User Tag List

12311 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 118

  1. #1
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default Gender Discussion

    I've wanted to bring up the some of the points mentioned in this article, but I thought they would be better received (especially on this site) if authored by a Woman.

    From Camille Paglia over at Time:

    It’s a Man’s World, And It Always Will Be

    The modern economy is a male epic, in which women have found a productive role—but women were not its author

    If men are obsolete, then women will soon be extinct—unless we rush down that ominous Brave New World path where females will clone themselves by parthenogenesis, as famously do Komodo dragons, hammerhead sharks, and pit vipers.

    A peevish, grudging rancor against men has been one of the most unpalatable and unjust features of second- and third-wave feminism. Men’s faults, failings and foibles have been seized on and magnified into gruesome bills of indictment. Ideologue professors at our leading universities indoctrinate impressionable undergraduates with carelessly fact-free theories alleging that gender is an arbitrary, oppressive fiction with no basis in biology.

    Is it any wonder that so many high-achieving young women, despite all the happy talk about their academic success, find themselves in the early stages of their careers in chronic uncertainty or anxiety about their prospects for an emotionally fulfilled private life? When an educated culture routinely denigrates masculinity and manhood, then women will be perpetually stuck with boys, who have no incentive to mature or to honor their commitments. And without strong men as models to either embrace or (for dissident lesbians) to resist, women will never attain a centered and profound sense of themselves as women.

    From my long observation, which predates the sexual revolution, this remains a serious problem afflicting Anglo-American society, with its Puritan residue. In France, Italy, Spain, Latin America, and Brazil, in contrast, many ambitious professional women seem to have found a formula for asserting power and authority in the workplace while still projecting sexual allure and even glamor. This is the true feminine mystique, which cannot be taught but flows from an instinctive recognition of sexual differences. In today’s punitive atmosphere of sentimental propaganda about gender, the sexual imagination has understandably fled into the alternate world of online pornography, where the rude but exhilarating forces of primitive nature rollick unconstrained by religious or feminist moralism.

    It was always the proper mission of feminism to attack and reconstruct the ossified social practices that had led to wide-ranging discrimination against women. But surely it was and is possible for a progressive reform movement to achieve that without stereotyping, belittling, or demonizing men. History must be seen clearly and fairly: obstructive traditions arose not from men’s hatred or enslavement of women but from the natural division of labor that had developed over thousands of years during the agrarian period and that once immensely benefited and protected women, permitting them to remain at the hearth to care for helpless infants and children. Over the past century, it was labor-saving appliances, invented by men and spread by capitalism, that liberated women from daily drudgery.

    What is troubling in too many books and articles by feminist journalists in the U.S. is, despite their putative leftism, an implicit privileging of bourgeois values and culture. The particular focused, clerical and managerial skills of the upper-middle-class elite are presented as the highest desideratum, the ultimate evolutionary point of humanity. Yes, there has been a gradual transition from an industrial to a service-sector economy in which women, who generally prefer a safe, clean, quiet work environment thrive.

    But the triumphalism among some, such as Hanna Rosin in her book, “The End of Men,” about women’s gains seems startlingly premature, such as when Rosin says of the sagging fortunes of today’s working-class couples that they and we had “reached the end of a hundred thousand years of human history and the beginning of a new era, and there was no going back.” This sweeping appeal to history somehow overlooks history’s far darker lessons about the cyclic rise and fall of civilizations, which as they become more complex and interconnected also become more vulnerable to collapse. The earth is littered with the ruins of empires that believed they were eternal.

    After the next inevitable apocalypse, men will be desperately needed again! Oh, sure, there will be the odd gun-toting Amazonian survivalist gal, who can rustle game out of the bush and feed her flock, but most women and children will be expecting men to scrounge for food and water and to defend the home turf. Indeed, men are absolutely indispensable right now, invisible as it is to most feminists, who seem blind to the infrastructure that makes their own work lives possible. It is overwhelmingly men who do the dirty, dangerous work of building roads, pouring concrete, laying bricks, tarring roofs, hanging electric wires, excavating natural gas and sewage lines, cutting and clearing trees, and bulldozing the landscape for housing developments. It is men who heft and weld the giant steel beams that frame our office buildings, and it is men who do the hair-raising work of insetting and sealing the finely tempered plate-glass windows of skyscrapers 50 stories tall.

