"sexism in america: alive and well, and ruining our future"

[niyad]

turned on booktv this morning, in time to catch a segment by barbara j. berg on her book of the above title. as a life-long feminist, one who has worked on so many different aspects of the problem, it was disheartening to see how much of a backlash there has been, and how far we have to go (like a person the other day who said it was bs that a male boss would make a very demeaning, insulting comment without immediately being hit with a lawsuit)

one of the things she pointed out, in terms of backlash, was the current popularization of the word "housewife"--a term feminists worked very hard to eliminate from our vocabulary. women, after all, are not married to their houses. but look at the prevalence of shows with that word in the title--and look at the stereotypes portrayed therein. just one small example.

From Publishers Weekly
Sexism hasn't gone away, argues journalist/activist Berg, it has simply adapted to our changing culture. Berg offers a refresher course on the 20th-century women's rights movement and its unexpected devolution in recent years, drawing on aspects of culture like advertising and reality TV, scientific research and an online survey of 300 not-so-randomly selected women and interviews with 200 more. Contemporary women, Berg says, are encouraged to imitate vapid media darlings instead of breaking glass ceilings (or breaking even) in academia, business and government. Containing the requisite—and accurate—feminist media criticism and movement history, updates to the 2008 presidential election and Obama's first few months, this is an excellent, easily decipherable text for history, sociology and women's studies students—and even older feminists looking for an update. Berg uses short chapters for flowing discussions on work, reproductive rights, health and activism. She focuses on working women's issues, and more discussion on women who choose to be full-time homemakers and their particular concerns would have added balance. But Berg still offers a wakeup call for young women entering the cultural and career trenches on what went wrong and how to fix it.

http://www.amazon.com/Sexism-America-Alive-Ruining-Future/dp/1556527764/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1262564091&sr=1-1

[Odin2005]

1. Even here on a supposedly liberal site the misogyny just oozes.

[niyad]

2. and when it is pointed out, people whine about it, insisting we are overreacting, etc.,

[omega minimo]

4. Let this be the year DU detoxifies itself of sexist and racist attitudes

We just had a disgusting example, a thread open for over an hour. Let the DU members put pressure on each other AND notify mods, when blatant bigoted rule violations occur. Let the honest be educated and the trolls be eliminated. SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.

[niyad]

6. great scott, what did I miss? do I need to sharpen my claws?

[Odin2005]

29. RAMEN!

:)

[omega minimo]

43. What? We need to pray

to some Noodly Appendage?

[Odin2005]

45. If you want to.

:evilgrin:

[omega minimo]

47. Now wait.

I'm confused.
















:wow:

[Odin2005]

53. LOL!

:rofl: :hi:

[omega minimo]

55. GOTCHA!!!

you thot you had me :eyes: :spray:

[LooseWilly]

156. Uhhh...

:wow:

From the wiki:
"A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices."

I'm pretty sure that's allowed here. In fact, I really can't imagine you'd want that "purged" from the site at all.

Just saying...

[omega minimo]

172. If you don't understand that sexist and racist attitudes are bigoted or why bigotry is

objectionable, maybe don't depend on wiki -- or simplistic editing -- for your definitions.

[uppityperson]

192. You put that well and very civilly. Thank you, better than I

would have done

[omega minimo]

199. I don't understand anyone trying to parse bigotry to be something other than what it is

Happy New Year, uppityperson.

[omega minimo]

200. "I'm pretty sure that's allowed here"

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot

Main Entry: big·ot
Pronunciation: \ˈbi-gət\
Function: noun
Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
Date: 1660
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
— big·ot·ed \-gə-təd\ adjective
— big·ot·ed·ly adverb

DU Discussion Forum Rules
4. Content: Do not post messages that are inflammatory, extreme, divisive, incoherent, or otherwise inappropriate. Do not engage in anti-social, disruptive, or trolling behavior. Do not post broad-brush, BIGOTED statements.

[uppityperson]

202. I luvs the selectiveness of your copy/pasting and wiki as a source. here...

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bigot
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

[iris27]

11. +1

To the point that I almost didn't even click on this thread...so far it is ok though...

[seabeyond]

12. yes. nt

[Kitty Herder]

18. Yes. It's disgusting.

And unfortunately, a large number of posters here are absolutely blind to it.

[Odin2005]

31. Some posters are in denial of their own misogyny.

Right down to thinking date-raping a passed out drunk woman is OK! :puke:

[Kitty Herder]

36. And yet they dare to call themselves progressive or liberal!

I used to be shocked when I saw such attitudes on this board. Now I've come to expect it.

[seabeyond]

38. i beg to differ. they deny, but they know, are aware, totally conscious of what they do

so i dont see it so much as denial, but more, .... lying. lol

when a man comes on du and uses language with the purpose of degrading a female, humiliating, lessening, dehumanizing her, attacking sexuality, the very female she is, one can pretty much know that the man knows what he is doing and is doing it purposely.

since being on du, has become clear to me. it is so predictable and constant.

and a handful of women use this style too, as they defend the sexism.

[Odin2005]

51. A few posters do it just to rile people up

There is one poster in particular that gets his rocks off being an ass. I still haven't forgiven him for the crap he spewed in the thread about the movie date rape scene thread this spring.

