I'm a feminist because....

I've been raised by my feminist mother, read her second wave feminist magazines growing up as a boy. I always encourage girls and women to do things they themselves consider manly things. My daughter has the right to do whatever things she wants, i would never discourage her because she thinks she can't do something.
Women use their brains instead of strong muscles and brute power. It would be great if we could combine the two, work clever, and girls get a bit more muscly and tough. We would get a lot further as a human race.
Shame the reality of these movements is different, and sorry fourth wave feminist ladies and men, a lot of your sisters do demean men, they want to take their power away, and pretend like everything will be better with women in charge(Thatcher,Merkel). I'm from Europe and we are a lot less traditional/ Christian maybe, young women nowadys outnumber men by and large in universities and paychecks are higher for women under 30. Manual labor is disappearing rapidly and seriously frowned upon any way, i'm a builder(who has been to university), i would know.
Young men are very insecure and a lot of them lack fatherly figures, they want to smoke weed and play videogames, pure escapism,young women are complaining about not getting attention. I see women in charge of men, i fix a lot of houses, women have the final say in 90% how the job will be done, not men.
If you're easily offended or sensitive do not read what i write in the next paragraph.
Sorry to open a can of worms, but I see worlds to win in our large migrant communities, but somehow migrant communities seem exempt of criticism. Au contraire, feminist women are often in favor of open borders which brings in people from countries where women suffer serious repression. Being sold into a marriage underaged for example or the sickening practice of FGM and general homophobia. But just stating this obvious fact gets you labeled racist. Labeling is  more of a tactic to avoid adressing the anti-female practices ,alive and kicking in many of our migrant communities, but the result is serious backlash, because people do notice these double standards, and feel victimized, which right wing outlets do not hesitate to mention over and over, fanning the flames of division worldwide. Counterproductive for the feminist cause in the long and maybe even short run.
I'm sorry if i hurt people's feelings by expressing my opinion.

Elle i understand you, ridiculous people think it's normal you give up your job, but judge your husband as being unmanly almost. Good luck.
 

I've been a stay at home dad for several years and homeschooled our kids. Didn't like what day care and then public school was doing for/to them. I'm pretty sure all the 'normal' people just figure I'm a lazy bum that doesn't want to work and so I make the wife work or she works because 'someone has to'. We moved half way across the country during this and bought a hunk of woods that I'm slowly turning into something more inhabitable. Built a cabin, driveway, shop, electric, plumbing, fence, cut 100 trees and we heat with wood. My wife couldn't have done these things, although I'm sure some females could. Is it ok to say female these days?

I'm still cutting trees for more fence and need to build shelters for goats/pigs/chickens and a high tunnel. The shop will eventually become a barn when we get a real house built. Passive solar a la earthip but with dry stacked, surface bonded concrete block as opposed to tires. I'm 53 and 130 lbs and this is clay soil so filling 800 tires with dirt is out of the question.

I'm all set up to start bringing in some money this year from home and the kids will be learning life skills so that I have time to do so. That will help make some things go faster around here since it takes money to build most anything. Even the earthship who's original concept was 'made from trash' is far from being free.

Neither of us consider ourselves feminists but neither of us buy into these labels that people apply to themselves or others or the related stereotypes that people(hollywood?) push on to others.

I just reread this thread and find it comforting that for the most part, it seems like there is only a word getting in the way of a shared view of equality for all humans.

Judith Browning wrote:I just reread this thread and find it comforting that for the most part, it seems like there is only a word getting in the way of a shared view of equality for all humans.

I'd like to think that's true, but if it is, I think the word is money. Women who have their own money don't have to put up with a whole lot of bulshit. I think this is true all over the world.

Jan White wrote:I spent my teenage years and early adulthood thinking feminism wasn't needed anymore.  I grew up in an awesome little bubble of the world where, despite having huge boobs, the only looks at my chest I got from men were clumsy, trying but failing to be discreet looks from drunk guys.  I grew up in a house where my mum preferred to fix the plumbing and my dad had absolutely no interest in that but would love to cook dinner, and no one thought much of it.  At parties, men and women mingled and talked about music, politics, life plans, whatever.  Children ran around and played and got plopped on a bed or a pile of coats (by father OR mother) to sleep when it got late.

Later, I moved in with my now husband, only a few hours away from where I grew up and experienced massive culture shock.  Walking down the street in summer, wearing modest-length shorts and a non-revealing tanktop I got leers.  And not just a few -from almost every guy I passed.  I had never experienced anything like this in my life.  I felt embarassed and threatened.  When my husband and I were looking at motorhomes to buy, I was generally ignored, even if I asked a question, and the male salespeople talked only to my husband...until the subject of the kitchen came up.  Then I was all his.  The parties I went to were weird.  The guys stood outside and talked about dirtbikes and trucks.  The women stood in the kitchen and talked about other people they all knew, weddings, and their kids (who were always left at home).  At my sister-in-law's wedding, my husband put together a gorgeous flower arrangement.  Everyone kept thanking me for doing it.

I'm now a feminist.

I like this post Jan, I think you've hit on something essential. Our attitudes towards feminism are going to be largely based on our own personal experiences. In your situation becoming a feminist is the only rational response. But how would you feel if you moved back to your old hometown, your old friends?


