feminism: the radical concept that women are people.

Post Reply New Topic

This isn't exclusively a male on female problem. Most people think that, if their friends were icebergs, they would see about 60% of them, whereas they personally are only 10% visible.

Excellent article though.

Puddingmouse, you could give me an honest answer. Why do some feminists think chivalry is another tool of chauvinism? I agree with you there is a lot of disrespect for women in the world. I don't want to brag about being all goody goody either. But really, why do some women do this? Do they not trust us we are trying to be nice?

Have you heard of ambivalent sexism? People who believe that women have a special need to be protected don't consider themselves sexist because they adore women. That generalization is sexist, in that it places all women in a particular category rather than seeing them each as individual people. Subtyping, or putting specific kinds of women into a different category, is a marginally more sophisticated form of stereotyping.

Ambivalent sexism, as the name implies, includes another side, whereby people who need protection cannot have complete freedom to make their own decisions. Anyone who would try must obviously be disciplined by their protector.

I don't really think about chivalry because I have bigger fish to fry. It has lost its meaning in the modern world and is now an affectation; therefore it is now harmless.

I agree with you.

I am more focused on those who are unambivalently sexist. With the ambivalent sexists, I try to set a good example in that I treat everyone as an individual and I try to put across my individuality as opposed to acting according to stereotypes.

Says the cat who is talking to a guy who thinks stay at homes dads are cool! I have a total crush on this one lady that I sparred with in mma class. If she would have initiated anything, I would have fainted! It is sexist to put women at an advantage? Women are not men, men are not women. That is why when you see a woman in need, or a man for that matter, you help them. I rather be generalized as a weak, helpless man than be in a situation like that.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tQSOlF9ZZM[/youtube]

How about this, then: Generalizing about people becomes, or tends to become, treating individual people as though they personally embody the qualities attributed to the general category.

Even if a person is weak or has a weakness, they would usually prefer that other people accord them the respect of asking whether they want help. For example, I have some difficulties in social situations, but I'd usually prefer to handle them myself rather than having someone fuss over me. I certainly don't want to be treated like a generalized Aspie. I'm J.R., thank you very much.

As far as holding doors goes, my favorite situation is when I hold one of a set of double doors for someone, and then they hold the next one for me. I might open a car door for a person to let him or her get into my car, but I don't know how I'd handle someone who sat helplessly and waited for me to come around and open it once we arrived at our destination.

It extends well beyond religion, pretty sure it was in the culture before there even was religion.

It's not always so simple to separate culture from religion.

Except it's pretty easy to do so in this case:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/blaghag/201 ... -list-too/

Feel free to look up non sequitur when you have the time.

Eh? That's not a non-sequitur... "The Amazing Atheist" isn't spouting crap because of his religion, but perhaps because of his culture.

And where did personality go?

Also, Judaism is not equal to atheism.

I dont mind chivalry as long as both parts agree into it, and feel good with it. I am myself annoyed, that some men actually expect me to insist on them acting like that towards me, and then being annoyed/angry if I dont "let them act chivalry". I am simply not used to it and dont think of it, so it happens to me, that someone actually goes forth to open some door, without me mentioning it (because of me not thinking of such things) and then I stop because of me searching for my handy or whatever, and then the guy stands there and waits for me annoyed, without me even getting it. Or that typical "Helping into the jacket." part. -.- When we decide to go, I simply dont think about it, so I simply go to the wardrobe, take my jacket and pull it on. My mother in law actually accused my partner, of me doing so, because of him not offering the jacket for me, which I think is ridiculous. If you both feel fine with it, then do it and its a nice gesture. But if it feels annoying for one of it, as it is for me, because of me not being used to it, then I dont see nothing bad about not doing so as well.

Chivalry means for me "caring to be nice and polite to people" = caring for things they like. Not caring for things, they dont even think about. ^^ But insisting that woman have to like to get helped into their jacket, is for me, as if I would insist that every man must be happy, if I gift him with entrance cards for a football game. ^^

Being an as*hole is a personality trait, but not being sexist. The point is he is by no means the only one, see reddit and 4chan in general. Just cesspools of misogynic atheists. Therefor religion isn't the only factor resulting in sexism.