[omega minimo]

115. Well he's not as active

since his sockpuppet was TSd

[Odin2005]

124. What was his sockpuppet?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

141. You should ask femrap.

:rofl:

[Odin2005]

145. I was waiting for you to pop up.

:eyes:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

146. I'm in agreement with the OP.

I've just gotten back from the future and half the eastern seaboard is in ruin due to the popularization of the term housewife. They never should have messed with the moon.

[omega minimo]

168. speak of the Invisible

his ears were burning :evilgrin:

[Kitty Herder]

52. It's not so much that they are blind to what they are doing but that they

are blind to the fact that it is wrong, that it's hateful. They've grown up in a culture where it is acceptable to silence, belittle and bully women and they don't see anything wrong with it. They're like fish unaware of the water they live in.

[The Straight Story]

21. there is a lot of hate here at times, but it seems OK when it is a group we don't like

Damn shame hate is tolerated at any level on a progressive site. But I suppose everyone needs an enemy.

[seabeyond]

23. a whole gender? lol. that is sad, truly sad. but i see it really sad for the person living it

i can walk away from it on the board. i dont have it in my RL. these people live it 24/7

[The Straight Story]

56. Not sure if you meant to reply to me there,

but hate I see here is a reflection of what I see elsewhere. Whether it be for one group or another.

[ProgressIn2008]

188. Good post. I agree. nt

[liberalhistorian]

134. No kidding. Just mention the words "child support"

and here they'll come. It's like a spray that gets them right out of the woodwork.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

187. I'm female and I had to pay child support for the child I gave birth to.

I had joint custody when her father and I divorced, but he had primary custody.

In Texas, we have community property, which means that men and women are equally obligated to support their children.

I had some stupid woman at my job once say, "Well somebody told me that NEVER happens! Women NEVER have to pay child support! It's so unfair, the way the men ALWAYS get reamed!".

She almost didn't believe that I had to pay child support.

The reason we have more equal treatment of men and women is because of Spanish Law from Mexico. I learned this when I was in law school and took Marital Property. There are cases stating that married women can own and transfer property in their own names, dating back to 1836, the first year that Texas was a Republic, that are still good law.

Much more equal than English law (used in New England) or French Law (Code Napoleon used in Louisiana).

[liberalhistorian]

198. I can't believe there are people like that woman who don't

believe that there are women who have to pay support. Then again, maybe I CAN believe it, unfortunately. I've personally known women who paid support and, being in the legal field, I've known of many cases where the father had custody and received support from the mother. I have no problem with that at all, you have children, you support them, period, regardless of which parent they may live with. And women who are supposed to pay support can be just as much "deadbeats" as some men. I don't mean "deadbeat" in terms of losing a job and being in financial straits and unable to pay, or hitting a rough patch financially and having to reduce or curtail payments for some time, that's different. I mean those who have the means but just simply refuse to support the child(ren).

But too many people act like ANY support is "taking away from the man", the mother is a bitch for even considering wanting the father to support his child(ren) in any way, and that she uses it all on luxuries for herself, etc., etc. Never mind that if the parents were still together, he'd be paying far more than any suppport amount for the daily/monthly care and expenses of the children. And don't even get me started on the resentment of second wives for the father having to pay anything for his children.

[ismnotwasm]

3. Society will never heal its ills

Until sexism is gone. And that includes heterosexism. It's arguably the single most destructive force plaguing the human race, as a whole host of societal ills can be traced back to sexism and misogyny.

[omega minimo]

5. "a whole host of societal ills can be traced back to sexism and misogyny."

Indeed

[niyad]

7. so very, very true

[Odin2005]

33. It even hurts us guys.

I was teased and bullied as the "quiet, sensitive boy" constantly when I was a kid. :(

[iris27]

109. It really does.

We are at a weird half-changed state in society, where it has become more ok for girls and women to have traits and pursue interests once considered solely "masculine", but the stereotypically "feminine" is still demonized such that it's considered degrading if a boy or man in interested in such things.

My Marine brother's stories of his boot camp experiences are rife with examples of DIs using femininity as an insult/motivator...it made me wonder what they yelled at the women?

[seabeyond]

110. a weird half-changed state in society

that is good. that is exactly what it feels like.

[Pithlet]

155. That's true.

Women aren't the only ones affected.

[DrCory]

171. +Infinity! I didn't care for football or monster trucks...

and often preferred the company of my sister and her friends.

I'm sure you know what that made me...GAY! :wow:

For some odd reason, the bashers seems to have overlooked the fact that I was in a long term (well, for a teenager) and obviously intimate relationship with a girl.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

8. and raging against colloquialisms and descriptions is going to accomplish what exactly?

The largest problem for academic feminism is they have taken themselves so far out of anything relevant to ordinary women that they at best have no opinion or interest in the subject what-so-ever, or have an antagonistic and dismissive attitude for the subject. If the only exposure a young woman has to feminism is an alienating university professor rambling about the racist hetero-patriarchy. Good luck inspiring them.

The media argument is ridiculous, because not only does it apply equally to men - the media presents a far greater range of female images than male ones, if that is her argument then the media encourages men to be crude, perpetual adolescents who piss off overpasses.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

14. i'm not fond of the expression,

the challenge is making yourself relevant to a generation for whom basic issues are taken for granted. Ranting and raving about the use of the phrases housewife and chick in the mainstream and obtuse and uninspiring and often bizarre rhetoric in academia does not help the cause of feminism.

[seabeyond]

15. discussing = "Ranting and raving ". are you sure anyone was ranting?

are you sure they were raving?

or

could they have been maing a point. discussing.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

16. Their making a point, but few people of any gender are interested

Fighting language isn't going to inspire any number of women, show me a dozen women in the entire state of California who don't use the word "chick".