    Every day along the Delaware River in Philadelphia, one can watch the passage of vast oil tankers and towering cargo ships arriving from all over the world. These stately colossi are loaded, steered, and off-loaded by men. The modern economy, with its vast production and distribution network, is a male epic, in which women have found a productive role—but women were not its author. Surely, modern women are strong enough now to give credit where credit is due!
    Your thoughts?

  2. #2
    royal member Rasofy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,932

    Default

    From my long observation, which predates the sexual revolution, this remains a serious problem afflicting Anglo-American society, with its Puritan residue. In France, Italy, Spain, Latin America, and Brazil, in contrast, many ambitious professional women seem to have found a formula for asserting power and authority in the workplace while still projecting sexual allure and even glamor. This is the true feminine mystique, which cannot be taught but flows from an instinctive recognition of sexual differences. In today’s punitive atmosphere of sentimental propaganda about gender, the sexual imagination has understandably fled into the alternate world of online pornography, where the rude but exhilarating forces of primitive nature rollick unconstrained by religious or feminist moralism.
    Can't speak for other countries, but this is indeed true for Brazil. In this forum, otoh, I still get surprised with the amount of women who seem to regard most forms of sexual appreciation towards a woman as a form of 'objectification'.

    Feminists routinely incur in sexism when they act entitled to speak for their entire gender, labelling women who disagree with them as 'subservient', and men as misogynists.

    I don't want to get involved in forum drama for a while, so I won't respond to mean-spirited replies and/or loaded questions.

    /Christmas spirit

  3. #3
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,910

    Default

    If men are obsolete, then women will soon be extinct—unless we rush down that ominous Brave New World path where females will clone themselves by parthenogenesis, as famously do Komodo dragons, hammerhead sharks, and pit vipers.
    I rarely encounter women who think men are obsolete. Such feminists are aberrant.

    A peevish, grudging rancor against men has been one of the most unpalatable and unjust features of second- and third-wave feminism. Men’s faults, failings and foibles have been seized on and magnified into gruesome bills of indictment. Ideologue professors at our leading universities indoctrinate impressionable undergraduates with carelessly fact-free theories alleging that gender is an arbitrary, oppressive fiction with no basis in biology.
    I have mixed feelings on the topic of how the representation of men has been affected by feminism. Regarding gender, if she means gender roles, I think that is mostly without a basis in biology. I think, a very long time ago, there was a biological catalyst something to the effect of a slight nudge in one direction, and it snowballed into all the absurd trappings of gender roles and sexism.

    Is it any wonder that so many high-achieving young women, despite all the happy talk about their academic success, find themselves in the early stages of their careers in chronic uncertainty or anxiety about their prospects for an emotionally fulfilled private life?
    How is that different from men?

    When an educated culture routinely denigrates masculinity and manhood, then women will be perpetually stuck with boys, who have no incentive to mature or to honor their commitments. And without strong men as models to either embrace or (for dissident lesbians) to resist, women will never attain a centered and profound sense of themselves as women.
    There's a difference between attacking men and attacking masculinity, and I would say this society is no where close to doing the latter as a general role. This society still loves traditional masculinity. Even self-identified feminists are not beyond worshiping masculinity. I do not perceive this as a real problem. I also don't think all the traits that get packaged together into masculine and feminine need to go together, or that a person needs to adopt one of those packages based on biological sex. I do not think our society is very close to catching up to my point of view, however.

    From my long observation, which predates the sexual revolution, this remains a serious problem afflicting Anglo-American society, with its Puritan residue. In France, Italy, Spain, Latin America, and Brazil, in contrast, many ambitious professional women seem to have found a formula for asserting power and authority in the workplace while still projecting sexual allure and even glamor.
    Allure to who? Glamor according to what? And why is this important?

    This is the true feminine mystique, which cannot be taught but flows from an instinctive recognition of sexual differences. In today’s punitive atmosphere of sentimental propaganda about gender, the sexual imagination has understandably fled into the alternate world of online pornography, where the rude but exhilarating forces of primitive nature rollick unconstrained by religious or feminist moralism.
    The bold is such gibberish that I find it quite irritating that she, shortly before, accused feminist professors of making fact-free assertions.