In my case, I live in a country  that now has it's third female Prime Minister, and many female CEOs of large companies. One of our current political parties in our coalition government has 75% female MPs. Females are now outnumbering males in universities. There are no rights that males have that are denied to females. Yet the media here constantly drones on about gender issues to the point the average person (male and female) are getting thoroughly tired of it. We are always hearing about the serious gender pay gap, yet no one seems able to find a single  example of a male and female doing the same work and getting paid differently. Another thing that is getting a lot of media time here is the constant bickering  between the lesbian feminists and the trans-rights groups, the vitriol these groups are condemning each other with is putting a lot of people off.

I think there are a lot of people like me who have both sons and daughters and can see that males and females have differences in some ways. It's not a case of  equality anymore than is an orange equal to an apple,  but recognition of differences in all people is not necessarily being sexist (or racist, or ageist, etc).

These days if a man looks sideways at a woman he's automatically a rapist, a misogynist, or both. Certainly guilty of something. Possibly this is correct, we still have inbuilt biological conditioning to overcome! But a group of women can be openly scathing and derogatory to any man and it is ok. The tide has gone too far in many cases in Western countries.

The danger is the extremists in the feminist camp are getting mighty close to creating a backlash. Swinging pendulums can hurt, if they are big enough.

Elle, I think that what you are observing is not society putting down women aka not empowering women.
Instead what you are seeing is some shade of homophobia.

A man wearing a dress .... immoral
A man wearing lipstick .... immoral
A man wearing a sexy apron, staying home cooking, feeding the kids .... immoral with his nuts chopped off.

In fact, alot of people would feel less threaten/fearful if said man was 100% homosexual. Then they could completely separated it as just something that happens in some alien/faraway sub-culture that my son/brother/etc is immune to. But when it is so closes to home where it seems like at any moment my son could be quickly demoted to a unmotivated apron wearing male who cant keep up with the jones/hernandez/his wife even though he had a head start. Solely because of the role model that 'said apron wearing husband is establishing'. The fight is for everyone to have a job getting paid equally not for men to be stuck at home in a sexy apron or in the workforce getting paid 69% of what women are being paid all else being equal.

But maybe I am viewing this from a male-centric point of view. Maybe a different point of view would be.

Big tough man Demands his wife leave work and stay home cooking and breast feeding or else .... people say typical tryant male society, but she is ambitious/driven soon she will gets a degree and joins the workforce and outsource childcare and food prep.
Empowered confident wife Demands that her husband leave his job and stay home wearing a sexy apron cooking/washing clothes/changing diaper .... Society calls said woman a tryant, immoral and said man weak for not striving to be gainfully employed in the workforce like other males and females and outsource childcare and food prep.

Another point is that anyone who is a stay-at-home parent male or female is views as weak/uneducated/oppressed/missing out/un-empowered. To the point that even kids who are homeschool are views as abused/missing out. Other family members/DCF/society view homeschool kids as at risk, even if homeschool kids do better than state average, and alot better than inner city school average. Similarly someone who leaves a job in the big wonderful city to move to a 10acres farmstead is viewed as 'stupid'/moving backwards/doom to failure/not giving their kids the superior city life upbringing.

It is also possible that they are worried about the kids, thinking that dads are horrible teacher with no college degree, dad are horrible parents and emotion teacher who will whip out a belt and beat the kids for the tiniest misstep, maybe they are worried the kids will be malnourished with donuts and bacon bellies (beer belly) because males can't cook and are just lazy and that you are evil for leaving your very own kids with such a horrible creature know as a male parent. It's like you are only one step away from hiring a 'pedophile-looking' male babysitter and that something is wrong with your gut-instinct/radar and decision making skills.


On a more personal level I don't really care if someone is different (Hindi/homosexual/sexy apron bondage fetish/etc), but at the same time I don't really want my kids to be a different religion, different sexual orientation, enjoying degradation, but if it happens what can I really do about it, to each their own.

I am also very happy that society as a whole is working towards more equality kids vs parents, students vs teachers, workers vs owners, serfs vs duke/king (avg citizen vs ruler/rich), whites vs minority/slaves, catholic vs other religion, men vs women. I don't want to see anyone pushed down/oppressed or left behind I think it is great that we are supporting each other and moving forward towards equality.

The idea that you and your husband take 2year turns staying home and homeschooling the kids/getting degrees/working on the house sounds wonderful, and it sounds equal to me. I know it must be a hassle to have to explain to everyone how it benefits you in long run and how it makes him a more successful/rich man in the long run.  People want to hear that you/him/your family will be more successful 5yrs from now, and if you can explain how he/you/your family will be more successful 5yrs from now they will complain less.

Personally I don't think that feminism is about 1) men denied entry to work or denied equal pay at work or 2)men being treated as house slave just to cook, clean and homeschool the kids. To me feminism is about women not being oppressed/denied any of the 'good' things that men are allowed to have. But in some ways female house slaves (abused stay at home mom), 'extra pay' and underage female sex-trafficked prostitutes are some of the 'good' things that men have enjoyed over the ages, so why not.

Hearing I am a feminist because my workplace pays my husband 70% what they pay me even though we are doing the same thing and that is how it should be forever for ever couple doesn't sound like equality, but more like revenge domination. I would prefer if both males and females are paid the same amount for the same job.