[seabeyond]

17. this is how you dismiss this whole subject in front of you. by the word chick

the books discussing so many things and you reduce it to the word chick? for real? this is your argument when it comes to feminism alive and well, addressing a real issue in u.s. with both genders.... to chick? and you want to be taken seriously? as if you really have something to say?





Berg offers a refresher course on the 20th-century women's rights movement and its unexpected devolution in recent years, drawing on aspects of culture like advertising and reality TV, scientific research and an online survey of 300 not-so-randomly selected women and interviews with 200 more. Contemporary women, Berg says, are encouraged to imitate vapid media darlings instead of breaking glass ceilings (or breaking even) in academia, business and government. Containing the requisite—and accurate—feminist media criticism and movement history, updates to the 2008 presidential election and Obama's first few months, this is an excellent, easily decipherable text for history, sociology and women's studies students—and even older feminists looking for an update. Berg uses short chapters for flowing discussions on work, reproductive rights, health and activism. She focuses on working women's issues, and more discussion on women who choose to be full-time homemakers and their particular concerns would have added balance. But Berg still offers a wakeup call for young women entering the cultural and career trenches on what went wrong and how to fix it.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

24. I don't dismiss anything,

The only exposure most people in the present day get to feminism is arguments about what is perceived to be sexist that offend practically nobody, the original post mentions the slur of the ages "housewife" and strange alienating academic rhetoric about an ethereal all-controlling patriarchy from creepy sociology professors.

[seabeyond]

30. those arent my priority. and i dont dismiss it. i dont with people of different race, religion or

sexual orientation. if they make it clear that particular words are bothersome, i respect that. simple enough to do for me. i dont purposely go out of my way to offend, even if it is not my priority.

but there is much much more in that book, than a word we use.

[omega minimo]

42. The main reason for that perception

"The only exposure most people in the present day get to feminism is arguments about what is perceived to be sexist that offend practically nobody" is: the success of Limbaugh's campaign against Liberals and Feminazis; the willingness of "liberal" males to adopt the lingo and attitudes without thinking them through; and consequent ability of "liberal" males and troublemakers to shout down and shut down any more finessed discussion of women's rights on a "progressive" board such as this one.

As you are being schooled elsewhere in the thread, it is not for YOU to tell us what we should or should not value or discuss. It's easy to dismiss as irrelevant when it doesn't affect you. Let others discuss what they wish. Don't try to PREVENT the opportunity to expand the exposure most people in the present day get to feminism..."

Thank you.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

49. don't give rush limbaugh so much credit

I'm not telling you what you should value or discuss, I am tell you why society isn't very receptive.

[omega minimo]

54. Yes you are. You don't speak for "society." You're serving as a Dittohead. Like it or not.

[uppityperson]

193. "The only exposure most people in the present day get to feminism is arguments ..." WTF?

"The only exposure most people in the present day get to feminism is arguments about what is perceived to be sexist that offend practically nobody"

Are you serious? Seriously? Huh, you must not get out much.

[iris27]

112. You realize that feminists are capable of working toward many goals at once,

and that those who would trivialize us deliberately select the smallest of those (language use) and focus their attention on it as though that's all we stand for and work toward?

[The Green Manalishi]

181. No, but I do feel that the sensitivity to such words as "housewife"

is, overall and in the long term, counterproductive. Raise hell about workplace inequality, kick up a shitstorm about academic inequality, but "housewife" is a perfectly good word; it describes exactly what some women aspire to be; indeed railing against it not only makes one seem ridiculous but offends those who choose to follow the programming they received.
Yes words and definitions are important, of course, but we should pick our battles. If my wife made serous bucks and I could stay at home cooking, caring for progeny etc I would have no qualms about being, or calling myself, a "house husband"; it's perfectly honorable and rational if one partner has much higher earnings capacity or simply much higher drive and motivation than the other for one to serve as a support system for the other.
Now, if someone objected to being called a 'housewife' and one continued to do so, then that would be insensitive, but to say that any use of the word is 'sexist' is to dilute the argument about sexism for no gain.

[NoSheep]

190. To not see the word "housewife" as offensive is to admit your complete ignorance of the issue.

the anti-intellectualism has been noted.

[Nikki Stone1]

10. Sen. Walter, you have to watch more than the cartoon channel for role models.

How about Brian Williams? Jon Stewart? Barack Obama?

Or if you're looking for fiction, how about Law and Order? That McCoy was always quite a maverick in the real sense.

[seabeyond]

13. when i see a talking penis argue with his balls about which attract women

the shot stays exclusively on the talking penis objectifying the male, then ok, i will agree with you.

and yes, this is part of the problem. our media presenting only the asshole male conditioning men that this is who they are.... jerks that are crude and vile, objectifying and dehumanizing women.

so it is a two prong attack from media. conditioning female they are things for male entertainment. and conditioning men that females are things for male entertainment.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

19. Douglas Rushkoff has written about this

He argues the media has created two gender stereotypes, he calls them the "mook" and the "midriff".

The "mook" being the crude, aggressive and stupid male stereotype and the "midriff" being the crude, sexual and stupid female stereotype. The media conditions youth to aspire to these invented demographics and then feeds it back to them in the name of giving them what they want. For men it gets worse still as southern and urban "values" dictate that ones masculinity is judged only by their ability to be cruel and violent.

