Sexism

[dragon_mando]

Examples, pl0x?

 

What's considered acceptable for men/women is entirely on topic, as that's what sexism is on its most basic level.

 

I know many guys who actually admired me /more/ than other cleavage-bearers because I didn't hesitate to deal a jerk a mean left hook...

 

edit to add:

 

Then have a separate woman's barracks for the capable ones and have them in separate units until the guys get over themselves.

Edited September 8, 2011 by dragon_mando

[kiffren]

And I also completely agree that women are different. I don't like feminism, in fact I hate it. My point was that if a woman can fulfill the requirements of a job TO THE SAME EXTENT that a man can, there should be no gender DISCRIMINATION. There's a large difference between discrimination based on gender and special treatment based on gender. I don't agree with either. I agree with equality to the point that a woman can, in fact, fulfill the requirements as good or better as a man. And that she should not NECESSARILY be judged by gender but by ability. Obviously (as with combat soldiers) there are exceptions.

 

Femininity is a very good thing that should be retained, I agree. Girls who act/talk exactly like guys are pretty disgusting. But as I said, discrimination purely based on gender isn't good either. Discrimination based on skills and ability to fulfill the prescribed task IS.

I agree with the equality thing. However, if there is a job that pays x dollars per hour, then a woman should earn the SAME as a man in that job. Jobs that pay by hour (the majority of jobs) should not have any discrimination based on sex. If you are capable and able to do the job, then you get payed that amount. Jobs based on amount done, it does make sense that one person, regardless of gender, will not earn the exact same amount as others.

 

I look like a guy, people assume I'm a guy all the time. Am I trying to look, act, and talk just like a male? No. I'm just being myself. I wear clothing that is comfortable, and I talk in a manner that is comfortable to me. There is absolutely nothing disgusting about being yourself. If a man is more comfortable acting and appearing more 'feminine', then that is fine. Same goes for women acting and appearing more 'masculine'.

[philpot123]

Ey, who are you to speak for all the guys?

 

What are the reasons, anyhow?

 

This is totally on-topic.

I wasn't speaking for all guys. when I said from a "guy's" perspective I meant mine. Personal opinion. Feel free to disagree.

 

reasons? Because we ARE different. Biologically, emotionally, girls and guys are different. Yes there are effeminate guys and manly girls, but that doesn't mean it's natural.

[dragon_mando]

reasons? Because we ARE different. Biologically, emotionally, girls and guys are different. Yes there are effeminate guys and manly girls, but that doesn't mean it's natural.

 

There is nothing unnatural about being yourself.

[kiffren]

I wasn't speaking for all guys. when I said from a "guy's" perspective I meant mine. Personal opinion. Feel free to disagree.

 

reasons? Because we ARE different. Biologically, emotionally, girls and guys are different. Yes there are effeminate guys and manly girls, but that doesn't mean it's natural.

I beg to differ. As I just posted, being yourself is natural. If I were to force myself to be 'feminine' it would be far from natural.

 

Besides, definite 'natural'. If you mean 'stereotype', which is what it appears you mean, that's not natural.

[philpot123]

I'm afraid I came off the wrong way here. I'm really not talking about girls who can handle themselves, (I've gotten a royal ass kicking from a couple girls and I respect them all the more for it.) It was a hasty generalization, forgive me this is my personal opinion, it's hard to explain. There's a difference between what I'm talking about and what you're talking about. I don't mean "tomboy-ish" girls, that kind of thing... I'll think about this and try and come back with a better response. Just an opinion, Y'all disagree obviously.

[St. Jimmy]

There are things that guys do, things that girls do, ways they act that are just gender specific.

And what are these things, exactly?

[Princess Artemis]

reasons? Because we ARE different. Biologically, emotionally, girls and guys are different. Yes there are effeminate guys and manly girls, but that doesn't mean it's natural.

Gotta go with dragon_mando here.

 

It's perfectly natural for a women to wear T-shirts, jeans, and cowboy boots. I'd hazard that makeup is unnatural as it's a bunch of gunk put on skin that eventually deteriorates it.