I think that what I am hearing you say is that your friends/family view active male parents (stay at home dad) as evil monsters who will kill/destroy kids and families. I don't know if I would equate viewing males as horrible parents with anti-feminism. But maybe they aren't against all stay-at-home-dads maybe they just never liked your husband and this is just a wonderful excuses to vent all of their bent up hate inside that they have against him. Maybe other female friends/family are worried that their husband will start saying I will reduce my working hours and take care of the house+kids, while you work extra hours my wonderful wife and that new extra responsibility scares them. And so they want to set an example by calling any male that does that 'bad'.  

I really do think that if you had said "I have outsources childcare and food prep like other city mom, and my husband is going back to school full time for a bit of time, and we have budget so we are okay financially." Nobody would have complained infact they might have said, wonderful with his degree he will be paid 2x, Your family is the role model for us all, so happy. But the moment the idea that dad is taking care of his children, you might as well have said ...... is watching my kids. The circle of people just see your husband and probably all dads in general as a risk. This might be true based on their own personal experience.

Alot of people see being 'girly' as a weakness and tell their female kids to not be girly/loser but to be more manly/winner. Most people would encourage their female child to try on their dads tie/hammer but if their male child try on lipstick, the reaction would be worse than if they found the trying out a cig/alcohol/poppjng pills (at age 5 or 10 or 15 or 20). Its like a male being girly/loser is the worse possible thing. Sadly we have all been indoctrinated that female/girly is inferior and should be eradicated from both males and females. They might be thinking this husband is male and thus a winner/superior and he doesn't just want his wife to be equal and manly like him, instead he wants her to be the manly/winner breadwinner while he takes up the loser/girly/inferior position what is wrong with him does he also like men vs women, is he a ...

Tyler Ludens wrote:

Dillon Nichols wrote:other definitions I've seen are more explicitly anti-religion.

I think you're right about that being the more common definition.

I agree. As well as being secular... it's ironic how feminism has become anti-feminine.

S Bengi wrote:Elle, I think that what you are observing is not society putting down women aka not empowering women.
Instead what you are seeing is some shade of homophobia.

Alot of people see being 'girly' as a weakness and tell their female kids to not be girly/loser but to be more manly/winner. Most people would encourage their female child to try on their dads tie/hammer but if their male child try on lipstick, the reaction would be worse than if they found the trying out a cig/alcohol/poppjng pills (at age 5 or 10 or 15 or 20). Its like a male being girly/loser is the worse possible thing. Sadly we have all been indoctrinated that female/girly is inferior and should be eradicated from both males and females. They might be thinking this husband is male and thus a winner/superior and he doesn't just want his wife to be equal and manly like him, instead he wants her to be the manly/winner breadwinner while he takes up the loser/girly/inferior position what is wrong with him does he also like men vs women, is he a ...

So this is something I struggle with. I try my best to let my kids be who they are but I have to think about society and the impact it will have on them. My son is very sensitive. He cares what other people think of him. Before he started school he would see me painting my nails and ask for it as well. I had no problem doing so. Now, when he asks, I redirect him. I know what the other kids at school would say to him and that it would deeply hurt him. So I haven't told him "No because it's for girls" but I am not painting his nails either.

Our daughter wanted a "short cut" like her older brother, since she could talk. I struggled with wanting to do pigtails and braids and cute stuff with her hair. We did let her cut it short eventually. People have responded by confusing her as a boy, even though she's the sort to romp about in a tu-tu and high heels. This doesn't particularly bother her but it drives her brother nuts and he's managed to shame her into growing her hair again.

I am personally a bit unusual. I really like dresses and heels and I dress very feminine. I also adore construction and digging holes. I can often be found doing it in my dresses. If you didn't know me and just looked at me you wouldn't believe the things I get up to. I just don't have that typical look, ya know.

Sometimes I wonder if my family has the reaction it does because my husband is such an involved and committed father. He isn't like the other Dads.  I wonder if that threatens their view of their own family. I know my mother complained about how uninvolved my father was. Here I am, with a man who never misses a kids Dr appointment or school event. To see that that was something that was possible. I don't know. That thought isn't fully formed for me yet.

Oh but money as well yes. We are the weirdos on that too. Not having debt, living within our means. CRAZY! So the fact that we are able to survive off a "woman's income" is a big shock. Most of them can't even live off their dual incomes.

Greg Mamishian wrote:

Tyler Ludens wrote:

Dillon Nichols wrote:other definitions I've seen are more explicitly anti-religion.

I think you're right about that being the more common definition.

I agree. As well as being secular... it's ironic how feminism has become anti-feminine.

I think it simply challenges the idea of feminine. My mother grew up not being allowed to wear pants. She pretty much never wears dresses now. Of course a woman's self conscious view of their own bodies has a lot to do with that. Varicose veins run in my family. It was something that always bothered my Mom. So she hides her legs in pants. I also have those veins but being something of a nut I still wear dresses and heels, unfettered by the judging looks of others.

So it's not that women are less feminine or anti feminine, I think it's just being allowed and able to be something other than.

elle sagenev wrote:

Greg Mamishian wrote:

Tyler Ludens wrote:

Dillon Nichols wrote:other definitions I've seen are more explicitly anti-religion.

I think you're right about that being the more common definition.

I agree. As well as being secular... it's ironic how feminism has become anti-feminine.