[seabeyond]

20. well, i havent heard of anyone writing about it, but that does sound promising.

i agree with what is stated in you post. thanks.

may just google his name. not gonna be surprises will there, like validation on why.... cause biological and men cant help it, grinnin.

nah

thanks sen.

[Kitty Herder]

22. I believe the reason that younger women feel feminism is "irrelevent" is that feminism is hard.

It is much easier to simply go with the flow than to swim upstream, so most choose to do that. It's not that it is irrelevant, but that they choose not to educate themselves about it, much as you appear to have done.

As far as the media, are you fucking serious? Perhaps we live on different planets?

[seabeyond]

25. i know what you say is true. and for many reasons. was hard for me when i was young

i see it with my two nieces.

i remember young, no way did i want to be associated with feminism cause i was conditioned to believe it meant ugly, didnt like sex, didnt like men.

then i grew up

i took back the word feminism and liberalism.... i say those words out loud now and people are appalled, or my father and brother both saying, "i didnt say you were....". like it was a cuss word. i tell them, no, you didnt say, i did. lol

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

26. no...

It is because they were raised in a world where things like suffrage, reproductive choice, career opportunity have significantly been settled for decades. They take it for granted and don't associate that with feminism. They then come to associate feminism with hyper-sensitivity, misandry and creepy professors ranting about the patriarchy.

People typically aren't going to make an effort to educate themselves about something they find completely alienating and not terribly relevant.

It is the same issue that faces many maturing causes, with the core objectives accomplished people move on. This leaves behind the hardcore element who in their private echo chamber only become more militant.

[Kitty Herder]

27. Of course it's not relevent to you, Walter.

It's very easy for those who are not affected by oppression to presume that because a few legal battles have been won, that the war is over. They don't experience the reality of it in their own lives.

I apologize for the crude metaphor to follow, but sometimes analogies can be enlightening. As a white person, I would be incredibly foolish and insensitive to think that racism is all over, a thing of the past because the Civil Rights Act was passed. As a straight person, I wouldn't assume that homophobia is over because of the recent hate crimes bill. As a man, you are being foolish and insensitive when you think that sexism is over because women have won some legal protections.

You don't live it or experience it so you don't see it and you honestly have no place telling those of us who live it every day that our lived experience and our pain doesn't count. As someone who is privileged because of their sex, your place is to listen, just as my place is to listen to those over whom I have privilege.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

37. Your missing the point,

It isn't that a handful of victories negate all or any issues, it is that in the case of feminism past accomplishments are appropriated into general social progress and are no longer associated with feminism. From there you are stuck with contemporary feminism which isn't very inspiring or relevant.

[Kitty Herder]

39. I agree with you there.

Feminism doesn't get the credit it deserves.

[omega minimo]

35. You continue to repeat the Dittohead Feminazi talking points.

"It is because they were raised in a world where things like suffrage, reproductive choice, career opportunity have significantly been settled for decades."

Not true.

"People typically aren't going to make an effort to educate themselves about something they find completely alienating and not terribly relevant."

Thanks for the Feminazi Dittohead shit that has permeated the culture and that you are reinforcing here.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

57. you are the only one talking about rush limbaugh and feminazis

Is it fair that the accomplishments of earlier feminists have been re-appropriated to collective social progress? Probably Not.

Does that change the fact that contemporary feminist scholarship and presentation is not very compelling? No.

[ismnotwasm]

70. Taking women's studies are you?

Or have in the past? Anthropology course from the perspective of female development maybe? Subscribe to Hypatia? Personally I find Hypatia very compelling, very thought provoking. Would you like a list of contemporary feminist journals to pass judgment on? Perhaps from the perspective of a Jewish or Islamic feminist? Incarcerated feminist? Black feminist? Aboriginal feminists in Australia? Canada?


I'd love to help you out here, since I'm sensing not only male privilege but white hetero male privilege. A pleasant place of enough time and healthy ability to stop and smell the roses, but alas, no desire to observe the actual rose

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

76. not recently,

but I know the subject well,

[uppityperson]

194. well, you had me going until this post. Thanks for the chuckle

[omega minimo]

84. That's bizarre. YOU are the ONLY one spouting the Dittoheadisms

and then trying to make it sound like more than that? :freak:

[hack89]

63. +1 nt

[KakistocracyHater]

161. those core objectives supposedly settled have been unsettled, Scopes monkey

trial redo, moon-landing deniers, anti-science Christians.........
all the while the words like 'feminisim' & 'liberal' are poisoned as much
as possible by the Right & this is part of their propaganda, one piece
in their arsenal. Much like Agape(love feast) a title of Venus, taken by the
"new" religion, & pandemonium-another title of Venus(it USED to mean harmony/all the people).

So while the Baptists are trying to make it the new norm in church for ALL WOMEN
TO BE SILENT, perhaps you ought to pause a bit longer before denying that anything's wrong.

[ismnotwasm]

32. Damn that didn't take long

a "what about the men" post.

I call Bullshit on the academic feminist part. However, I won't argue, because there is obviously a lack of knowledge and concern what the academic feminist writes or lectures about here.

We won't even talk about the world wide groups of feminist activists, groups that happen to be made largely up of young women; A population you've so conveniently dismissed as having "no opinion" and "no interest"


Jesus that's fucked up.

[omega minimo]

46. "Fucked up," articulate, not the usual loutish hijacker

Successful nonetheless.

