thread?p=264379#post264379) before dismissing it as some sort of Dudes Only Illuminati because it's easier to make fun of a word that hints at dissing dudes.

I am a third wave feminist.

The markers of third wave feminism (something she was treating like it was shitty) are a focus on the harm expected gender roles cause (something that affects everyone), increased intersectionality, and increased sex positivity.

Now equality. I think equality works like this:

http://thrivalroom.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Equality-Equity.jpg

To her, that seems like it's entitlement.

There are some words that throw up red flags for me about someone when they complain. Privilege is one of them. It's a simple concept and people bristle like it's a word that tells them their struggles don't matter.

But hey, let's get back to that equality thing.

"Yet feminists continue to place this blanket judgement over all men that they are all privileged, and all women, that they are all oppressed."

NICE BLANKET STATEMENT YOU GOT THERE.

I really can't/won't with the stuff she's saying about rape because it's a HUGE can of worms and there is other stuff I can effectively address, but I disagree and strongly.

Court custody? Because gender roles and patriarchy and all those words that we like to throw around to diminish feminism like they aren't actual things with actual meanings ELEVATE WOMEN AS THE KEY CAREGIVER. That's why women are favored. That's not equality. Feminism doesn't support this.

Many companies don't give a reasonable amount of paternal leave. THIS ALSO OPPRESSES WOMEN FOR THE SAME REASON. Patriarchy hurts everyone.

I don't personally know of a single feminist who doesn't support equal gender distribution in combat. Remember that whole patriarchy and gender roles thing? It's like it makes sense for the fact that men have been historically considered fighters and women to stay out of battle to have something to do with that. Maybe. Sigh. I guess. It's like women can make more babies and aren't as strong and men are disposable. OH WAIT, it's like that disposable male thing is a part of a partriarchal and damagingly hetero-normative society. OH WOW.

She seems to hit this barrier where she can't understand that a marginalized group (any group before someone starts in with WOMEN AREN'T MARGINALIZED) advocating for their own interests and equal treatment *is* supporting equality.

But it's cool, because the next time I see a house on fire, I'm gonna run up and go BUT SOME PEOPLE ALSO DROWN. I COULD CALL MYSELF A SUPPORTER OF HOUSES NOT BURNING DOWN IF YOU ACKNOWLEDGED HOW MANY PEOPLE DROWN.

And you know what else pisses me off? I care very much about men who've survived trauma having access to resources. I'm all fucking for it! I don't know a single feminist personally that isn't. In fact, I view the way society dismisses their experiences as an issue my feminism addresses.

It would be super great if MRA's couldn't tear down what feminists strive for to make room for these issues. We can care about both. But what she's voicing reflects a problematic mentality.

And lastly, WHY, FUCKING WHY, do we have to care so fucking much about what men think about us. Why is it so important that we also advocate for men while advocating for ourselves in order for our self-advocacy to be legitimate?

I am so fucking over it.

I thought I posted this quote here the other day, but I don't see it. Here it is again:

"Feminism didn’t teach me to hate men, but it did teach me to stop prioritizing them over women. And it turns out a lot of men think that’s the same thing as hatred."

[telee.kom]

Lauren Southern is a girl, that held up a sign with "There is no patriarchy in America" on a slut walk(? I think it is called) and it basically ended with pretty disgusting threats against her from the feminist crowd up here; people said that she's a pedophile and stuff like that. Which is pretty ironic considering the fact, that this event should be about empowering woman not to be ashamed of themselves, but only if you are having the same opinion as them. Apparently having a different view means you deserve to be shamed.

I can respect feminist worldview, I might not agree with it, but you certainly have right to think that there is a patriarchy in 1st world countries. What I can't respect is the sense of entitlement that comes with it in lot of cases. Lot of people seems to be so sure about their views that their consider everybody else who won't share it, to be some kind of lesser human worth, I guess, no respect. Someone who you can harass because "your opinion is the one that matters and the other ones not".

I like to think that my opinions are somewhere in the middle. I'm not saying that this society is the epitome of equality and this is how it should be. It would be arrogant to think that after thousand of years of development I just happen to live in day and age that is just right. But on the other hand we don't live in patriarchy either. Patriarchy would suggest that there is some systematic problem where women are think of as less human beings than men. I'm sorry if you think that, but we already passed this. I'm not saying that there aren't men who still think of women this way, but it's definitely not a majority, it's not a systematic thing. Women have the same rights and same opportunities as men for the most part. If you think that there is a gender discrepancy in STEM fields for example, stop talking about it and just go work in STEM fields. We are past the time of "women need to stay in the kitchen and raise kids". If you get over the "oh look at me I am so oppressed because I'm a woman" mindset, maybe you would see that you actually can do whatever the hell you want. I know plenty successful women, lot more successful than me, and none of them needed the positive discrimination (the added box under their feet) to get where they are. Most of them would find the notion of 'I need help because I'm a women' offensive.

