feminism: the radical concept that women are people.

Post Reply New Topic

hint: this is satire
http://www.theonion.com/articles/deform ... nis,34732/

This has nothing to with the fact that feminism wouldn't be necessary if chivalry were not dead.
By the way are you part Native American, I am. Is that the thunder bird?

It is Raven stealing the sun. Completely different part of the country.

'Chivalry' isn't as nice or as helpful as men seem to think that it is; men and women hold the door for me all the time (and I hold the door for other people), and it's never creepy unless they do it in a 'chivalrous' manner (i.e., blatantly with the motivation that 'I am a man and you are a woman, and that fact is so much more important than any other aspect of this situation, including the logistics of our relative positions with respect to the door, that I must hold this door for you'). Chivalry is based on the idea that women are somehow 'other,' and usually a type of other that is less capable of anything and everything, be it mental, physical, technical, or whatever.

I agree the lose of chivalry is terrible, but not with regards to feminism. As LKL said, the problem is treaty woman specially implies they are inferior. The vulnerable (not necessarily weak) should be protected, but that should not be lumped on a gender.

As if women don't have this tendency to see men as "other".

One thing I really dislike is, in grade school, competitions exist between the boys and the girls. I don't think this is right. We should never allow the genders to believe they are competing with each other or one is the enemy of the other. They need to be more united imo. This is how we see each other as equals. They need to do away with those kind of competitions in schools or have it segregated into girls v. girls and boys v. boys. Never boys v. girls. Sends the wrong message.

The difference is men have more power. The media generally tells girls they are the other, for example.

Chivalry's great if strong people protect weaker people, but terrible if the assumption is that men are always strong and women are always weak. Only the second half of that is dying, and the first part has typically been more honored in the breach than in the observance.

ETA: I saw this article yesterday on Literally Unbelievable, which is worth checking out if you haven't seen it.

Last edited by jrjones9933 on 07 Dec 2013, 11:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Sometimes, Onion satires are really funny. Other times, they're just bleah. This time, it is bleah. Didn't make me laugh.

I don't think that there's a strong tendency in most women to see men, in general, as somehow less human than women, or as deformed women. Or, at least, I haven't heard this expressed in locker rooms or from my family members.
Personally, I try really hard to see men and women both as 'people' rather than as men or women, and to judge them on who they are rather than on how well they fit the stereotype of manliness or femininity. I tend to like people better that way.

@AP: it's funny because it's describing the experiences that a lot of women have in their relationships with men, but ascribing a totally different explanation for it than the ones that are usually used (i.e., being stared at on the street because of deformity vs. being stared at on the street for 'attractiveness,' being denied jobs or equal pay, etc). It might not be as funny to you because you haven't experienced those things and wondered why they're happening to you.

@jrjones: not seeing a link in there.

I'm a guy, and I hold the door for both sexes all the time. What can I say, it's the right thing to do.

I'm pretty sure most men don't think of woman as less than human than men either, but I'm can't be sure, I'm not all men.

I practice chivalry, it's how I was brought up. (Seriously, I became an SCA Squire at 16) it's literally how I was raised. For me it's part of good manners.

I don't expect everyone to have my manners, or to practice theirs but I keep my personal manners regardless. Chivalry is not dead.....it's just resting.

^Most men don't. But there's a sizable minority - 10% to 25%, I guess - who do see women as less human than men, to varying degrees. You can tell when they compare women to dogs, or complain that their dog is more 'loyal' than a woman (well, yeah, he's a dog; he's more loyal than a man, too), or get frustrated that women are complex beings with their own desires and motivations, or they talk about how women are generally less good than men at pretty much anything but popping out the offspring. Amazingly, a lot of these guys really think that they 'understand women;' often, they think that they understand women better than women understand themselves.

I don't know about that. My partner and I have a rather modern and traditional relationship. I am quite old fashioned in terms of my behaviour towards her. Holding doors open and standing when she leaves the table. However, we are both quite modern, she out earns me by a substantial margin, at least for the moment, and is a highly educated woman. We have been together five years and are an interracial couple. Chivalry is not threatening, I see it is an expression of respect that is particular to my gender. Just as she has methods of expressing her respect of me in ways that are particular to her gender. The assumption inherent in treating those facts as a negative is that the roles are seen as universal negatives, in and of themselves. I just don't see that.

Your problem, 91, is that you're a decent human being who respects women as human beings.
Some guys (think 'Nice Guys(TM)')see chivalry as an alternative to actual respect, as opposed to an expression of it.