[ismnotwasm]

69. A psychological "projection" perhaps

The word "rambling' was used in a rambling reply decrying feminist academics. Nasty that.

And Still fucked up.

[Odin2005]

34. You are attacking a strawman.

[Kitty Herder]

40. Indeed. nt

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

41. unfortunately in the social sciences today strawmen get published

feminism is one of many fields that has been destroyed by post-modernism,

[Odin2005]

48. A lot of fields have been destroyed by PoMo BS.

Doesn't mean all the stuff is crap, that's a fallacy.

[Cerridwen]

67. You are wrong.

"The largest problem for academic feminism" is the phalanx of small minded men and their enablers in the hallowed, "liberal" halls of academia who are terrified their petty fiefdoms will be dismantled as their 19th Century "scholarship" is questioned and examined.

"The largest problem for academic feminism" is the parsimonious, purse-string, manipulators who are afraid their research dollars might wind up in the hands of those who refuse to quietly accept the "canon of knowledge" as dictated from high atop the ivory towers.

"The largest problem for academic feminism" is the outrage and dismay expressed from within those towers that those having acquired the treasured letters of admission into the sacred "brotherhood of learned men," might use them whilst marching in the trenches amongst the "un-learned" and "un-washed" masses as many feminist scholars have wont to do.

"The largest problem for academic feminism" is the pompous, rigidity of those convinced of their right as all-knowing father/professor desperately clinging to their last, once unchallenged, proof of superiority.

In short, Sen., "The largest problem for academic feminism" is those so enamored of their title, power, privilege, and position within the patriarchal, hierarchy of academia, they're pissin' their pants that a bunch of "goddamned girls" are going to expose their petty, self-inflated egos to the stench of reality.

[Kitty Herder]

73. You absolutely fucking rock!

[Cerridwen]

78. Yes, I absolutely fucking do. LOL.

Thanks, Kitty.

He won't get it. He's too invested in his unearned privilege.

More's the pity.

[Solly Mack]

131. Yes you do!

Rock!

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

75. so, basically in five paragraphs you blame the patriarchy

brilliant rebuttal,

[Cerridwen]

77. "brilliant rebuttal" Yes it was. Thank you, ah, Senator?

Is that the title to ascribe to yourself; senator? Couldn't you have gone with, Lord, Master, King of all the penises?

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

80. well, king of all the penises was taken

and if you don't know who Walter Sobchak is - or why Senator Walter Sobchak would be funny, well I can't help you.

I was going to go with "Sen. Sobchak R-CA" but was worried I would get banned if a mod, like you, didn't get the joke.

[Cerridwen]

87. Yes, yes, yes, EVERYONE on DU knows I'm a humorless feminist.

I've even joked about it. Oh, wait...humorless feminist...joke. Nevermind.

And you've yet to reply to one point I made.

Not one.

You put your pompous ass right into the middle of this thread and lectured all us "silly widdle feminists" with your "superior" knowledge of what it is to be a woman and what feminism is.

I suggest you try to educate those other groups next time you have a hankerin'. You know, those goofy gays and uppity...well, whatever you think you can get away with calling them.

Some things are *now* not tolerated on this board. You just happened to find the one bigotry that's still acceptable here. Congratulations. You've joined the ranks of r/w spewing "liberals."

You must be so proud.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

91. You have posted nothing to reply to

The problem with academic feminism is... the patriarchy. Great, your on the record.

You just rambled on about what is probably among the most liberal demographic of men anywhere, academics in the humanities and social sciences are part of the big bad patriarchy with the same alienating nonsense that makes men and women alike tune-out.

If you delivered that screed in front of a classroom you students would wander out afterward muttering about those stupid feminists, in likely much cruder language only perpetuating the credibility and relevance problem.

[Cerridwen]

92. I have delivered that very message in front of classrooms.

They were pissed.

Not at the feminists.

Nice try.

Now, continue speaking with yourself. Though, I do have a question; do you have a skateboard?

Oh, and keeping with my academic roots, that would "you're" not "your." Pet peeve of mine; your penis-nish.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

95. no, I have never owned a skateboard

oh, and my girlfriend reading over my shoulder thanks you for the "your penis-nish" line.

[omega minimo]

117. If there is a King of the Penii

wouldn't he be called "Your Phallusy?"

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

123. could you ladies stop talking about my junk,

it is making me a little uncomfortable,

[omega minimo]

152. We're not. It's not All About You

[hfojvt]

128. well I have never heard of Walter Sobchak

but I see that 'male privilege' has reared its head again.

[Rebubula]

135. Walter Sobchak

Your ignorance is your loss

[hfojvt]

136. nice of you to say so

edit; it kinda works with my sig line doesn't it, and seems to contradict yours.

[seabeyond]

138. The Big Lebowski. a stupid guy film. god forbid women dont know the characters

in this movie.

a few men on du spend a lot of time referring to and quoting from the movie.....

[Scout]

139. i saw that ... only because Jeff Bridges was in it ... what a waste of, well, everything n/t

[seabeyond]

144. had to do a google cause of reference on the board. i came to that conclusion

go to know lol. thanks.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

148. watch the damn movie

Walter Sobchak is the most brilliant characature of a neo-conservative tough guy ever created,

[Pithlet]

158. Actually, I love the movie.

I'm sure that will make his head spin!

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

164. somebody who was alive in the 1990's loves The Dude?

yeah, i'm shocked over here.