    It was always the proper mission of feminism to attack and reconstruct the ossified social practices that had led to wide-ranging discrimination against women. But surely it was and is possible for a progressive reform movement to achieve that without stereotyping, belittling, or demonizing men.
    Sure.

    History must be seen clearly and fairly: obstructive traditions arose not from men’s hatred or enslavement of women but from the natural division of labor that had developed over thousands of years during the agrarian period and that once immensely benefited and protected women, permitting them to remain at the hearth to care for helpless infants and children. Over the past century, it was labor-saving appliances, invented by men and spread by capitalism, that liberated women from daily drudgery.
    Sometimes hatred was really involved, yes. I think the the only relevant power differences between men and women largely ceased to be prior to civilization. However, it had already had enough of an effect as to give men political control and an inherited sense of natural superiority. Even old civilized technology largely negated the gender roles if we culturally could have seen past it. From that point on it was a power struggle, which ends up becoming very hateful very fast.

    As for protecting women, it was a package deal, it went along with a load of gender norms which put women in danger and dramatically reduced their quality of life.

    So I don't buy that, over the course of civilization, women either have anything to be thankful to patriarchy for, or that the intentions men had toward women has been benevolent.

    What is troubling in too many books and articles by feminist journalists in the U.S. is, despite their putative leftism, an implicit privileging of bourgeois values and culture. The particular focused, clerical and managerial skills of the upper-middle-class elite are presented as the highest desideratum, the ultimate evolutionary point of humanity. Yes, there has been a gradual transition from an industrial to a service-sector economy in which women, who generally prefer a safe, clean, quiet work environment thrive.
    Women can be soldiers, laborers, etc... and they should be. I'm not clear whether or not she's still talking about just the USA or feminism globally, but in many parts of the world (and in the USA at different times) acquisition of hard labor or personally hazardous jobs by women has been a feminist plank. One I agree with.

    But the triumphalism among some, such as Hanna Rosin in her book, “The End of Men,” about women’s gains seems startlingly premature, such as when Rosin says of the sagging fortunes of today’s working-class couples that they and we had “reached the end of a hundred thousand years of human history and the beginning of a new era, and there was no going back.” This sweeping appeal to history somehow overlooks history’s far darker lessons about the cyclic rise and fall of civilizations, which as they become more complex and interconnected also become more vulnerable to collapse. The earth is littered with the ruins of empires that believed they were eternal.
    I know nothing of the author or book she speaks of, but I don''t subscribe to a tidy cyclical model of history nor do I think she's even talking about the same things, anyway. Technology and education have been on an upward trend since the beginning. There is no cycle there. Womens' rights would seem to be in that category and not in the category of the rise and fall of polities.

    After the next inevitable apocalypse, men will be desperately needed again! Oh, sure, there will be the odd gun-toting Amazonian survivalist gal, who can rustle game out of the bush and feed her flock, but most women and children will be expecting men to scrounge for food and water and to defend the home turf.
    For of all, "prepare for the apocalypse" might be the strangest argument I've ever seen in the topic of gender relations. Secondly, since I do not think women are so physiologically constrained, it would be interesting to see how much (or how little) women revert to their former subservient, objectified position in that scenario. It is not a given, I don't think.

    Indeed, men are absolutely indispensable right now, invisible as it is to most feminists, who seem blind to the infrastructure that makes their own work lives possible. It is overwhelmingly men who do the dirty, dangerous work of building roads, pouring concrete, laying bricks, tarring roofs, hanging electric wires, excavating natural gas and sewage lines, cutting and clearing trees, and bulldozing the landscape for housing developments. It is men who heft and weld the giant steel beams that frame our office buildings, and it is men who do the hair-raising work of insetting and sealing the finely tempered plate-glass windows of skyscrapers 50 stories tall.
    This is kind of like pointing out that most of history's great scientists are men. Of course they are because they all worked in a patriarchal society where they received benefits and women were held back. Who knows how many potential female luminaries we never got to have as a society. This situation she describes here is just the continuation of the male dominated world that feminism was all about undermining. The job isn't done yet. It could change any time, and I don't see any reason to keep it from doing so.