I think it simply challenges the idea of feminine. My mother grew up not being allowed to wear pants. She pretty much never wears dresses now. Of course a woman's self conscious view of their own bodies has a lot to do with that. Varicose veins run in my family. It was something that always bothered my Mom. So she hides her legs in pants. I also have those veins but being something of a nut I still wear dresses and heels, unfettered by the judging looks of others.

So it's not that women are less feminine or anti feminine, I think it's just being allowed and able to be something other than.

Elle, you're referencing a harmless softer side of feminism which is a woman's sovereign individual prerogative in how she presents herself to others. I was referring to the harder more militant secular political leftist side of feminism which isn't feminine.

Greg Mamishian wrote:

elle sagenev wrote:

Greg Mamishian wrote:

Tyler Ludens wrote:

Dillon Nichols wrote:other definitions I've seen are more explicitly anti-religion.

I think you're right about that being the more common definition.

I agree. As well as being secular... it's ironic how feminism has become anti-feminine.

I think it simply challenges the idea of feminine. My mother grew up not being allowed to wear pants. She pretty much never wears dresses now. Of course a woman's self conscious view of their own bodies has a lot to do with that. Varicose veins run in my family. It was something that always bothered my Mom. So she hides her legs in pants. I also have those veins but being something of a nut I still wear dresses and heels, unfettered by the judging looks of others.

So it's not that women are less feminine or anti feminine, I think it's just being allowed and able to be something other than.

Elle, you're referencing a harmless softer side of feminism which is a woman's sovereign individual prerogative in how she presents herself to others. I was referring to the harder more militant secular political leftist side of feminism which isn't feminine.

But who are you to decide what is or is not feminine?

The same way how your son shame his sister into fitting in and into re-enforcing his male boundaries.
Your female+male friends/families are also shaming your husband and you into fitting in and into re-enforcing the gender roles.

Alot of people prefer having a boring/pointless role at work, vs leaving that comfort and starting there own biz, where there is so much unknow. We are social creatures and so we like having role and hierarchy and stability. Mostly we like having stability, not everyone lives to explore and try something new. And you doing new stuff make them feel uncomfortable so unconsciously they try to bring you back into the flock. Alot of what they are doing is unconscious stuff, but it is good to see the flow of negativity, just being aware of it, give you power over it. Just try not to let that negativity infect you into disliking the people, just realise that they were infected by it and watch it move towards you trying to distract you and or infect you with negativity, and then laugh at it. Don't stop doing what you are doing, I love that you are able to enjoy life, live semi-retire have time to enjoy the important good stuff in life. VS living paycheck to paycheck with both parents working 1.5jobs at a job they hate with no time for the kids/hobbies/projects/partner.

I think that across the animal kingdom and males are prettier (horns/bright color/beard/crown/lapels/accessories/no veils/insignia and they do less work than the females.
Female lions do more work, female primates do more work, female wolf do more work, so many examples.

I think that historically females in humans groups have done more work than the males. While the males did the "hard work" of making the rules.

When I look what the bible says is a good wife
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs+31%3A10-31&version=KJV

I see that she grows, process and preserve food, she cooks it and serve it.
She buys raw material, she makes stuff/clothes for her family.
She buys land and starts a farm.
Being a sexual outlet
She starts a biz and sell whatever excess that she has (wine/grapes/clothes/oil/etc)
She educated her kids and take care of him
She takes care of her family, she even run the family biz (aka maidservants)
(I think the youngest son watched the herd).
And all the man had to do was go to war or sit at the town square and make rules/joke around.
Even making bricks to build houses was done by the women.
I am sure that most of the work of building a house was done by the woman.
Most community public works was done by the women.
Men did do warfare/mining/luberjack/slave trade/sailing/jewellery/blacksmith. But those trades were for maybe 8% of the male population.

But I am probably going off topic


Oh yeah, the question is why is your husband electing to do more work (woman work) when he has the option of doing less work as a male. What does he get out of it. Is it that he doesn't want to do the work but you just dominate him and force him to do it. Why does he allow you to hang around other males at work vs locking you up at home and while he gets to flirt with the coworkers, bartender?

A wife really was a a slave-mate, I mean helper-mate.
But now we have a rat-race system where the man is also a "serf-mate" to the powers that be (king/sultant/duke/plantation owner/corporation/bank/etc).  If I could have 20 serf-mate working for me and I could live a "retire/cozy" life I am not sure that I would willing give that up to do my own woodchopping/canning/clothes making/etc. Really I like my privileges/electronics/comforts/"helper" and it is very hard to give them up. And so many people are trying to get one over on others so that we can live a more cozy life.

elle sagenev wrote:So it's not that women are less feminine or anti feminine, I think it's just being allowed and able to be something other than.

I hear you on this. After getting catcalled and worse for having boobs as a young'un, I made my body as unfeminine as possible. To this day I'm happiest wearing men's clothes and doing "men's things" and if you see me in a skirt, you can assume I'm being held at gunpoint, possessed, or replaced by an alien imposter. As an older lady now I get this is an irrational backlash on my part, but I'm okay with that. I think it is a lot easier for women to be "un feminine" than it is for men to be "un masculine", for what it's worth, and that is a shame.

I agree with everything Jan said above. Quite frankly i never thought of myself as a feminist until I had a daughter and watched people catcall her as an 8 year old. Heard people tell her that science would probably not be "for her" (in two weeks, she starts college for cell biology, she took 2nd place in her incoming class). Now, in the current government of my country, seeing the erosion of women's rights in a supposed democracy. I always thought it was something I should just "get over". Now that I have money (as mentioned) I do what I can to raise up women to level the playing field if all other factors are equal, and I am glad for the privilege of doing so. I feel bad that the word feminist makes men feel put down, since that is not my intention and it alienates allies.
And like Jan says, I have a male partner who has never been afraid to be a good father, wash dishes, or that anyone will make any comments about his sexual orientation because of what he does in a very macho society. I am lucky and grateful. I am just as apt to comment if someone makes a crummy comment about men's abilities as I am when people say things about what women can and should do.

referring to the harder more militant secular political leftist side of feminism which isn't feminine.

By who's standards? Who is defining 'feminine'?  
Ironically, in this thread, men seem to be more certain what defines the 'feminine'.

My grand daughters can be quite traditionally feminine and are also warriors...no less 'feminine' in my mind?

So it's not that women are less feminine or anti feminine, I think it's just being allowed and able to be something other than.

Yes!  Without being kept in a box

Tereza Okava wrote: I think it is a lot easier for women to be "un feminine" than it is for men to be "un masculine", for what it's worth, and that is a shame.

Agreed.

Though no one has ever commented on my husbands butt in a courthouse and that just happened to me at lunch so.......

There is this idea that males need a pecking and so they are always struggling and fighting.
When we look at female chickens in a flock they "fight"  just as much, the same go for all primates, canines/wolf/etc and other female animals in a pack/herd/flock/etc.

There is also this idea that males at school/work/etc tell there friends that they like a female, but girls at school/with friends/etc don't do that. But females do in fact do it.

There is this idea that males start having sex before females, but it is actually not true.

There is this idea that males chose a female based on just physical health/looks (cleaning/labor and child bearing capabilities) where as females looks for males that have more connection/domineering personality/wealth/education/morals. There might be some truth to it, but I think that both males and females look for physical attraction, and mates higher up on the pecking order, etc, etc.

There is this idea males go around to as many females, really any female, showing their tail feather/jewelry/car/health(muscle), while females don't do as much showing off instead, they get to pick and chose the particular male that they want. There is alot of truth to that, I see it happening in nature. So I can see human males jumping around saying hello hot lady look at muscle/shiny/etc let me know if you like what you see because I like what I see.  

Sometime in the near future I see men only approaching women who are in their same social status (education/nobility/wealth/education) and ignoring rejecting other women who are below their standards, but I think that has already been happening to an extent for quite some time.

Creating a world without pecking order at homes, schools, work, government, society is going to be hard. We have made some great strides but so much still depends on the race/tribe/country/nobility/money/gender that you were born into.

S Bengi wrote:
Creating a world without pecking order at homes, schools, work, government, society is going to be hard. We have made some great strides but so much still depends on the race/tribe/country/nobility/money/gender that you were born into.

Yes, culture will impact this 'bigly' ... [...as a current stable genius leader in our current culture would say. :-) ]

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/may/14/early-men-women-equal-scientists

I read a book several years ago about a woman who lived disguised as a man for 18 months (Self-Made Man by Norah Vincent).  The big thing that I took from that book was the comment that for men, every other man wants to "kill them or f**k them."  There is a lot of aggression and physical bullying and jostling/rough housing and/or sexual interest or dominance and not much in between.  I know (and the author showed) that that wasn't always the case, and there is a lot of great friendship that men share too, but I have had the truth of it confirmed by men in my life - careful how you make eye contact, careful which way you nod or the gestures you make, always being judged as to threat or for weakness.  It makes me sad for men.

Elle, I think the issues your son (and other males) have and the crap they get around dressing "feminine" is that it confuses and blurs the lines between these two extremes (kill vs. f**).  I know this is simplified but I think there's something to it.

re. femininity, wearing dresses, etc.: I grew up in a religious home where "modesty" was one of the most important attributes a woman could possess.  No shorts or skirts above the knee, no bare shoulders, no bare legs (always pantyhose), not a hint of cleavage, no makeup, long hair.  Always cross your legs, no running.  You wanted to look nice but not sexy, feminine but not attractive.  I stopped believing all of that more than 20 years ago and I still struggle with the remnants.  

Sonja Draven wrote:The big thing that I took from that book was the comment that for men, every other man wants to "kill them or f**k them."    

I have never,  not one single time in my life,  ever thought anything like that,  and I've never heard any other man say they had either.  If you don't think that men establish friendships that are every bit as strong as women do, I can only tell you,  this man's experience is very different.  My lifestyle had always brought me in close contact with alpha males,  and there are dominance issues among strangers at first sometimes,  but the "kill them or fuck them" thing is ridiculous in my opinion.  I don't know where the author even came up with the "fuck them" half of that,  but I'm willing to bet that no man you ask has ever worried about that for one single second unless he was in prison.

With males only going about killing or fucking, I can see why elle family is scared shitless for the kids at home. With that type of thought pattern I would be very scared for the kids too.

But hopefully it's meant as eliminate/avoid (kill) or recruit/subjugate (fuck). I have watch enough mean girl high school shows to see that it is the same for females. I have also seen the same thing with office politics at work. Even at church the women do the same thing. PTA and community groups have the same pecking order problems. In fact I have heard quite a few females say, other women do too much back stabbing pecking order stuff that is why they don't like including others in their circle or at the very least they prefer a guy because it is out in the open what you are dealing with.

As a male going into a social setting new or old, mid-day or mid-night. I don't go in afraid that I will be fucked in the ass. Worse case I might be afraid that I will be robbed/killed, best case I have to give a firm handshake and find some people to handout with san social anxiety but I think that would be similar for female (the best case part)

I think the author of the book lived a super high stressed life where she was a new male (Chicken) entering a setting (flock) and so every single time a pecking order had to be established because she was a new 'fake male'. That is not a regular situation for most people. Also I am sure that the males felt some incongruities and probably gave her extra test because she was a 'fake male' and at least unconsciously they picked up on it. If as a male I tried to be a 'fake female' and go in the bathroom with them I am sure 'natural women' would pick up on it at least unconsciously and 'test me'. Also with no shared males to introduce this 'fake male novelist' it would be hard to form a deep friendship. Also as an adult it is hard to form deep friendship with strangers irregardless of gender. Not too sure if 6 months is enough time, esp when you yourself know that you are fake and you feel weird, even if the other person felt like everything was perfect being fake/self-conscious would make that deep connection all put impossible, that is way too big a secret.

That said most male animals are loners or if they are in a 'family unit' to lead. Where as females are usually taking care of young or following the leader. And human females in particular have been trained/indoctrinated to be a group player vs to be a loner or to lead, (at work, at home, while travelling, etc). So I can see how being a fake male and doing solo at a club/bar would be super scary at midnight.

Kids do learn how to 'manage' their parents on the low, who supposedly have more power and I think that women who have historically been forced to follow males have learnt how to 'manage' males on the low. But that style of managing can be very different from 'direct' managing that males tend to do. But either way it is about managing. Also I think that because of the freedom that males have (male privilege), they can openly try to manage other similar to siblings fighting each other.

But Elle all this talk about pecking order make it seems very probably that like Dale you are dealing with some unconscious sibling rivalry/jealousy. It's always interesting what the mind can do even if one swears that they will never be that way.

I think it is nice that you and your husband busted your ass, planned, worked, prepaid and saved so that you all can survive off just one income, and that he now walk to 'semi-retire' at home for a bit after your 2.5yrs. Like you I just don't understand why others have to be so negative. Is it self-hate where they feel that the work of a stay at home parent is worth absolutely nothing. I have always thought that kids who have to learn new info for 2 decades non-stop work harder than me in my cubicle. And that the people at the bottom working two jobs to survive work harder than me, and being a stay at home parent, homeschooling means that you are working 5x more than me just licking stamp at my cubicle.

So you either didn't read my post very carefully or I didn't write it as clearly as I thought.  So I'll try again....

I DID ask males in my life when I read it because I had never heard it before reading that book and multiple men confirmed that they had that experience or perception.  I did not just take her word for it based on her experience.

I didn't say (or mean to) that men can't have strong / great friendships (as strong as women's).  I know that isn't true.

If you care to, I would be interested in more details about the "dominance issues among strangers" you mentioned since i can only guesd what you mean.

Lots of guys f**k each other by choice and/or are attracted to other guys outside of prison.  And lots of guys are raped and assaulted outside of prison too.  I know statistics support that the latter especially isn't as common for men as for women but it seems a hugely sweeping statement to say that "no man" has worried about it.

And just to be totally clear, I am not trying to speak for you or any other man or convince you to see things my way. I cannot and will never know what it is like to be a man. I am just sharing my experience and perceptions.  I am also not interested in fighting or trying to add contention. I don't enjoy it and I really don't come here for that.

Thanks for the great post,  S. Yes there was definitely some of what you mention (the interpretation of that phrase) although not completely.  There were some sexual components in some situations.

And it was 18 months and she was an active member of a bowling team/league etc. So more than superficial interactions.  She makes friends as a guy.

But I did read it several years ago so I definitely don't remember clear details.  Just that it gave me sympathy for some male struggles where, even with lots of brothers and male friends,  I was more clueless before.

Sonja Draven wrote:It seems a hugely sweeping statement to say that "no man" has worried about it.

.

It is a hugely sweeping statement to say that,  but less so in my mind than "every man wants to kill them or fuck them". Every man.  You said your experience is different than mine and I'll take you at your word,  but I've never heard anything vaguely like that expressed by anyone.  I'll read the book.  I'm interested in reading more about the authors experiences and the circumstances surrounding them.

Trace Oswald wrote:

Sonja Draven wrote:It seems a hugely sweeping statement to say that "no man" has worried about it.

.

It is a hugely sweeping statement to say that,  but less so in my mind than "every man wants to kill them or fuck them". Every man.  You said your experience is different than mine and I'll take you at your word,  but I've never heard anything vaguely like that expressed by anyone.  I'll read the book.  I'm interested in reading more about the authors experiences and the circumstances surrounding them.

Fair enough.  And I am impressed and appreciative that you are going to read the book. I am interested in your take on it and if I am remembering it correctly.  :)

elle sagenev wrote:But who are you to decide what is or is not feminine?

I decide for myself just as you do...each of us from our own personal life experience.
So one determination is no more valid than the other because both are proprietary while neither is transferrable.

As I know them, feminine and feminism are distinctly different qualities.
One is effortless and flows naturally like water
while the other is strained and has hard sharp edges like gravel.
I'm grateful to my wife for showing me the difference without even trying.