[seabeyond]

165. is this where the dude commercials came from a couple years ago?

waz up dude...

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

166. probably not,

the dude to fuck ratio isn't high enough in the beer commercial,

[seabeyond]

167. lol. nt

[hfojvt]

169. I wouldn't call it a guy film

and I am a guy.

I'd call it a stoner film, not that somebody who watches Kevin Smith movies should cast stoners
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7382825&mesg_id=7386242

I actually bought the DVD since DUers claimed it was sooo funny and I have sorta been following the Coen brothers since I took that course from their dad. I thought Raising Arizona was hilarious, but didn't like the Big Lebowski at all.

[seabeyond]

174. we have raising az. hubby loves it. i have never seen it.

so it is more in that area? thanks.

[dustbunnie]

186. I'm a woman and I wouldn't call it a guy film. It's pure Coen magic.

I love the dialogue in that flick... the fun they poke at some of the stereotypical characters is falling on the floor hilarious. John Goodman is brill in it from start to finish. What's with this guy movie crap? The Coens make amazing movies.

[omega minimo]

116. So basically, the existence of the patriarchy is your excuse for ignoring the five paragraphs

lame

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

119. nothing she said needs an answer, blah, blah, blah, partirarchy

There is nothing wrong with us, it is the patriarchy, and oh yeah - our male colleagues (likely the most liberal men virtually anywhere) are sexist douchebags.

[omega minimo]

121. Everything you've said in the thread is a gross over generalization.

[niyad]

126. C, this deserves its own thread. would love to see you make it one.

that way, I can rec it!!

[Scout]

133. +1000 n/t

[PizzaDriver]

159. younger women have been dismissing "feminism" since Susan B. Anthony's day.

it hardly means that feminism is not needed or has gone too far, or any such thing. young women (like young men) tend to believe what they're told by society. it takes a while for them to see things for themselves.

[niyad]

162. welcome to DU

[PizzaDriver]

170. thanks; i've actually been here since the very beginning, under various names...ha ha

[NoSheep]

189. Yeah...let's just dumb it all down.

[NoSheep]

191. "the media presents a far greater range of female images than male ones"

THAT is the biggest lie I've heard since the chimp left his stolen seat of power.
And by the way, from what I've observed from some truly amazing men who are bright, educated and have social advantages...they don't need the media "to be perpetual adolescents who piss off overpasses".

[Greyhound]

28. K&R. Yes it is, worldwide.

[struggle4progress]

44. It seems curious to me, looking back over the last forty years or so, that the feminist

movement of the 1960s and 70s did not produce more gains. The traditional patriarchy in the US expected women to do unwaged labor as "housewives" or to undertake essential (but underpaid and low status) service jobs in fields such as teaching or nursing, since they were usually barred from higher paid and higher status employment. An assault on these expectations could potentially have produced major reforms in employment practices, including extensive (and not necessarily sexist) considerations for maternity, family emergency time, part time jobs with commensurate benefits, and so on. What happened, instead, is that women were expected to join a workforce that remained structured as if everyone employed (whether male or femnale) still had a wife at home to handle essential matters during the workday. And, of course, women still do not generally receive pay comparable to that of men. Part of the problem might be that we did not ratify the ERA -- and perhaps continuing the struggle would require us to reactivate that issue. I will add, as a general comment, that political movements are pointless without specific political objectives: it is easier to change attitudes by changing the context in which people live and work, than to seek to change the context in which people live and work by aiming at their attitudes

[MellowDem]

50. The title seems somewhat hyperbolic...

but I suppose that has to be expected when someone is trying to sell a book. It doesn't really surprise me when a feminist in academia, whose whole career hinges on the continued existence of sexism, issues dire warnings of how sexism is actually worse now, etc. etc.

Few people think that sexism has completely gone away, so to begin on the premise that they do makes no sense. You can pretend that most people think we are living in a post-gender society, but it doesn't make it so. Probably the biggest obstacle facing feminism is that it needs to adapt itself as well. Those who define and create theories of feminism are almost exclusively women in academia, which just doesn't reflect the real world obviously. And feminism is an unfortunate name for what really is genderism. It has left out half of the equation (and population) right there and presumes that men somehow shouldn't study or know how their gender effects them in society. Without maleism, or whatever one would call it, it is an incomplete equation. Males should feel they have just as much at stake in identifying societal gender roles, but they have by and large been made to feel like recepients of privilege who have no part in the reformation of gender roles, which couldn't be further from the truth. Males are in many ways suffering more than females from their assigned gender roles in society, but there is little to no discussion of it by men, if even an awareness at all, and certainly no push to do so.

Are contemporary women really encouraged to imitate vapid media darlings? Not anymore than men. The media is about profit, and sells a generally vapid image anyways. These aren't men's or women's only issues, and to discuss them as such misses out on a lot. It would be far more effective and inclusive to be a genderist.

I understand and generally agree with what this book is attempting to do, but until feminism transforms into something more inclusive of men, it will continue to be ignored by the vast majority of the populace and made to look like just another part of the culture war by the right.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

59. "maleism" does have a name - we are the patriarchy!

A collective union of all men on earth biologically programed to enslave and brutalize women. Feminism by its nature can't become inclusive because it is dialectical in nature - raging against the patriarchy, whatever it is perceived to be at a given moment. Progress comes out of defeating the patriarchy as opposed to cross-gender cooperation.