    Every day along the Delaware River in Philadelphia, one can watch the passage of vast oil tankers and towering cargo ships arriving from all over the world. These stately colossi are loaded, steered, and off-loaded by men. The modern economy, with its vast production and distribution network, is a male epic, in which women have found a productive role—but women were not its author. Surely, modern women are strong enough now to give credit where credit is due!
    Most of this applies to my previous points. And should women give credit for, exactly? Is history a story of men achieving these things, or a story of men denying women the chance to achieve these things? The historical bias toward men is surely because of the latter and not because men have either the ability or the will that women lack.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  4. #4
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    I've wanted to bring up the some of the points mentioned in this article, but I thought they would be better received (especially on this site) if authored by a Woman.

    From Camille Paglia over at Time:

    It’s a Man’s World, And It Always Will Be

    The modern economy is a male epic, in which women have found a productive role—but women were not its author



    Your thoughts?
    History is a male epic, in which women were given supporting roles, but women were not its authors.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    As for protecting women...
    Not to point out the obvious, but in her apocalyptic world where Cray Cray feminists have gotten rid of men, who would the women need protecting from?

  6. #6
    As Long As It Takes.... Redbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,879

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qrious View Post
    Not to point out the obvious, but in her apocalyptic world where Cray Cray feminists have gotten rid of men, who would the women need protecting from?
    You weren't supposed to notice that!!!!

    And without strong men as models to either embrace or (for dissident lesbians) to resist, women will never attain a centered and profound sense of themselves as women.
    What the hell does this mean? I don't understand this at all...sounds suspiciously like how women are supposed to make a man feel like one? I don't get how the job of making me feel like a woman belongs to anyone but me.

  7. #7
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    461 so/sx
    Posts
    2,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qrious View Post
    Not to point out the obvious, but in her apocalyptic world where Cray Cray feminists have gotten rid of men, who would the women need protecting from?
    Each other. Women are "almost" as violent/aggressive as men in most categories. In such a man free/low % world I'd see women taking up the obligations that men currently hold, that of soldier. Do you really think that a woman couldn't start/cause a war?
    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft

  8. #8
    climb on Showbread's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Enneagram
    3w2 so/sp
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    "From my long observation, which predates the sexual revolution, this remains a serious problem afflicting Anglo-American society, with its Puritan residue. In France, Italy, Spain, Latin America, and Brazil, in contrast, many ambitious professional women seem to have found a formula for asserting power and authority in the workplace while still projecting sexual allure and even glamor. This is the true feminine mystique, which cannot be taught but flows from an instinctive recognition of sexual differences. In today’s punitive atmosphere of sentimental propaganda about gender, the sexual imagination has understandably fled into the alternate world of online pornography, where the rude but exhilarating forces of primitive nature rollick unconstrained by religious or feminist moralism."
    I don't like this. I have no problem with women wanting to be beautiful, and I don't fault men for noticing when they are. I don't consider that to be objectification, but stating the obvious.

    What I have a huge problem with is the idea that femininity is somehow dependent on external beauty. Because especially in a culture like America's with such narrow and unobtainable ideas of beauty, that is just not fair. External beauty is either a skill or a genetic blessing. It has absolutely nothing to do with one's identity as a woman.
    Friends, waffles, work

    "The problem is, when you depend on a substitute for love, you can never get enough" - Louis Cozolino

    3w2 6w7 1w2
    *Gryffindor*


  9. #9
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpankyMcFly View Post
    Each other. Women are "almost" as violent/aggressive as men in most categories. In such a man free/low % world I'd see women taking up the obligations that men currently hold, that of soldier. Do you really think that a woman couldn't start/cause a war?
    Thank you for spectacularly missing not only my point but the original point of Paglia's that it is based upon. That's quite the talent.

  10. #10
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    461 so/sx
    Posts
    2,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qrious View Post
    Thank you for spectacularly missing not only my point but the original point of Paglia's that it is based upon. That's quite the talent.
    Do you mind elaborating on what you think Paglia's point was and what your's is/was?
    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-11-2016, 05:34 AM
  2. Gender Bias in Type Identification / Interrelating
    By ptgatsby in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 05-24-2007, 05:08 PM
  3. Dawkins and Evolution, a discussion (moved to new thread)
    By hereandnow in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-18-2007, 11:41 AM
  4. Does SJ vs SP account for gender bias?
    By Tayshaun in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-17-2007, 08:11 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO