females, feminists and femininity.

Sure, if you ignore everything else I wrote and concentrate on that one sentence. Sure. Why would you want to do that, though?

Besides, overall, I think the statement is true. I'm not talking about you or any other individual on this board so no one should take it personally. If you feel that observation doesn't describe you, then GREAT! Glad to hear it. I just tend to think most men don't even question the way they respond to these things. At all. Either they don't question it or they fall back on tired rationalizations that excuse them from having to question it.

 

Well, I didn't think what you said was a distraction. I tried to comment on your observations and share with you what it looks like from over here. This conversation is no different than one about guns or religion or Sarah Palin. Just people sharing their thoughts. I can tell you with full candor that there's not a single thing you wrote that bothered me on an emotional level. I wasn't triggered, angered, irritated or annoyed. Just talking.

 

And just talking or speaking honestly is what I'm trying to do. I'm not perfect but I keep trying to work through my stuff and drop the baggage--hopefully, I'm not dropping it on anyone.
FWIW, I do think it is valuable for both men and women to participate in this discussion. The more POV, the better.

 

Or they do think and simply come to a different conclusion than you. The assumption that men with a different view than yours must be wrong, and especially the delegitimization of their thoughts and feelings through the "tired rationalizations", is actually a perfect example of the toxic femininity I mentioned earlier.

I mean let's look at this comparatively...
"no one should take it personally" - The initial delegitimization - "Calm down you're overreacting, you're so sensitive, don't take it personal, of course not YOU babe"
"Most men don't even question the way they respond to these things. at all." - the general attack - "Women are crazy, they're unreasonable"
"They fall back on tired rationalizations that excuse them..." - the specific attack and argument delegitimization - "it's hormones, she's just PMSing"

The pattern is exactly the same, so why is one acceptable and the other "gaslighting"?

 

I haven't said anything about right or wrong. I'm talking about reflection.

You take my words and characterize them as hostile. And I'm supposed to, what? Fight you?

You don't get to re-say what I said. You're coming to a different conclusion than me? What am I asking for? Thought? Oh wow, welcome to my world.

 

I would think it's generally fair to say that referring to most men as either not thinking or resorting to "tired rationalizations" is a rather direct judgment of rightness or wrongness.

That right there is exactly what I'm talking about. That schism in our worldviews. To you I'm characterizing your words as hostile and picking a fight. To me your post was an example of something that's considered a form of abuse when men do it, but right now I'm the one that's hostile because I pointed that out. That sequence of events shouldn't make sense to any of us, but in reality it seems perfectly normal to all of us. On the other hand if I were to say something in the pattern of "women are X, but not any of you of course" and a few female posters were put off things would probably turn out the other way around.

I didn't quote your post to paint you as some kind of bad guy or claim you're a man-hater, I'm just using a current example to point out what I see as a profound dysfunction with modern gender roles. Your most recent post is an even better example of what I was referring back to than the first one I quoted.

Right now what you're saying isn't what I have a problem with, it's a symptom of a toxic culture which robs women of agency. In it women do not act, they are acted upon. You didn't post something that put off some male posters, men put-themselves-off at your words on their own. There's probably a less clumsy way to say that but I couldn't think of anything using mild enough terms (offended was too strong a word).

Anyway the point is that is what I'm getting at here, not your post itself but the cultural framework in which it takes place and is assigned a normative value.

 

ANYTHING that someone says about any subject could be considered abuse if that's what you're looking for. I think your "comparisons" are inflammatory, inaccurate and manipulative. Yes, I think you were trying to pick a fight with me.

If I freaked out every time someone said "women are X" either here or anywhere else I would be in a constant state of rage. The only thing I requested was for, perhaps, people to question their own responses to things. There was no bad behavior implied or assumed. This thread IS ABOUT THINKING. The opposite of stasis and denial. I don't give you agency to describe either my words or my worldview. I have the ability to say exactly what I mean to say and I am not robbed of agency here. Why don't you try talking about the subject? You know, the actual stuff I've said, not your interpretation of it.

 

The thread subject as you yourself defined in the OP and title is feminism and femininity, including gender norms. I've been talking about exactly that, the dysfunctional and unhealthy gender norms and definition of femininity our culture is steeped in. Is this thread about thinking, the opposite of denial, or do you want to only think and talk about the nice parts of feminism and femininity, or the interpretations and views of it you agree with? I think my comparison was perfectly legitimate and furthermore I think your latest response, moving past flat denial and into openly attacking my post and me as inflammatory and manipulative, is evidence of exactly the kind of behavior you originally ascribed to most men. You refuse to even consider the possibility that you're saying something hostile or offensive, you refuse to even consider the possibility that most men aren't unquestioning or reliant on "tired rationalizations", you refuse to even consider the possibility that that previous generalization could be born of a biased worldview.

Mixed I'll say it again: I wasn't trying to pick a fight with you, but I do think you've been determined to pick one with me, and I think things like jumping to blame me for someone else's post entirely in another thread shows just how badly you want to find cause for one. You say you want people to question their own responses to things. Question yours in light of that behavior. How differently would you respond to someone you don't want a fight with that badly? Would you give fair consideration to the possibility that someone challenging a very deep set cultural norm can provoke a strong response? Would you give fair consideration to them at all, instead of automatically dismissing and attacking them?

 

You know, if you have something to say about your experiences with feminism and femininity then feel free to share them here. I have no intention of discussing myself or my motivations with you. You'll just have to find a way to deal with that.

 

I've been following this; but hadn't got around to responding.


What are your earliest memories of gender awareness?

Not sure really, probably when my sister was born.


What were the norms for gender in your family and your community?

Somewhat traditional, somewhat not.

How have your attitudes toward gender been influenced by your personal experiences -

with your parents and family?

My mom was a stay at home mom for all of my childhood (I'm the oldest), she did work outside of the home after I moved out. However, she was a scout leader, softball coach, and political rabble rouser for all of her life. Her and my dad used to bowl religiously. Dad used to win money betting on my mom. She was really the athlete in the family and my dad was fine with that. Dad was the better cook and my mom was fine with that, as well. I can cook, my sisters can change their own tires and oil.

with your friendships?

50% (or more) of my favorite people are female.

with your romantic relationships?

34 years ago, I found 1 woman that can tolerate me (for the most part), I'm not pushing my luck. I'm an active, outdoors kind of guy. A helpless "damsel in distress" is going to work for me.

How do you feel about feminism and how do you express it (if at all)? What is your relationship with femininity?

I've been married for 34 years, both of my offspring are female, half of my friends wear dresses, as do all of my doctors and 2 levels of managers. Hell, even my dog is a girl.

For the most part, I treat women like people. The XX chromosome combination is usually irrelevant to any decisions that I make. I'll tone down my vocabulary to PG13; but if you let the F bomb slip, I will too. I do the same for Mormon friends. I hold the door open for everyone. I'm 5'11" and 170# ... if you're 5'2 and 100, I'll lift the heavy shit. If you're 5'10", I'll ask which end you want.

I raised my daughters to be independent and competent. They had pink fishing poles and Mickey Mouse skis; but they did fish and ski (eldest still gives me grief about the skis). My daughters have backpacked in Montana and Alaska, drive a stick by choice. Both are married with children and both are pursuing carrers outside of the home. I'm not sure where they picked up their sense of feminism, Mom and grandma, I suspect. I just raised them to be decent human beings.

My sense of feminism is more about equality. I'm not for or against much of anything, I just want to see everyone treated fairly.

 

Are you talking in professional or social settings?

Professionally, no doubts about it.

Socially, why does some men's sole appreciation for women's sexuality need to become history? If a person, or a group of persons, considers another person/group only in sexual terms, why shouldn't it be acceptable for them to do so?

In the case of men and women in the West, it has become the common MO to be hugely offended when some men declare their views on proper women's behavior, whereas it is frequently accepted (even praised) for women to declare what a real man and his behavior entails as well as prescribing them to behave in a certain way by telling them to "man up".

I don't think such hypocrisy makes much sense. If a man considers a woman a slut, and a woman considers a man an asshole, why should either be banned or shamed?

Maybe I got your point wrong, though.

In the above context, what do you think of this article (A Cold War fought by Women) and its correlating study, talking about how apparently women are the biggest factor in the shaming of promiscuous behaviors of other women?

 

What person on the planet wants consideration of their person to stop at the point of sexuality? If I were to see you naked and then, in future interactions with you, always default to this conception I have of you sexually (along with all of the psychosexual detritus that comes along with that) that would not bother you? If after I had seen you naked I commented on how you pretty much give up the right to be dealt with on a non-naked basis...that would not bother you? That shit bothers me. Because it is oh, low-minded and stupid. Just by seeing reactions on this thread and how men want so badly to not be seen as 'that person' I am talking about, I know that's not true. Everyone wants to be seen as a complex, real person. I happen to believe that's one of the reasons we all come here...there is such an opportunity in a place like this to be everything you want to be. If we are all about evolution and being distinct from much of the conversation out there, I think this is sort of a perfect place to start at. Maybe we shouldn't be telling people to 'man up,' either. That's kind of the point. All I want is for people to talk about it without being so reactionary.

I haven't read the article, yet, but I will. And I will remind the thread that female prohibition of other females was one of the lines of thought that started this thread in the first place.
--- merged: Nov 20, 2013 at 6:43 PM ---
I read the article and I see the validity of that article played out in real life. I also see men who engage in the same sort of behavior when it comes to OVERT displays of female sexuality. Perhaps because imagining that girl in the tight dress as a sexual partner is one thing, but seeing a female offer herself up to other men is another. I would buy that theory, but I can't say it's true with any authority.

 

I know we've had our substantial differences, but I am not being reactionary (if your reference included me). Just want to have a normal discussion without feelings getting in the mix.

Regardless, I am not saying that it is acceptable to insist on interacting with another person on a sexual basis alone, especially if the other party is blatantly uncomfortable with it. I am saying that if a person only considers another person's sexuality of relevance to him-/herself and then chooses to base their interaction with the other party solely on sex/attraction, then I see no problem with that. Matters of courtesy and rudeness are a given.

Honestly, if you were to see me naked and decide to interact with me around the sexual concept of my person alone, it is entirely your prerogative to do so (at least in my mind). If I'm not bothered by it, or actually like it, our interactions would continue in that fashion. If I dislike you seeing me in sexual terms only, I would not seek your company, or be very selective about it. We do have the freedom to choose our reaction to a particular person's behavior and can stop our interactions with a person/group at any time.

Other than when I have a vested interest (such as in business), why would I care how simple or complex the concept of me is to another person? If a person only perceives me in terms of sexuality, humor, intellect or any other aspect of my being, why shouldn't they be free to do so? Your argument does assume that everyone needs/desires to impress others, and to insist on everyone else to appreciate their entire being and all its aspects.

This argument leaves rude/inconsiderate behavior by other parties out. Such a thing is never acceptable. However, it is entirely possible to be respectful and courteous, and interact with another person on a single specific aspect.

I completely agree.

 

So the answer is not in evolution or change, but in acquiescence then. Correct me if I am wrong.

I will never go down like that. Never. I do expect people to be better.

 

Neither of your options really apply. People will always evolve, whether they fit the desired evolution you wish to prescribe... or not.

What do you mean with "be better"? If they are completely respectful in their interactions with other people, why is that not good enough?

 

You can't be completely respectful of another person and see them as a sexual object. It's not possible. Come on, man.
--- merged: Nov 20, 2013 at 7:21 PM ---
You seem to be only concerned with the surface of things. But let me tell you this. The surface doesn't mean shit. And 3/4 of the time, people can read beneath your surface. You're not that good. Take it all in a few more years and you will see what I mean. Maybe you'll even be in my place by that time.

 

Absolutely disagree with your contention. I have personally witnessed this exact thing you are dismissing in Amsterdam, where a lady approached my (married) colleague at the bar and had a very friendly conversation with him. She was not ambiguous about why she approached him, and he wasn't either in that he had no interest to pursue anything sexual. They kept up some soft banter here and there without coming close to any lines, and had a good time until she asked him one last time whether he wanted to "go somewhere private" and went on in her search when he politely refused again. My colleague was unperturbed by her approach, and actually enjoyed her company for the short time that it was.

Maybe your view is too influenced by American culture? It is quite noticeable that American culture often doesn't thoroughly consider concepts/systems of other cultures at all before drawing universally applicable conclusions.

Or you've got me figured out and, as you say, in a couple of years I may come to realize the same things you did.