[Khrz]

What I can't respect is the sense of entitlement that comes with it in lot of cases. Lot of people seems to be so sure about their views that their consider everybody else who won't share it, to be some kind of lesser human worth, I guess, no respect. Someone who you can harass because "your opinion is the one that matters and the other ones not".

I'm not even going to comment on the whole patriarchy denial.

Instead I'll say that the kind of behavior you described here is the mark of opinionated people, everywhere, in every field and ideology.
It doesn't come with feminism any more than in any other movement or group. I don't even know why you'd imagine feminism should be immune to that kind of behavior.
Are you saying you can't respect feminism because of it ? Because in this case you can't respect any group, period.

One way or the other, your point has nothing to do with feminism and isn't a valid dismissal of it.

[telee.kom]

It is a part of a reason why I wouldn't associate myself with this movement. While it is true that every movement have extremists, I hear a lot of people apologizing this kind of behavior or downplay it by saying that you shouldn't be focusing on this/this is not what feminism is about. But why do I keep hearing about these "excesses" if it's such a niche thing.

The other reason is that I'm not buying that much into feminist/gender theories so I would probably be a very lousy feminist.

[Khrz]

The other reason is that I'm not buying that much into feminist/gender theories so I would probably be a very lousy feminist.

Well then I don't even know why you discuss this in the first place, it sounds like you're not even open to change your views on the matter, which is one the core principles of discussion.

You have extremists everywhere, and everywhere they are the most vocals. They are also the only ones you'll notice if you don't really pay interest to the actual conversation of the whole movement. I don't frequent christian forums or groups of discussion, so of course all I hear is the crazy fundamentalists yelling that everyone will burn in hell. It's all the truer when the movement is an urgent one, by that I mean a movement whose members feel the need for an instant change.

Everyone's "side" has its own vocal fundamentalists, and everyone's "side" has reasonable people calmly explaining that the nutjobs don't represent them.
The question isn't even who you should believe, a movement is an array of views vaguely agreeing on a topic, and no part of that array is any more objectively right than the others. It's who you agree with.
You don't agree with the most radical feminists, fine. Don't pigeonhole a whole movement in one specific attitude, no matter how extreme or reasonable that fringe is. When it comes to personal beliefs and opinions, only you decide what a movement represents. Only you decide what feminism is. In your case, whether feminism is about shaming your opponent is up to you. It's not anyone's job to explain to you how it's not about that. Either you see it, or you don't.

[playwithfire]

So, I'm not (especially as a privileged as hell white person hailing from Alabama) equivocating the experience of being a woman to being black. They're different.

That said, check out this post when I switch out "women" for "black people" and "patriarchy" for "racism":


I like to think that my opinions are somewhere in the middle. I'm not saying that this society is the epitome of equality and this is how it should be. It would be arrogant to think that after thousand of years of development I just happen to live in day and age that is just right. But on the other hand we don't live in a racist society either. Racism would suggest that there is some systematic problem where black people are think of as less human beings than white people. I'm sorry if you think that, but we already passed this. I'm not saying that there aren't white people who still think of black people this way, but it's definitely not a majority, it's not a systematic thing. Black people have the same rights and same opportunities as white people for the most part. If you think that there is a race discrepancy in STEM fields for example, stop talking about it and just go work in STEM fields. We are past the time of "black people need to stay in the kitchen and raise kids". If you get over the "oh look at me I am so oppressed because I'm black" mindset, maybe you would see that you actually can do whatever the hell you want. I know plenty successful black people, lot more successful than me, and none of them needed the positive discrimination (the added box under their feet) to get where they are. Most of them would find the notion of 'I need help because I'm black' offensive.

[telee.kom]

I'm not sure what are you trying to prove with this, it still makes sense to me.

[playwithfire]

Do you still agree with it? Because to me, put in that light, it's really problematic.

But then, race in the US is a whole other tragic mess.

Anyway, I really don't get how you can look at the statistics in the US (like that post I made where I did a short timeline of our laws and shit) and think that patriarchy isn't a thing. I feel like there's this backlash to the word.

And, just like feminism, that backlash to me illustrates how important the word is.