[MellowDem]

60. Unfortunately, some feminists have pushed variants of this idea...

and I understand your sarcasm. I think feminism is great in how it forces women to really look deep at themselves and society, but unfortunately, some feminists have encouraged against men doing the same for themselves by defining everything as the male perspective in the default because of male dominance, with feminists there to show the female perespective. The truth is, it is a gender perspective, and it is needed, but not just for women but for men also. Just because there is male dominance doesn't mean there is an understanding of what it means to be male. In fact, women seem to have a firmer grasp of their identity and gender roles, and as a result, are somewhat more progressive and flexible because of it. There seems to be a greater awareness than with men, though the reality is that most people have little to no awareness at all, which is the problem. The fact that feminism is portrayed as just another part of the culture war, much like global warming, by the right is the real problem and keeps it from being taken seriously by many.

[seabeyond]

62. have you ever sat with a guy, any guy, and asked him to be reflective of the role he plays

in society.

lol

i have

actually, i think your post has a lot of good points and i would love for me to be more reflective. i think it would help them, us.... so much

i also agree that all this cant be without the men either. raising two sons, we continually talk about their roles and conditioning, female roles and conditioning, and it is really good for them. they see how the conditioning doesnt benefit either gender.

[seabeyond]

64. actually it is a "cult like" group of males saying "all men on earth biologically programed "

then there are those women, myself, who call bullshit to it, are label as man haters. i defend and i am attacked. i know men are so much more, seeing how all i have are men/boys around me and for a lifetime, yet stilll.... a group of men just dont want to let that go.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

65. if you want to take the liberal feminist approach

Few men are franchised within the patriarchy to begin with, so who are they and what is it they won't let go of?

[ismnotwasm]

72. And what have you done to stop rape today?

That's what I thought

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

74. that was, uhh... random

well, I didn't rape anybody... today or ever. So I guess I did my part.

But since you asked I worked for a number of years assisting women who had been trafficked into the United States unwittingly for prostitution replace travel documents so they could return home. Often a very difficult task when they were both trying to avoid arrest as illegal immigrants, their identities had been erased and their homelands didn't want them back.

[ismnotwasm]

79. Random?

So are most of your responses, as I look though them. Most designed to look somewhat intelligent, and to cause a little sting.

Thank you for your work, I am surprised at your, um, attitude, if you've worked with that particular population. Personal issues?

[Kitty Herder]

71. Oh, boy. Here goes the "what about the menz!" crap.

Feminism isn't about you. Deal with it.

[MellowDem]

147. Sure it is...

feminism is all about gender roles, and men are just as much a part of that as women.

[Cerridwen]

58. I see the resident male experts on all things feminism have

made their presence known by pissing all over this thread like dogs marking their territory.

Will you be humping the posters next in a glorious displays of male dominance?

[G_j]

61. K&R

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

66. Woof, men are dogs,

what an inspired rebuttal,

[Cerridwen]

68. That was just the warm-up. n/t

[MountainLaurel]

81. Christ, don't give them any ideas. n/t

[Cerridwen]

82. LOL

:rofl:

Sorry.

LOL

[WildEyedLiberal]

201. Frankly, your posts on this thread have sort of proven that guy's point

What exactly is gained by your crude schoolyard taunting comparing male posters to dogs humping and pissing on things to mark their territory? And yet you're the one claiming to come at this subject from a position of expertise and academic relevance? Sorry, when you fling ad hominems all over the place like that - and not even particularly clever ad hominems, I might add - you just proved his point wholesale.

There was really nothing in Walter Sobchak's posts I disagreed with. Anyone with any kind of critical reading comprehension can see that he isn't denigrating "feminism," but rather the modern manifestation of postmodern 'feminist' theory common in academia - which you unwittingly provided a terrific example of with your breathless rant against the male university patriarchy upthread. Gee, that's how you want to inspire the latest generation of women to rally around the feminist banner? Consider me underwhelmed. I'm sure your classrooms of women's studies students DID cheer, but for those of us who grow weary of the 'feminist establishment' waging its battles over words like "housewife" and "chick," you're going to have a do better than that.

If modern academic feminism wants to be relevant, it can start by tackling big issues that are actually relevant to young women - for example, the rampant party culture on college campuses that encourages promiscuity and date rape. I realize most feminists speak out about such things as well, but when you're loudly condemning "the patriarchy" or making mountains out of molehills over words like "chick," you aren't doing anything to help real, live women. Nobody cares about academic abstractions - no social justice movement that has ever accomplished anything did so by being bogged down in ivory tower gibberish. Martin Luther King and Susan B. Anthony weren't out delivering PhD level discourses on the epistemology of the subjective nature of privilege blah blah blah. Everyone who isn't a graduate student just tuned you out. You want to make feminism relevant again? So do I. Do it by focusing on real life issues of privilege that actually impact real women every day - and by 'impact,' I don't mean abstractions like the alleged psychological harm that may or may not arise from being called a "chick."

[Cerridwen]

83. Yoo hoo! Over here!

:hi:

Now that we've all played a bit with our little, thread, pissing, putzes, who rode in here on their skateboards, can we maybe discuss why it is that on a "Democrats and other progressives" board this kind of derailing and feminist hatred is allowed?

Or, ya know, we could maybe get back on to why so many have bought into the r/w talking points about feminism and how it's become okey-dokey to be sexist and spew the r/w talking points.

Here, part of my old sig-line; maybe we can use this as catalyst?