Similar counterparts exist in the other sex, as masculine and macho are also different. One is a character quality of a man... while the other is merely male.

I think that some try to draw lines of similarity between what I see as the toxic outgrowth of masculinity,  machismo, and what some perceive as (and others have turned into) the toxic outgrowth of femininity that has become feminism.

I don't think its accurate. I think machismo for males is essentially a pre-linguistic throwback, when posture and actions were how thoughts and intent were communicated. It's a backstop for when our intellect seems insufficient.

By extension, the female analogue, to my mind, wouldn't be feminism, as that is, in its most basic form, a seeking of balance, but something with the same toxic potential as overblown machismo is to males. It would probably use sexual enticement, a mirror to the macho show of force, and it would probably seek to manipulate the weaknesses of the toxically macho with related emotions.

I think we need to move beyond all this. That, more than anything, is why I feel that using 20th century terminology and ideas to solve a 21st century problem is fallacy.

-CK

S Bengi wrote:When we look at female chickens in a flock they "fight"  just as much, the same go for all primates, canines/wolf/etc and other female animals in a pack/herd/flock/etc.

When I dress well, I'm doing it for other women. I have to admit that. I will sometimes dress to please my husband but it is mostly to impress other women. Of course I've never heard a man say he liked my shoes but women comment on the appearance of other women a lot.

Chris Kott wrote:I think we need to move beyond all this. That, more than anything, is why I feel that using 20th century terminology and ideas to solve a 21st century problem is fallacy.

Values define the difference between males and females... and men and women. But many people have moved far beyond this. The 21st century already has its own terminology for its own problems. Speak even one "incorrect" word in public today and your career will be destroyed. Whoever controls the language controls the culture.

This is just one reason why I love living outside the urban world where nature has its own wordless language.

.

In my perfect world people treat each other the same as they'd like to be treated.  They don't try to define each other or manipulate each other, but they share ideas and each takes for themselves what they wish.  (except when people are harming others)  When religious groups impose gender roles that aren't natural then that seems obscene to me.  "If God gave you the ability to do something who is man to go against that" is my response to those folks....how dare you!!!  :O

elle sagenev wrote:

Chris Kott wrote:To be clear, I didn't intend to suggest it was the wrong word for anyone else, nor do I think that could be reasonably inferred from what has been written.

Would it have been a different matter if my name were Christine rather than Christopher?

-CK

So this. This exactly. You are assuming because you are a male and we proclaim to be feminists that your opinion is despised purely on your possession of male parts.

Also, I do think it could be reasonably inferred. You did argue for the use of different words, after all.

I have been meaning to address this.

My observation is maligned as though this is some construct of my imaginings, when in actual fact, in real-life conversations with living, breathing, capital-F feminists, that is often the underlying, unspoken filter that qualifies any male opinion.

Enough with the sophistry, already. I don't care who wins a contest that doesn't matter. I want the women around me to feel valued and empowered, to be properly compensated, to be able to say and do anything they want to do within the bounds of a society of free individuals. But I want that for all people. This is no zero-sum game, where for feminists to feel empowered, men must then be subjugated.

We are not some monolithic organisation. Not all white people are rich. Not all rich people got rich by nefarious means. And not all men ascribe to those ideals vilified by feminism.

I think more progress could be made towards a fully inclusive, egalitarian society if we just gave the benefit of the doubt to those others of us we find in conversation on the matter. I don't think anyone espousing feminism as a cause is some kind of fire-breathing, bugfuck crazy harpy, even if they are a little heavier on enthusiasm than substance in their argument; we aren't even likely to find someone like that on these forums. I would appreciate if at least that amount of trust was extended my way.

-CK

Chris Kott wrote:

My observation is maligned as though this is some construct of my imaginings, when in actual fact, in real-life conversations with living, breathing, capital-F feminists, that is often the underlying, unspoken filter that qualifies any male opinion.

Enough with the sophistry, already. I don't care who wins a contest that doesn't matter. I want the women around me to feel valued and empowered, to be properly compensated, to be able to say and do anything they want to do within the bounds of a society of free individuals. But I want that for all people. This is no zero-sum game, where for feminists to feel empowered, men must then be subjugated.

I would appreciate if at least that amount of trust was extended my way.

-CK

See but I have never tried to subjugate a male. In fact I posted this because of the things being said to my husband.

Yet the argument is about the word I use to describe myself and my feelings/actions within society. To try to twist that word, which I personally value, into something vile and man hating.

It makes me sad. That's it. Just makes me sad. So I've been arguing for the right to use a word instead of the right for my husband and myself to care for our children equally. Life is weird sometimes.

Putting on my moderator hat for a moment...

We have learned over the years that comments that are addressed to "YOU" are more likely to cause turmoil in a thread, than posts that address the topic in more general terms. I'm asking if we can move the discussion more towards the general, and less towards singling out particular posters for their ideas.

Removing moderator hat.

Here's something just for fun... For what it's worth, nobody other than my mother says negative things about my costumes or hairstyles. And, when I put on a dress, glitter, or pigtails, I think of myself as the most alpha masculine man in the room... Who else would even dare? In any case, it's only a piece of cloth, there is no gender inherent in how a piece of cloth is sewn together, or how someone's hair is groomed, or what they apply to their skin.