I think you may just fundamentally disagree with a lot of people here, I'm not sure how discussing it really benefits either of us.

[Khrz]

Yeah I'm a bit at loss for words here I'm afraid. It seems that you deny concepts and facts that, for some, are actually extremely well documented. I don't know what to say from this point on. There's just no bridge big enough to cover that gap, as far as I'm concerned.

[telee.kom]

What facts? Feminist theories aren't facts, they are theories. Gender theory is not a dogma, or even something that would be broadly accepted in psychological circles. For example- I don't think that gender is completely social construct, I believe that there are differences between men and women given by evolution, not by society. Sure, gender stereotypes are definitely part of it, but it's not the only thing that matters in this regard. Subsequently, when I'm thinking of gender differences in certain fields, I think that part is that "as many women just don't want to do it" more than "it's fault of patriarchal society". Take this as an example of what I mean when I say I don't agree with feminist theories. I think they have some truth to them, but it's just a part of a larger picture.

[Khrz]

What facts?

Off the top of my head, the fact that headlining your resume with a typically white male name will open up more doors to the rest of the process than if your name is Claire or Aziz. I apologize, I have other things to do right now and I'm answering this real quick, but such instances have been investigated and documented multiple times. That's just one example, which has absolutely nothing to do with your own willingness to participate in a process, and everything to do with how welcome your race or gender is inside that process.

But then again, examples have been cited, quoted and linked all over this thread, I don't know why you would consistently ignore that at this point of the discussion, and why you would even try to participate in the discussion if you're going to ignore them.

I'm not being confrontational here, I'm just genuinely not getting it. You want your opinion to be acknowledge, yet contrary to some participants in this thread you have given no reason for anyone to care about it, and haven't backed it up with any facts. At this point this has turned into pure subjectivity and comparison of core values, which we can agree is simply pointless if you don't bring objective facts to discuss.

I'm not going in the transgender thread to post ; I have nothing of value to contribute there. Not matter what my opinion is, my presence would be pointless and unwarranted. I have no experience to share, even second hand, and nothing that would reasonably encourage or challenge the discussion there. I somewhat feel the same about you in this very thread : I still have yet to see you bring something to the table that isn't personal (thus unarguable) beliefs.

As I said, I'm not trying to confront you here, I just don't get what you're trying to achieve or to gain. You don't seem open to the arguments and documents as you don't acknowledge them, and you don't bring anything beyond personal beliefs that would reasonably challenge them. Isn't that fundamentally pointless ?

[Sarah K]

Oooooh... http://www.startribune.com/target-to-remove-gender-based-labeling-in-toy-aisles/321063071/

Target is removing gender based labeling in the toy aisles. For now, it will remain on the website, though.

[telee.kom]

Off the top of my head, the fact that headlining your resume with a typically white male name will open up more doors to the rest of the process than if your name is Claire or Aziz. I apologize, I have other things to do right now and I'm answering this real quick, but such instances have been investigated and documented multiple times. That's just one example, which has absolutely nothing to do with your own willingness to participate in a process, and everything to do with how welcome your race or gender is inside that process.

But then again, examples have been cited, quoted and linked all over this thread, I don't know why you would consistently ignore that at this point of the discussion, and why you would even try to participate in the discussion if you're going to ignore them.

I'm not being confrontational here, I'm just genuinely not getting it. You want your opinion to be acknowledge, yet contrary to some participants in this thread you have given no reason for anyone to care about it, and haven't backed it up with any facts. At this point this has turned into pure subjectivity and comparison of core values, which we can agree is simply pointless if you don't bring objective facts to discuss.

I'm not going in the transgender thread to post ; I have nothing of value to contribute there. Not matter what my opinion is, my presence would be pointless and unwarranted. I have no experience to share, even second hand, and nothing that would reasonably encourage or challenge the discussion there. I somewhat feel the same about you in this very thread : I still have yet to see you bring something to the table that isn't personal (thus unarguable) beliefs.

As I said, I'm not trying to confront you here, I just don't get what you're trying to achieve or to gain. You don't seem open to the arguments and documents as you don't acknowledge them, and you don't bring anything beyond personal beliefs that would reasonably challenge them. Isn't that fundamentally pointless ?

I'm not ignoring anything, I read it all (in this thread). Sometimes I just don't think I should state the same argument again, we already discussed things like wage in regards of men and women, I already stated my opinion, I'm not gonna repeat myself ten times. You believe in different statistic I guess, I've always said my opinion. I've never said that this is a fact, but it is something I believe in. That's why I'm in this thread to begin with. I'm not trolling and I am willing and eager to change my opinion, I'm able to do that, believe me, but should this be just some circle jerk of opinions where people just say the same thing over and over again? Why?

