females, feminists and femininity.

Honestly, I don't really remember a time when I was aware of gender differences. Very much like racism, I grew up thinking everyone was the same, never noticed any difference between myself, the Asian kids, the Hispanic family that babysat me, etc. until someone pointed it out. And then I realized it was a "thing" that people did.

I grew up with three boys-- not family, but close enough. And we ran around and did what we felt like doing. There wasn't much thought into it.

I do remember getting gifts from a particular family friend sometime between 6 and 9-- a cloth doll. And it was funny, because I had Barbies (though I was much more into my Breyer horses) and didn't have any association with gender and my Barbies, but I was quite annoyed that I received this stuffed doll I had no use for. I was also terrified of dolls due to early exposure to Chuckie.

You know, some of my friends wanted to play with Barbies and the Breyer horse collection, some of them wanted to dress up and sing to my Disney records, and there was tons of make-believe with some version of playing house or raising horses, but I never thought about the female/male thing. People just liked what they liked.

I grew up in San Gabriel Valley, which is in the northeast corner of Los Angeles. And, like I said above, I never noticed any gender norms. I liked purple. I liked unicorns and horses and stuffed animals and dressing up like 80s pop stars. And I liked building things with wood (treehouse, yay!) and rough-housing with the boys I grew up with, and playing dodgeball. There was no pressure from either of my parents to be anything more than I wanted to be, gender-wise.

Community-wise? I didn't pay too much attention. I was more of an introvert and, at that time, my parents' social life was extremely limited. I remember holiday events with family friends (that eventually disappeared, for the most part, as they got married and had their own kids) and... yeah. We didn't do much in the community.

I remember a neighbor across the street offering to crimp my hair and seeing her 80s band posters. I think I thought at the time that when I was an adult I'd suddenly be female and care about things like hair and boys but that, until then, I got to be formless.

I could take all night with this one. I have massive, massive hang-ups about both sexes. Hang-ups that I don't even realize I have half of the time, until something causes one to surface and I'm all, "Holy fuckballs."

I don't care about traditional gender roles in general, I find. People get to do what they want. But when it comes to dating, I'm really strict on the male gender role. I don't like deviance from that in my partner. And I have these expectations of the 1940s-50s idealized manhood attached to the male gender role. Which are rarely lived up to, let me tell you.

And I do work in this world of idealized gender roles for myself and for the men in my life (sexually speaking). It's annoying because, man, do I want to let go of those. But I keep clinging. And it's probably from looking at my dad and wanting some of his characteristics in my partners. More traditional characteristics.

I feel like I'm failing to answer this in the right way because it's just so much.

I would never consider myself a feminist. Nor, I would hope, would anyone who actually knows me.


This is not because I don't believe in equality. I do believe in equality.

This is because I don't believe that I should be walking around with a belief of a particular social structure that I'm hoping to influence onto the world. My ideals are not right for everyone, so why should I try to enforce my ideals on everyone by ascribing them to a belief system and social movement? I'm quite aware that my approach to most everything is different than most, so why would I try to get other people to hop on board my -ism?

Do I fight for equality for myself? Rarely. I don't have to. I innately operate from a place of assumed equality, and because it is so innate, it rarely gets questioned. I assume equality in my life. Which is why I'm able to have the job I do and function well within it.

It's... being explored. As some of you have seen.

I'm trying to reconcile my image of femininity and my disgust for that image with reality. And with the reality I chose to make for myself. I'm trying to be okay with girls "being girls" and, myself, being a girl. I have issues with "feminine" actions and traits. I find a lot of them impractical and self-absorbed. Tedious. Foolish. Not efficient. Things I really, really look down on.

And I've decided to do these things. I've decided to enter into the realm of "high maintenance"-- not to stay, but to be it until I accept it. And it's an expensive place to be. And it's hard. It goes against who I've told myself I was for the bulk of my adult life.

I went out with someone last night and, yes, I'll usually dress up for that. But, seriously. Hair (blow dryer: $30, straightener: $15, dye job: $70, cut: $60, conditioner: $20, shampoo: $18, hair repair spray: $15), make-up (silicone base: $22, cover-up: $18, base cream: $15, shimmer cream: $18, random eye base: $22, blush: $20, powder: $22, eyeshadow boxed set: $30, eyebrow pencil: $18, lipstick: $18, mascara: $9), no glasses because of the LASIK ($2000) I did a week ago. A really fashionable dress ($100), thick waistbelt ($30), Guess over-the-knee-boots ($230, I think), DKNY full set of lingerie (bra: $50, merrywidow type slip thing: $60, thong: $10), necklace ($5), rings ($30), vegan leather purse ($150), Fossil wallet ($90), manicure ($15), pedicure ($25)...