Greg Martin wrote:"If God gave you the ability to do something who is man to go against that"

I hope you don't say that to the person who robs your house. (lol)

elle sagenev wrote: This is no zero-sum game, where for feminists to feel empowered, men must then be subjugated.

You have just described a highly relevant principle. Elle. If applied to economics, wealth is also not a zero sum game. The rich do not create the poor. In my opinion a woman who is empowered has no need to feel empowered. I've noted the overwhelming cultural popularity of movies where characters have super powers. I think this is because so many people in this society have become powerless.

elle sagenev wrote: I posted this because of the things being said to my husband.

Yet the argument is about the word I use to describe myself and my feelings/actions within society. To try to twist that word, which I personally value, into something vile and man hating.

It makes me sad. That's it. Just makes me sad. So I've been arguing for the right to use a word instead of the right for my husband and myself to care for our children equally. Life is weird sometimes.

This makes me sad, too.  Really sad.

elle sagenev wrote:
When I dress well, I'm doing it for other women. I have to admit that. I will sometimes dress to please my husband but it is mostly to impress other women. Of course I've never heard a man say he liked my shoes but women comment on the appearance of other women a lot.

Interesting how males and females give compliments.

Males are more likely to compliment a woman saying what nice hips(butt) you have. (all the better to carry my offspring).
But a female will compliment another female saying what nice skirt(pants) you have. (I will have to find one that is as good as if not better)
I think males normally compliment about health indicators directly, but women compliment about accessories and health more indirectly.

Males do compliment other males about toys/equipment/cars/etc.
How do females compliment male coworkers/male friends/random/etc?

In the animal kingdom and for humans too from a historically perceptive males were the more colorful, attention grabbing sex. But that has all changed now. Females are now the more colorful/stylish.

In nature the males are usually bigger than females. Currently in USA the avg women weighs more than the avg USA men in 1960.

To me feminism is the idea that men should not dominate over woman and that makes alot of sense. I don't really see a majority of people going around saying that they really really enjoy being on the losing end of a deal/interaction.  So to hear women say that they want to be treated equally, isn't surprising.

Humans are prideful and greedy. it seems that we really want to get one over the other human. So I can see men collectively coming togather saying lets decrease the competition by 50% be suppressing women. I can just as easily see women 100yrs from now saying lets suppress all the men, because both men and women are greedy and prideful if given the chance to be. (I know that Irish were suppressed in Boston and when they had a change to oppress the next group, they were the biggest oppressor of the Italians that came to Boston later). And it is possible that it is fair for women to oppress men for the next 100yrs because men oppressed women for thousands of year.  I bring this up because men are concern that the Hispanics immigrants are going to come over and take over and the empowered women are going to come over and take over and suppress the males. Is this an irrational fear brought about by lots of projection ... possible. This fear could be the reason why your male friends and family is indirectly requesting that you stay home and watch the kids doing more work taking on the inferior position and let your husband go to the office and take on the superior/dominant position. It's one thing for both parents to work but when the man becomes the "inferior/scared/protected" stay at home parent.

i am glad that we have laws and agreed up on rules that says even though we are all prideful and greedy, I will not just outright rob someone and send him or her home naked. I am glad that we at least get to haggle and are allowed to form collectives at the top and at the bottom [mergers/corporation (top) and labor unions (bottom)]. I am glad that we are now doing similar things for females and males. I forward to the day where we can do more homescale production with equality and less greed, where we try and have one human do more work than the other through suppression.

I am not even sure if such a day will ever come but that doesn't mean we should stop working towards it.

All that said if a specific man/woman wants read a different holy book or stay at home and watch the kid. Personally it doesn't bug me the least bit. It doesn't really take away from me or my family. And I am actually happy that we all have the freedom to do whatever we want. I think that society as a whole (friends and family included) is slowly but surely moving towards a more inclusive and free society. Your family and friends will slowly but surely get there too on this particular issue, you just have to be the one to "help them there" giving family help is always extra work but at least it is worth it.

Joseph Lofthouse wrote: And, when I put on a dress, glitter, or pigtails, I think of myself as the most alpha masculine man in the room... Who else would even dare? In any case, it's only a piece of cloth, there is no gender inherent in how a piece of cloth is sewn together, or how someone's hair is groomed, or what they apply to their skin.

I love that you have these costumes I've seen in some of your photos.  I wish more guys would play around like this.

It reminds me of a guy in my high school who decided, I think maybe to make some sort of point about something, to wear skirts and dresses to school for a while.  His point was never made because no one really paid any attention.  He got a few comments in the hallways in between classes at the beginning, but it was fun and nonjudgmental, nothing that put him on the spot or made him uncomfortable.  I didn't think much about it at the time.  It wasn't until years later that I remembered it and realized what an awesome place I grew up.

elle sagenev wrote:

So this is something I struggle with. I try my best to let my kids be who they are but I have to think about society and the impact it will have on them. My son is very sensitive. He cares what other people think of him. Before he started school he would see me painting my nails and ask for it as well. I had no problem doing so. Now, when he asks, I redirect him. I know what the other kids at school would say to him and that it would deeply hurt him. So I haven't told him "No because it's for girls" but I am not painting his nails either.

I would be tempted to try to turn this into a be yourself and don't worry about what other people think of you lesson..  I think if I had kids I might be a difficult mother, though ;D