[philpot123]

Like I said, looks like I backed myself into a corner here with what I'm coming across that I think and what I actually think. I'm trying to think of a better way to word this that's less confusing, so give me a chance

 

In response to the above post, T shirts jeans and boots are horribly attractive. Not gonna lie. I agree on makeup. My definition of feminine isn't stereotypical, feminine, pink, fluffy, weak, etc. That is most definitely NOT what I'm talking about. But there's a reason girls are girls and guys are guys. I like my girls to be comfortably distinguishable from the opposite gender. Like I said, give me a bit, I'll clarify... eventually

[TikindiDragon]

I beg to differ. As I just posted, being yourself is natural. If I were to force myself to be 'feminine' it would be far from natural.

 

Besides, definite 'natural'. If you mean 'stereotype', which is what it appears you mean, that's not natural.

No, there is a difference between men and women. If there wasn't a mental difference between men and women than trans-folk like myself wouldn't exist.

 

I'm not saying the stereotypes are natural, or right, but even setting stereotypes aside there *is* a difference.

 

I, personaly, have had a lot of problems with feminists in the past. Most of them cannot seem to accept that I'm actualy a transman and not "betraying my gender.".

[St. Jimmy]

But there's a reason girls are girls and guys are guys. I like my girls to be comfortably distinguishable from the opposite gender.

Sorry, not trying to be an arse with all the questions, but if this were true, then why are there transgenders/genderqueers? (Unless you're including trans people as the gender they identify as, but that still doesn't explain genderqueers.)

[Princess Artemis]

Like I said, looks like I backed myself into a corner here with what I'm coming across that I think and what I actually think. I'm trying to think of a better way to word this that's less confusing, so give me a chance

 

In response to the above post, T shirts jeans and boots are horribly attractive. Not gonna lie. I agree on makeup. My definition of feminine isn't stereotypical, feminine, pink, fluffy, weak, etc. That is most definitely NOT what I'm talking about. But there's a reason girls are girls and guys are guys. I like my girls to be comfortably distinguishable from the opposite gender. Like I said, give me a bit, I'll clarify... eventually

No issue having a personal preference, but when it's "anyone who deviates from my personal judgment on attractiveness is disgusting and are acting unnaturally", then there is a problem. A really big one.

[RheaZen]

I wasn't speaking for all guys. when I said from a "guy's" perspective I meant mine. Personal opinion. Feel free to disagree.

I see. You did make it sound rather general. But ditto what Artemis said.

 

Adding on to St. Jimmy's post, what about people who are both/neither?

Edited September 8, 2011 by RheaZen

[kiffren]

No, there is a difference between men and women. If there wasn't a mental difference between men and women than trans-folk like myself wouldn't exist.

 

I'm not saying the stereotypes are natural, or right, but even setting stereotypes aside there *is* a difference.

 

I, personaly, have had a lot of problems with feminists in the past. Most of them cannot seem to accept that I'm actualy a transman and not "betraying my gender.".

I didn't say there isn't a difference, I know fully well there is. However saying that women must be like one thing doesn't make sense. Transguys are an example of this. They are biologically female, so as far as I can tell, by philpot's logic, they are expected to act like women and be feminine, simply because they are "female". (I use the term female to mean biologically, not their gender.)

 

My point is simply that who we are is the natural thing, and trying to conform to the "expected" traits of our sex is not natural.

 

Also agreeing with Artemis here.

Edited September 8, 2011 by kiffren

[philpot123]

I'm not really prepared to launch into that area because I KNOW you all would disagree with me, and there's really no point in stating what I believe when I'm going to be torn apart moments later. My views are controversial and "offensive" to some and I don't want to instigate that.

[greylight]

On the idea of women in the military -- our soldiers have fought on the front lines with the Israeli army, the Canadian army, and others. We have had no tales of men breaking protocol to save a woman over a man. Ever. There's been no real problems in New Zealand, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Norway, Israel, Serbia, Sweden or Switzerland the way other people describe. So, yes, keeping women out of the military is sexist. It's been proven to work.

 

I think, however, that "sexism" can really be thrown around too much towards anyone who is a little odd in the culture, or goes against stereotypes. Both my wives, for example, cover their hair. Both of them have been hassled over being "anti-feminist," for this. Both of them have tried not covering their hair because of the pressure of other women talking about betraying their gender, and both of them decided they were uncomfortable with it. Feminism should allow the women they claim to represent to make the choices for themselves, not try to force what someone's "idea" of feminism or liberation or freedom onto them is.

 

Women absolutely should get the same pay for the same work, despite gender. Men who are bothered by their wives making more money than them are just silly. Aisha makes more money than me. Does it bother me? No. We have different jobs.

[Danse]

 

Now why should the company pay a female, who only gets through 4 jobs a day, the same pay?

Try this on for size: I'm biologically female and I grew up on a farm. In a single working day I could singlehandedly buck twelve tons of hay onto the tractor's trailer, unload it, and stack it, the guys on the crew gave up at ten. Should I be getting paid the same or less because I've got the wrong plumbing?

 

Actually you proved my point. My point is that a woman should get paid according to her ability, and beyond that, a PERSON should get paid according to THEIR ability. It's impressive that you are a girl, and can do that, but the only thing that should matter is that you can do it, regardless of sex.

And to defend what I think philpot is trying to say is that girls who try to be something, that they dont feel, that they truly aren't is not attractive. If youre the type of person who can be seen wearing boots and a flannel shirt, you will look comfortable in it, look right, dare i say. But if you go to your closet, agonizing over what will make you look as offsetting as possible to other people, then you are going to look like youre trying to hard. It would be the same as if you try to stuff a body, more comfortable in jeans and a tank, into a pink taffeta dress. You need to be true to your own self, and sense of style, and quit trying so hard to be an ideal, whether that be feminine or anti-feminine.

Also fine, so you don't like make-up, that's cool. Why do you need to make me feel "unnatural" about putting my spf-tinted moisturizer on? Am I in a crazy spiral of self mutilation because I like high heels and pierced ears? I'm not trying to make anyone feel or dress, or even act the way I do, but your overwhelming ideals make me want to defend myself.

[Princess Artemis]

I think, however, that "sexism" can really be thrown around too much towards anyone who is a little odd in the culture, or goes against stereotypes. Both my wives, for example, cover their hair. Both of them have been hassled over being "anti-feminist," for this. Both of them have tried not covering their hair because of the pressure of other women talking about betraying their gender, and both of them decided they were uncomfortable with it. Feminism should allow the women they claim to represent to make the choices for themselves, not try to force what someone's "idea" of feminism or liberation or freedom onto them is.

I completely agree with this. Best as I can tell, the idea of feminism is to make it so women can make real choices for themselves and have real choices to make. If your wives want to wear their hair covered, awesome for them, it's their choice to make. If a capable woman wants to be in the front lines of combat, that choice should be available to her without moving to another country. It's certainly no betrayal of feminism that many women want to be stay-at-home moms, while on the other hand, for it to be the only 'choice' (which is no choice at all) is very much against feminism. No woman who makes her own choices, thinks her own thoughts, and lives life as she feels best suits her is betraying her gender.

 

For the matter of sexism applying to all, there is a real issue with men who choose to be stay-at-home dads. Society has so much of an issue with this that it can't seem to comprehend that it does happen and therefore many places which have been told this will disregard it and not call dad first when a child gets sick. That's thoroughly sexist and takes away from men's ability to choose to live their lives as they see fit.

 

What the argument about "just try to make it through SEAL training, girls!" misses is that the vast majority of men can't do it either. If a woman can, let her serve on the SEAL team. There are women who can, the bar is not set so specifically and in such a way that no biological female on Earth is capable of such feats of physicality. More men will be able to do it than women, but that doesn't mean no women can do it.

 

ETA:

Also fine, so you don't like make-up, that's cool. Why do you need to make me feel "unnatural" about putting my spf-tinted moisturizer on? Am I in a crazy spiral of self mutilation because I like high heels and pierced ears? I'm not trying to make anyone feel or dress, or even act the way I do, but your overwhelming ideals make me want to defend myself.

 

Seems like this was pointed at me. What I said about make-up being unnatural is not at all to say that women (or men, or none of the above) who choose to wear it are unnatural, but that the substances themselves are not natural to the human body and can, not will, cause damage. Whatever you choose to wear is A-OK with me, I don't think it's unnatural in the slightest to adorn oneself with paints and jewelry and clothes that one finds fitting. Certainly though, humans do not naturally secrete eyeshadow : )

Edited September 8, 2011 by Princess Artemis

[Danse]

also, here is a short clip of some protocol breaks among other things.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-44...udith-Webb.html

Also, I totally think women should be allowed in the military(and they are)....but not on the front lines.

And also, its not really a matter of "separate barracks" First of all, can you imagine the costs to update and build so many gender specific things? And isn't it just going back to a sort of "segregation" type problem? The military should be one place where every man (and women) be united How can an army fight divided?

[dragon_mando]

The military should be one place where every man (and women) be united How can an army fight divided?

 

Right back at'cha. They're already segregated and divided by the simple fact the women capable of doing what they dreamed of--like joining the SEALS--are being told "yeah, you're good enough, but we don't want you anyway"

Edited September 8, 2011 by dragon_mando

[greylight]

Also, I totally think women should be allowed in the military(and they are)....but not on the front lines.

 

Why do the US and UK have these problems then, if they don't happen in other countries? Why should women have to move and become citizens of another country if they want to fight on the front lines?

 

The military should be one place where every man (and women) be united How can an army fight divided?

 

Which raises the question of why should they have to be?

 

"just try to make it through SEAL training, girls!"

 

I know at least three Israeli women who could probably do it.

[philpot123]

If it was as easy as "If they can do it, let em!" Don't you think they would have changed it by now? It involves the re-working of an entire system, it's not something that's cost effective or time effective for the few amount of women who would be able to do it. Logistically it would be a nightmare, and for what? The odd one out of thousands spartan woman becoming a SEAL?

[Princess Artemis]

If it was as easy as "If they can do it, let em!" Don't you think they would have changed it by now? It involves the re-working of an entire system, it's not something that's cost effective or time effective for the few amount of women who would be able to do it. Logistically it would be a nightmare, and for what? The odd one out of thousands spartan woman becoming a SEAL?

Yeah? I think it would be worth it. One of the big problems is separate showers, but is it really that expensive and difficult to install a curtain in a locker room so that there would be a section for the women and a section for the men, on an as-needed basis?

 

I think, practically, and in a very pragmatic sense, that the fact that the US military's attitude sucks so much and that they need to get the hell over themselves does present an issue with idealism. That certainly does not mean that things don't need to change, just that practically, it might be better for it to be a slower process.

[philpot123]

Yeah? I think it would be worth it. One of the big problems is separate showers, but is it really that expensive and difficult to install a curtain in a locker room so that there would be a section for the women and a section for the men, on an as-needed basis?

 

I think, practically, and in a very pragmatic sense, that the fact that the US military's attitude sucks so much and that they need to get the hell over themselves does present an issue with idealism. That certainly does not mean that things don't need to change, just that practically, it might be better for it to be a slower process.

Separate showers, separate barracks, separate housing when on field missions to prevent sexual harassment suits, changing the training program (example is the marines, fit test for men and a fit test for women. they would have to adjust.) There's SO much that goes into it that would have to happen all over the US and around the world that it's just not worth it. Obviously, or they would've caved to the growing feminist movement.

[Princess Artemis]

separate housing when on field missions to prevent sexual harassment suits

In this case, that's something that can be cured by 1. not putting in suits that have no basis in fact, and 2. not sexually harassing one another. I feel that it is perfectly possible for even US military persons to behave themselves.

 

changing the training program (example is the marines, fit test for men and a fit test for women. they would have to adjust.)

 

Why? No need to alter the standards, people who do not pass the test do not continue with the program, simple as that. That goes for men and women.

 

There's SO much that goes into it that would have to happen all over the US and around the world that it's just not worth it.

 

It seems that a lot of the world's militaries do not have this problem, so I don't see why you say "all over the world".

 

Obviously, or they would've caved to the growing feminist movement.

 

That it hasn't been done yet is not self-evidence that it cannot be done with minimum hassle.

 

Separate showers is something I can see a need for, but it is also not something I think is so very hard to do that it stands in the way. Separate barracks seems to be something that is also not such a logistical nightmare that it can't be rectified.