Some of these items I got on sale. But I'm doing retail price. Which brings the total to approximately $3235 if you include the LASIK, or $1235 if you don't.

I went out looking like three-thousand, two-hundred, thirty-five bucks. Last night.

This is retarded.

For those of you who have met me, I'll swing back and forth between tossing an easy dress on to being all t-shirts and jeans.

And here I am, raping my bank account, being completely impractical, just so I can see what it's like to be what I would consider "feminine".

Among other things. Whatever. Time for bed.

 

I really like, love, swoon over your responses. Thank you, so much. But just keep in your mind that other people had feminism in mind and those are the folks that allowed you to be who you are today in all of your fabulous glory. It's an ongoing thing.

 

I'm a humanist, not a feminist.

If you base life choices on gender (beyond sex) then you are just another type of problem. If you vote for someone because they are a woman, if you see a group of scientists and your first thought is there should be a woman, if you complain about how another woman dresses too "slutty" or is "hurting women", then you are just an activist.

The problem I see with many self proclaimed "feminists" is they are really just pro-likeminded women. A woman comes along who they don't agree with and they would be called misogynistic in what they say about her, if they themselves were not women.

 

Those who call themselves a humanist or are aiming for equality while stating that they are not feminists, are kind of missing the point.

The whole point of feminism is to strive for equality. To strive for precisely what so-called humanists are claiming to strive for...

I find, and this may not be the case of those posting here, that many people who make these claims are in fact, just looking to keep the status quo and do not recognize any imbalance in how the society and culture treat women and men and are probably doing a disservice the the equality they claim to support.

 

Its been a long time since the goal was equality based on merit. Its not "women deserve equal chance" but "women deserve because they are women".

There will always be a imbalance in society until you figure out how to make women genetically like men and men genetically like women.

The obvious one is strength, when you lower strength standards for a job, you are not worried about equality, just numbers. This applies to other fields as well.

Everyone deserves a chance without gender getting in the way, but not everyone deserves to succeed just because they want to.

 

This is a valid goal, I can agree.

Sadly, I don't agree that gender doesn't get in the way. There is still a glass ceiling in many sectors of society that has nothing to do with abilities (physical or otherwise). There is, more to the point, not nearly as much progress in other parts of the world outside of the West, as you might think there is.

In the end, I hear a lot of the arguments you are making used to defend status quo. In other words, "there are women who aren't being nice about their positions, it makes me feel uncomfortable. Haven't we given enough? What more can we do? Really, we are men and are different." Etc. Ad Nauseum.

In the end, the fact that we are having this discussion is evidence that there is an issue. I am not convinced that it's because men are getting the short end of the stick.

 

Who said anything about making life choices on gender (what does that even mean?) or voting for someone because they are a woman? Do you realize that even the fact that you have to point out the fact that voting for a woman is something one might intentionally do is getting at the crux of the problem? What sort of strengths do men have that make them more suitable to hold governmental office?

If I disagree with someone, I disagree regardless of gender. If a woman is referring to how she chooses to live her own life and what makes her happy, I am happy for her. If she's saying that feminism was/is wrong and women should live their lives in ways that conflict with their own desires just because they are women? You bet your ass I will be "saying things about her."

I feel like your attitudes are kind of resentful and deliberately extreme. Which is actually pretty common around here so you have plenty of company.

 

Why does someone need to ascribe themselves to a particular movement, if they believe in merit-based employment and truly equal treatment of an individual? Feminism doesn't have a monopoly on this line of thought, and certainly wasn't the first school of thought to propagate it. East Germany didn't have any Feminist movement, yet over the course of its existence it became an extremely equal society for men and women. Which was then reverted a good amount by the male-dominated Western culture once the two Germanys merged. Should I call myself a Communist, as a result?

Also, I believe many men are put off by militant/Jezebel-brand feminism and the entire Fempire stuff, and as a result avoid the whole movement. I know you guys around here love that site, but it is arguable that your perceptions of gender issues become skewed by their publications. In Germany, there was a recent instance where Feminists in a large University induced a change of the title "Professor" to "Professorin" (feminine genus) for all professors, even though Professor is gender-neutral in meaning and application. Suffice to say, there was a huge outcry in the intellectual class and the movement itself took a big PR hit.

The continued existence of the glass ceiling in the West is a debatable issue. There is no question that the glass ceiling exists pretty much everywhere outside of the West, and that is something I have already mentioned in @Shadowex3 's thread as something that has to be actively addressed. Quotas (the popular sexual integration tool in the West) are not the way to do it, though.

So yes, I would gladly call myself Humanist or Egalitarian over Feminist/MRA any day of the week, while having full confidence in the fact that I'm fighting for real gender equality. Subscribing to a popular movement and becoming a groupie has no meaning.

His statement may be resentful, but it is hardly extreme.

Also, I perceive there to be many more Feminists on this board than anything else. Do you have plenty of company as well, then?

 

You know, your post doesn't really apply to anything that I said in mine. I'm not responding to your brand of 'debating.' I don't read publications. You know far more about this stuff than I do, obviously. Maybe you should stop reading (and responding to) publications and actually listen to what people like me have to say. You can't respond to street level feminism because you're constantly responding to extremity with your own extremity. I guess that's fun for you but it doesn't speak to feminism or the world in a useful way - certainly not in a way that I'm interested in discussing. My only question is: is it an incidental obfuscation or a deliberate one?

 

Never said one had to ascribe to anything. My point is simply that:

A) those truly fighting for egalitarianism share the same battle as feminists
B) many so called egalitarianists use their position to disguise their desire to maintain status quo.

I don't read Jezebel or any publications so I can't comment.

As for University students aiming to create new language to redefine things... This is what liberal arts students do and it isn't just done by wymyn's groups (see what I did there?). It's not really news and it's annoying to just about everyone who isn't stuck in academia. In their earnestness they give a bad name to all academia.

 

What on earth are you talking about, @mixedmedia ? Where did you get half the things you just wrote from? None of it made any sense.

1. My main response was to Charlatan's post, not yours. Obviously my points don't apply to anything you said.

2. Who said I know more about this than you? I've repeatedly stated in recent threads that I've just begun delving into the gender debate stuff and need to solidify my position on the main arguments by reading a lot more.

3. I love your branding of things as extremism. Do you even realize what you're saying? Extremism implies that I'm rock-solid in my view and discount all others as false. That is not the case. I'm more than happy to engage people of opposing views and to open-mindedly scrutinize arguments presented to me. If you give me compelling reasons for Feminism over other social movements, I'll brand myself a Feminist right this second. However, your branding-of-everything-but-yourself-as-extremist is extremist itself.

4. What the hell is "my" brand of debating? You mean, discussing things and giving my opinion? What is your brand then? Oh wait, it's also discussing things and giving your opinion. Seriously, where are you going with this?

5. Very nicely done on portraying my view on improving the world as useless. I don't idolize Feminism the way you do, so I must not know how the world works at all (sarcasm). I put it to you that I am much more pragmatic about inducing equality (especially in the the third world) than most on this entire forum. I do not appreciate you doing this to things I say when I extend the courtesy not to dismiss your views for irrelevant reasons.

Lastly, while you describe my opinion as obfuscation, you haven't given a single reason a person for equality must be Feminist. Don't expect a response to your questions, when you don't respond to others'.

Unless you have a response to my question why Feminism is a necessary component of being/fighting for equality, I'll wait to see whether Charlatan has anything to add.
--- merged: Dec 2, 2013 at 9:53 AM ---

On a) I agree, there are overlapping areas where Egalitarians and Feminists posit the exact same views and demands. However, I perceive the Feminist movement to lack in any action to address men's issues. Unless I am satisfied that they also speak to things I and other men experience, I would not be inclined to join them.

On b) I have also seen this, though I'm not sure if "many" is the right descriptor. If I decide to join the Egalitarians, I would be more than happy to denounce those sections within online discussions but also publicly. I have never agreed with movements letting their extremist elements be, simply to get a political advantage (bigger group = bigger, louder voice on the political stage).

Regarding the university case, it was the board of the university, and the female President, who initiated this change. Students did not write a letter or submit a petition. And yes, also agreed with your statement on their earnestness.

 

Yes, I realize what I am saying. Do you? But I did mistake you quoting my post instead of Charlatan's. Still meant what I said, though.

 

MM, ever since your PM I have been trying to engage you in a civilized, and friendly whenever possible, manner but I seriously have no response to this.

I will continue to do my best, though.

 

This is right on the money, and therefore its those who stress they are Egalitarians that I get suspicious of. You have to wonder why they are so keen on excluding themselves from feminism. Probably because, through the eyes of the patriarchy, things seem pretty equal already and they actually don't have to do anything in order to be proud egalitarians.

 

Thanks for the clarification, @Baraka_Guru . As I said, I'm new to this and sometimes the many distinctions become blurry to me.

What I did mean with my possible "joining of the Egalitarians": I intend to directly or indirectly become politically active in a very limited capacity in some countries, and depending on what I identify as, I would be able to label myself appropriately when it comes to certain discussions and meetings and gender issues are brought up. Subsequently (sussekwenlee?), I would also advocate for the movement I belong to.

In that respect, I see the movements as groups. While not correct in academic and colloquial terms, in the political arena I think it is.

Regarding feminism, I guess I am part of it overall. Though my gender views encompass a lot more than women's equality.

And since @snowy brought up that feminism has room for everyone, I would love for her to expand on and substantiate that statement.

 

Hear, hear.