I think I brought a lot of facts and lot of concrete examples to this thread, I mean, last ten pages of this thread are about articles I cited here.

[orestes]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExEHuNrC8yU

[Volband]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rossalynwarren/a-woman-ran-a-marathon-free-bleeding-to-take-a-stand-against?bffbuk&utm_term=4ldqphz#4ldqphz

Do women want to "free bleed" or what is she on about? Also, isn't it unhygienic? Sounds like a great way to collect and then possibly spread infections.

Good for her for feeling all right doing the marathon like this, and I think everyone can back her up that women shouldn't be shamed for having "accidents", - I suppose it happens with every girl at least once in their lifetime -, but it sounds like she wants to push it even further. Which kinda sums up almost every movement for me.

[telee.kom]

There is a Deadpool joke in there somewhere

[playwithfire]

Oh MAN. I remember when I had an IUD my flow was INSANE. I'd take a shower and between walking from the bathroom to my room blood would just start dripping down my legs. I'd bleed through tampons and pads on the regular. Once I was lying on my vinyl couch all day only to realize I'd covered the back of my pants and cushion in blood.

You know what's hilarious, also? Period shits. Those are the greatest.

[Sarah K]

I think the goal of raising awareness that many women throughout the world don't have access to the products that they need during their period is awesome.

However, a good chunk of people are getting held up on the "Ew, gross". But this highlights another issue on how absurd that reaction is to something a body does naturally.

[playwithfire]

Fun fact! It looks like blood but it's not blood! It's actually uterine lining! Which is why there are chunks sometimes.

[Khrz]

But this highlights another issue on how absurd that reaction is to something a body does naturally.

It is ! On the other hand, for a guy at least, the sight of "blood" in such an intimate spot remains unsettling. I'm not uncomfortable with it personally, far from it, but it's still somewhat unnerving to see blood-stained underwear, stagnant blood pooling at the bottom of the toilet, or other subtle signs like that. A guy's reptilian brain will just go "Alarm ! Wound/trauma !!!"

But well, that's yet just another sign that this discussion needs to happen more often, instead of trying to sweep the pads under the rug, if I may speak this way.

[Sarah K]

Period sex 4 lyfe

[playwithfire]

Period sex 4 lyfe

The only thing I miss about having a period (I skip my placebos on hormonal bc) is the period sex.

[playwithfire]

Oh, this is GREAT. (http://nymag.com/thecut/2015/08/the-big-secret-of-abortion.html?mid=twitter_cut)

"The act of controlling or preventing pregnancy for a heterosexually active woman is filled with corporeal maneuvering. It can entail the daily, timed consumption of pills; implantation of a subdermal device; the obsessive monitoring of temperature and vaginal secretions; fiddling in unseen recesses with caps and diaphragms. Even the in-vogue set-it-and-forget-it IUD is not always as easy as it seems. Getting mine involved a snapped wire, retrieval, reinsertion, and the manual dilation of my cervix, which was the most exquisitely terrible pain of my life — and I am the veteran of three uterine surgeries, two of which resulted in babies and one in the removal of 20 fibroid tumors from my uterine wall.

Women do not need real talk about bodies; our adult days brim with the effluvia, the discomforts, the weirdness and emotional intensity and magnitude of our medical choices. Then there is pregnancy itself, wanted or not, and its attendant risks. Women pass early pregnancies into toilet bowls and sadly collect the remains of later ones in Tupperware containers to bring to their doctors. Most of us know of someone who has suffered the excruciating pain of stillbirth. One friend, bleeding 13 weeks into a deeply desired pregnancy, was told by her doctor not to worry unless she passed a clot bigger than her fist."

[telee.kom]

That's it, I'm starting shit stain awareness next month. Who will join me?

[Sarah K]

Not comparable at all!

[Khrz]

That's it, I'm starting shit stain awareness next month. Who will join me?

Feel free to do so ! The difference is you'll look like a complete moron instead of addressing an issue with the perception of a natural reproductive cycle involving half the world population, most of which not having the luxury to deal with it under safe conditions !

But go on, run in the streets with shit running down your legs and tell the press you equate it with women's periods. I'm excited to see how it goes ! Hell, do a kickstarter, I'll pay to see that happen.

[Sallos]

That's it, I'm starting shit stain awareness next month. Who will join me?

sorry, next month is already semen stain awareness month. For to long have we been mocked for our stained pants and underwear and accused of being wet bedders and when we correct people that its not piss but semen we get labelled creepers. enough is enough.

[Volband]

I think the goal of raising awareness that many women throughout the world don't have access to the products that they need during their period is awesome.

However, a good chunk of people are getting held up on the "Ew, gross". But this highlights another issue on how absurd that reaction is to something a body does naturally.
I mean... is it shallow to call those pictures gross? I'm not sure why should anyone be called out for finding the image of someone with a huge spot of dry blood and other liquids gross. We shit everyday, yet I shouldn't feel ashamed for finding anyone shitting in front of me, or showing pictures about it disgusting. I get that the idea here is that it was supposed to happen accidentally, but it really did not. She knew in advance that it will hit during the marathon, and she had the choice whether to prepare for it (or at least try to), or do not. I think what people find gross (did not read any comments about this on other sites, so just assuming here) is her decision, not the fact that women bleed.

What pushes it for me into the grey, or even into the green zone is that she's like an athlete here, so we have to understand that she probably trained fucking hard for it, it's an insanely important event for her, so I don't think anyone should call her out for not giving a fuck. I don't think many people at home in their couches could even fathom what could it mean for someone and how much effort and sacrifice they put into it.

However, if it was just someone who wanted attention, so walked around the city in blood stains, I would find it pretentious, because the whole point is to accept and understand this, and not promote a new trend of women dripping blood over the whole city deliberately, in the name of "IT'S MOTHER NATURE, BITCHES, DEAL WITH IT!" to provoke people.

[Volband]

Feel free to do so ! The difference is you'll look like a complete moron instead of addressing an issue with the perception of a natural reproductive cycle involving half the world population, most of which not having the luxury to deal with it under safe conditions !

But go on, run in the streets with shit running down your legs and tell the press you equate it with women's periods. I'm excited to see how it goes ! Hell, do a kickstarter, I'll pay to see that happen.
Funny thing is, if he was a she, it wouldn't be as big of a disaster as you'd think. The news just needs to reach certain groups, who are eager to bandwagon and support any woman in the name of equality, just for the sake of doing so.


sorry, next month is already semen stain awareness month. For to long have we been mocked for our stained pants and underwear and accused of being wet bedders and when we correct people that its not piss but semen we get labelled creepers. enough is enough.
Well, semen can leak throughout our nightly sleep, so what if we wake up with loads of semen all over us, but we need to hurry to work?! Though I'd personally rather be late and take a shower, than forcing myself to smell that all day long. Aaanyway, just random thoughts ~~~~

[Sarah K]

For the vast majority of people, our bodies give us control over when and where we shit. Women's bodies do not grant us control over when and how we are going to have our period. It can't be held in.

[Sallos]

Well, semen can leak throughout our nightly sleep, so what if we wake up with loads of semen all over us, but we need to hurry to work?! Though I'd personally rather be late and take a shower, than forcing myself to smell that all day long. Aaanyway, just random thoughts ~~~~

No, other people should endure the smell and sight of my bodly fuilds, don't you know there are people in some parts of the world who don't have acess to showers? We must raise awareness.

[Volband]

For the vast majority of people, our bodies give us control over when and where we shit. Women's bodies do not grant us control over when and how we are going to have our period. It can't be held in.
Yes, but you can prepare for it. You know when it's about to start, so you can get ready in advance. Accidents gonna happen, especially with the unexperienced ones, but it's not like girls and women are so tricked by their biology that they have to walk with totally visible blood stains at least once in every two weeks.

[Sarah K]

You're completely missing the message. So, okay.

[tony.parente]

Fun fact: "free bleeding" was literally made up by 4chan in the same manner the "cut 4 bieber" campaign was thrown together.

[playwithfire]

You know when it's about to start, so you can get ready in advance

lol NOPE

I have never had regular periods.

Guess what, part of feminism is being able to TALK ABOUT THIS STUFF. Stuff that MOST women experience EVERY. SINGLE. MONTH. for about 40 years. It is *normal* and acting like it's disgusting is fucking stupid. People get weird even hearing details about it. In the feminism thread. Really? REALLY?

[Volband]

No, other people should endure the smell and sight of my bodly fuilds, don't you know there are people in some parts of the world who don't have acess to showers? We must raise awareness.
Yeah, that point never made sense to me either. Not sure how poor people, or even more extreme, people from third world countries came up here. Yes, they can't shower, they can't eat, they are killed off by starvation or diseases, I get it. But an average female citizen shouldn't have excuses for not getting ready for those days in the month. Kiran's example is different due to the nature of this marathon, so I do not condemn her for pursuing this special day for her in a way which made her the most comfortable.

[Volband]

Guess what, part of feminism is being able to TALK ABOUT THIS STUFF. Stuff that MOST women experience EVERY. SINGLE. MONTH. for about 40 years. It is *normal* and acting like it's disgusting is fucking stupid. People get weird even hearing details about it. In the feminism thread. Really? REALLY?
I agreed with this sentiment from the beginning, so I'm typing out my agreement once again!

[orestes]

Oh MAN. I remember when I had an IUD my flow was INSANE. I'd take a shower and between walking from the bathroom to my room blood would just start dripping down my legs. I'd bleed through tampons and pads on the regular. Once I was lying on my vinyl couch all day only to realize I'd covered the back of my pants and cushion in blood.

You know what's hilarious, also? Period shits. Those are the greatest.

Period shits are the worst, especially on the first day. It's bad enough dealing with coffee shits first thing in the morning.


Period sex 4 lyfe

Shout out to pre-menstrual masturbation to alleviate cramps!

[playwithfire]

Menstruation is viewed very differently in many parts of the world. It's not just about not having access to hygiene products. It's being forced to sit in a hut for the entirety of your period. Not being able to attend school because your period is viewed as that unclean. Not being able to throw away hygienic products anywhere but at home because they're viewed as that unsanitary even in the trash. It goes on, and on.


I agreed with this sentiment from the beginning, so I'm typing out my agreement once again!

Cheers, but menstruation is not equivalent to semen or poop.

[Sarah K]

I've always wondered what the deal is with period shits.

brb, googling.

[Volband]

I already complained about this here, but since it's actually related to this discussion: the "askyahoo" equivalent of our country is filled with questions about periods. And yes, by girls. This is why I roll my eyes when people talk about "but what about the poor?!?!", when your average white teen doesn't even know shit about her body. Either her parents are not educated or shy to talk about it, while the school doesn't offer anything, aside from "if you have any question, come visit the nurse!". Yeah, wanna bet how many girls went there? It would be the walk of shame, and then they had not even started talking!

edit: oh, also, it should be taught to boys and girls at the same time too. It's nice that girls finally do not live their life for years thinking they actually shat themselves those days, but until you do not educate the other gender, it'll be just as shameful for the girls. But as I said, as of now, no one is really taught anything about it in school, so it's up to the parents, or maybe more experienced girlfriends, big sisters.

[playwithfire]

Yep, even in the US it's a huge issue. Women just like... don't know how their bodies work and it's really depressing. Or they're embarrassed/ashamed.

[Volband]

Menstruation is viewed very differently in many parts of the world. It's not just about not having access to hygiene products. It's being forced to sit in a hut for the entirety of your period. Not being able to attend school because your period is viewed as that unclean. Not being able to throw away hygienic products anywhere but at home because they're viewed as that unsanitary even in the trash. It goes on, and on.



Cheers, but menstruation is not equivalent to semen or poop.
But - and this is going to be a universal little rant now - why are we so keen to talk about those parts of the world, when even our 21st century high-tech societies have such glaring issues as this one. And it applies to many topics, really.

The semen comment was more of a showerthought, but the poop one was to make a point that it's pretty silly wanting to lynch someone for finding looking at period blood disgusting. If you give it a thought, the whole process of menstruating is disgusting in some way, even if it's been around for a while. Some people can't even handle the sight of blood to begin with - which just made me think: how cruel is that if a girl has that phobia?


Yep, even in the US it's a huge issue. Women just like... don't know how their bodies work and it's really depressing. Or they're embarrassed/ashamed.
Same goes for sex.

[telee.kom]

Feel free to do so ! The difference is you'll look like a complete moron instead of addressing an issue with the perception of a natural reproductive cycle involving half the world population, most of which not having the luxury to deal with it under safe conditions !

But go on, run in the streets with shit running down your legs and tell the press you equate it with women's periods. I'm excited to see how it goes ! Hell, do a kickstarter, I'll pay to see that happen.

I'm sure it will be swell. Anyway, how exactly does this help women in countries where they don't have access to hygienic needs? Do you think that Nigerian guys will see this article on their African internet and suddenly go like "yeah, I probably shouldn't make fun of Ukeme for her period stains because this marathon runner really open my eyes about this subject". Also I have to assume that in developing countries they have some other means how to deal with period. If you are proudly wearing period stains in a first world country and making a blog about it, it is no different when I would proudly wear shit or cum stains. We would both be filthy and disgusting individuals. And you can say how it's natural and whatever, but lot of things are natural, that doesn't mean we should do them/show them in public.

[Mantra]

last ten pages of this thread are about articles I cited here.

Hah, I like how this is you admitting that you're a troll in this thread.

[telee.kom]

Hah, I like how this is you admitting that you're a troll in this thread.

Oh come on, I think it was interesting discussion for the most part. And if I may be so bold, I think my topics were more interesting than period blood.

[allegro]

Yes, but you can prepare for it. You know when it's about to start, so you can get ready in advance. Accidents gonna happen, especially with the unexperienced ones, but it's not like girls and women are so tricked by their biology that they have to walk with totally visible blood stains at least once in every two weeks.

Actually, this isn't true. We often have no idea when / if it's going to show up. Especially during times of physical stress. We can count days, etc., and it can still show up with no symptoms whatsoever at the totally wrong time, in very very embarrassing ways at the worst possible times. I think she's kinda weird to use a marathon to "bring attention to that (http://www.people.com/article/kiran-ghandi-runs-marathon-without-tampon-bleeds-freely)." I dunno, we each choose a venue for our protests, but if I ran a marathon I sure as hell wouldn't want to run it bleeding the whole way because that actually feels kinda crummy and, personally, I find a tampon feels better. But, more power to her.


What pushes it for me into the grey, or even into the green zone is that she's like an athlete here, so we have to understand that she probably trained fucking hard for it, it's an insanely important event for her, so I don't think anyone should call her out for not giving a fuck. I don't think many people at home in their couches could even fathom what could it mean for someone and how much effort and sacrifice they put into it.
Exactly.

[playwithfire]

I mean, marathon runners go through all kinds of horrifying physical stuff. Having your period ranks on the milder end of that for me. At least it's not shitting your pants or bleeding nipples.


Oh come on, I think it was interesting discussion for the most part. And if I may be so bold, I think my topics were more interesting than period blood.

My uterine lining respectfully disagrees.

----------

TIME FOR A CLASSIC.

If Men Could Menstruate by Gloria Fucking Steinem (http://www.haverford.edu/psychology/ddavis/p109g/steinem.menstruate.html)

Still so good.

[Volband]

Oh come on, I think it was interesting discussion for the most part. And if I may be so bold, I think my topics were more interesting than period blood.
Interesting or not, it starts affecting a girls life - usually - towards the end of primary school, and that girl won't give a crap about what progress feminism had achieved, because almost none of those affects her at that stage of life, while rushing home in shame with brown panties, and eating herself up over it can actually damage her, and that girl would be very happy if she'd been in a world where it would not be considered taboo to talk about every aspect of her menstruation instead of just giving her a tampon box and telling her to read it.

Also, when I first read about menstruation stuff it was quite interesting. I never knew what went on "behind the scene", I literally thought there are like 4-5 days when they are bleeding, so they put it in (one each day), then out, and it's over + stomach aches. If I was a girl when I was in my teens and my only options to get to know every important details about menstruation were to:
- ask my mother, who is reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaally awkward when such topics come up; you can't spell cringe without my mother
- ask my dad, who may or may not have known about the fine details, but I absolutely can't see him being able to handle a father-daughter talk. He sucked ass at father-son talks to begin with, so go figure.
- ask the school nurse, so I can feel like the biggest fucking tool in the entire school, have paranoia which teachers she told it, and god forbid someone sees me there, and my classmates start inquiring about why I went there, probably thinking I'm pregnant or sth.

then I'd either hang myself or cry into my pillow all day long.

[allegro]

My mother said that when she had her first period, she had NO KNOWLEDGE about it in advance, NOBODY had told her. They didn't teach it in school, and her mother never told her. This was in the early-50s. So she thought she was bleeding to death. So she ran out to tell her mother.

And her mother laughed at her.

So my mother was careful to tell me about it in advance, so that I heard it from her and not from school, etc., so I was fortunate.


so they put it in (one each day), then out, and it's over

ONE FOR EACH DAY, yeah, that would be nice. Most of us end up with 2 to 4 each day. Or more. For the record, to avoid TSS (Toxic Shock Syndrome) (or a total mess) you're supposed to change a tampon every 4 to 6 hours.

When I was in Jr High, I had cramps and periods so bad I would pass out. Like, literally, pass out. Then I met other girls who were the same way.

Now I know women who use the Diva Cup because it's supposedly a lot healthier. I bought one for myself but I'm not having periods anymore because I'm controlling them chemically with progesterone.

[Volband]

My mother said that when she had her first period, she had NO KNOWLEDGE about it in advance, NOBODY had told her. They didn't teach it in school, and her mother never told her. This was in the early-50s. So she thought she was bleeding to death. So she ran out to tell her mother.

And her mother laughed at her.

So my mother was careful to tell me about it in advance, so that I heard it from her and not from school, etc., so I was fortunate.
Fucked up parents raise some of the best ones!





When I was in Jr High, I had cramps and periods so bad I would pass out. Like, literally, pass out. Then I met other girls who were the same way.

What the hell, that can't be normal, can it?

[Sarah K]

None of my parents ever mentioned anything about periods. I remember the school nurse holding a class once in I believe 5th grade, and that was the only information that I was ever given. And it's not like I started early or anything. I was 12, almost 13.

[telee.kom]

I don't think it is considered taboo to talk about menstruation, this is obviously something that should be primarily concern of parents and school. Sex ED is probably too late for this particular thing, but human biology is already taught at that age if I recall correctly. It's one think to be taught/told about it, it's entirely another to act like it's no big deal to have bloody panties and walk around in it in public. And don't get me wrong, I don't consider it to be something particularly disgusting, I just think it's silly to act like it's okay to have blood stains on your pants

[allegro]

What the hell, that can't be normal, can it?
Probably not "normal" but it's not that uncommon. It sucks, LOL. I was at a store clothes-shopping with my mom, and my mom said she looked over and I was under the clothes rack. And people were standing around, going "lady, do you know your daughter is passed out on the floor??" I was only about 14. These days, they tend to diagnose those symptoms as endometriosis (http://commonhealth.wbur.org/2012/03/teenagers-endometriosis-pain).

[tony.parente]

It shouldn't be taboo to talk about menstration. I don't understand why it's looked down upon to call it gross though. It is a natural body function, but so is pooping, and peeing, and farting, and burping. Shit is gross, blood is gross no matter where it comes from, your body shouldn't define who you are and neither should the fluids and where it comes from.

Am I off base here?

[Sallos]

It shouldn't be taboo to talk about menstration. I don't understand why it's looked down upon to call it gross though. It is a natural body function, but so is pooping, and peeing, and farting, and burping. Shit is gross, blood is gross no matter where it comes from, your body shouldn't define who you are and neither should the fluids and where it comes from.

Am I off base here?

It is gross.

This reminds of that joke Seinfeld made about hair. Hair is beautiful when its attached to your scalp but when its not it's repulsive.

[telee.kom]

If I would have to make my top 10 list of gross bodily fluids, menstruation blood would be somewhere in the middle. Above cum, but below shit I would say. It would probably be a tie with piss the more I think about it. The point is, you want none of this on your clothing in public.

[Mantra]

Oh come on, I think it was interesting discussion for the most part.

Oh yeah, SUPER interesting, hoo boy, what a fascinating read those ten pages were.

[playwithfire]

Yeah, I sure love a bunch of dudes coming into the feminism thread and disagreeing with us! Period blood: grosser than cum but equally as gross as urine! Air Conditioning: what will feminists get unchill about next! Catcalling: I'm a male, what about what I think? Jessica Valenti: Clearly the worst.

Patriarchy: Is it a thing though?

Thanks guys.

[telee.kom]

Why are you guys so afraid of a different opinion? It's not like I was rude to you or anything

[allegro]

Nobody is "afraid" of anything. But your "prove it to me" attitude in "our" thread is exhausting.

In the 4 years that this thread has existed, it's been here as maybe a safe place for us to gather to discuss real issues that affect us; a shelter of common ground; not a place to defend feminist issues.

I used to work a board where, when it got to this point, I'd lock the fucking thread up to "members only." End of story. Fun with censorship.

[playwithfire]

This thread doesn't exist for a different opinion. It's the feminism thread. It'd be like going into the car thread and starting a conversation about how people should consider sustainable transportation alternatives. You wanna talk about which gear shift is superior, or why Ferrari needs to reprioritize, okay. But to be like SO, CARS, MAYBE WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT BIKES is derailing and lame.

It would be cool to actually focus on the issues we care about without someone coming in here and going "BUT" and then sticking around when we all are clearly getting nowhere and don't agree with you.

I for one would support a thread reboot, just to remove the context of this thread having been started as a split-off debate.

[telee.kom]

Oh man, I feel kinda sad you don't want me here. Well, let the safe times roll

[orestes]

We'll carry on.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/1bb2370b93b5f87482c9584401b0c987/tumblr_mfzbj74PC41ra9vljo1_1280.gif