ERMA BOMBECK

We've got a generation now who were born with semiequality. They don't know how it was before, so they think, this isn't too bad. We're working. We have our attache' cases and our three piece suits. I get very disgusted with the younger generation of women. We had a torch to pass, and they are just sitting there. They don't realize it can be taken away. Things are going to have to get worse before they join in fighting the battle.

[omega minimo]

85. EVERY FUCKING TIME

[Cerridwen]

86. Yep.

Cut 'em off, OM. Just cut them the fuck off...at the pass, ya know. Cut 'em off at the pass.

I'm reading about horses these days.

LOL

[ismnotwasm]

88. Well, I smell a big 'L' libertarian

(As well as some outright bullshit, although I give credit for faily well done bullshit) Perhaps a prisonplanet.com devotee. Those types are foaming at the mouth feminist haters. The way to flush them out is to bring up the equal rights amendment.

Why on a Democratic progressive board? Now that is a very, very good question.

[Cerridwen]

94. You are much kinder than I.

What I see posted by those you would call "Libertarian," I see as the "frat-boy-wanna-be" crowd, aka, "the angry white males."

A whole generation of boys grew up in the US thinking their male-ness and white-ness gave them certain "inalienable rights." Then, reality, with a capital "R" kicked in.

They pay lip-service to gay rights and civil rights but they're not gonna, under no circumstances, let a "girl" "show 'em up." *That* would be the ULTIMATE humiliation; to be beat out by a girl!

There has not been, in my experience, one, not one, sexist/misogynistic putz I've encountered who hasn't (secretly or openly) despised gays, non-whites, the working class, and any of those other "non-worthy" people. Not one. Yeah, that's not data. That's just personal experience.

Not one.

[seabeyond]

96. i am thinking about it. my mind is going thru the list right now. not one.....

not one sexist/misogynistic putz that i dont hear the same about gays, non whites.

not one.

[Cerridwen]

99. Scary, huh?

Damn, seabeyond, you make me want to go get a research grant and go prove my point. Damn.

:hi:

[Odin2005]

125. +1

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

100. So I am a...

Racist, sexist, homophobic misogynist, angry white asshole who listens to rush limbaugh and suffers an all-consuming sense of white privilege and hatred of the working class. Hell I am so full of hate I am a self-hating patriarchy dude too.

Oh yeah, that is me down to the letter, case and font.

Amazing what a objection to post-modern academic bullshit can tell you, huh?

[seabeyond]

101. i dont know you personally. i can only talk about the men that i know in real life

and their behavior.

but next time with buddies you hear sexist bullshit, listen an see if you dont also hear homophobic and racist bullshit from the dude too.

might be interesting. observe

[ismnotwasm]

106. Can you leave off with the "post-modern" references already?

We get it. You either read Wikepedia, or you have a philosophy background. You do not have a comprehensive background in feminist philosophy and please don't try to tell me you do.
You're sounding like you've been stumbled on some rather old critiques of the feminist movement. Who the fuck are you reading? Camille Pagiia?

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

111. No, because it is part of it

Post-Modernism had an enormous impact on the humanities and social sciences and in many areas is the point at which scholarship simply became ridiculous. Feminism is one of the areas where post-modernism has been extremely destructive.

And sadly, I was subjected to Camille Paglia in person - not once, but twice.

[Cerridwen]

113. Have you ever head of "You're so Vain" you probably think this post is

about you?

Uh, wrong again.

[omega minimo]

118. If your "objection" had not been a hackneyed Dittohead cliche, it might have had different response

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

120. so criticism of the alienating nature of contempoary feminism = morans guy

good to know,

[omega minimo]

122. that's not what I said and that's not what you did. Don't flatter yourself

Speaking of feminists losing interest .................................................

[Pithlet]

157. When you come in here and parrot some of his talking points, why are you so surprised?

Coming into this thread and claiming that inequality was solved decades ago? Ditto, ditto, ditto!

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

163. I didn't say anything even close to that,

I said feminism suffers because earlier victories are misappropriated into a collective social progress, while current issues fail to inspire, often because their delivery is intensely alienating (misc nonsense about the patriarchy) or nobody really cares (hyper-sensitivity to perceived sexism) I am fairly confident Rush Limbaugh has never said that.

[uppityperson]

195. Lets make this simple. It isn't all about you.

"A whole generation of boys"
"There has not been, in my experience, one, not one, sexist/misogynistic putz I've encountered"

So now you spend time defending yourself because, of course, we are all always talking about *you*!

As seabeyond says "next time with buddies you hear sexist bullshit, listen an see if you dont also hear homophobic and racist bullshit from the dude too."

[ismnotwasm]

102. My personal experience as well

I have a acquaintance, who used to be ok, and then, oh I don't know what the hell happened to him, but my prisonplanet comment came from knowing him and a few others he hangs out with. (He still calls my husband up with the latest conspiracy on what causes Multiple Sclerosis, and how the government is covering up a cure)
He thinks women should be wives and mothers. He hates Jews more than he hates black, but he sees a whole force fighting against The White Male, and actually sees the White Male as a victim. He ties in Gay rights with Jews somehow. Before I knew how crazy he had gotten I listened to him up to the point where he tied the ERA as a Jewish conspiracy to ruin the 'family unit'

I don't know a single male Libertarian who doesn't think that a major driving force for women's rights should be legalizing prostitution.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

103. why don't you do a quick search and read my posts on the subject of prostitution

[seabeyond]

105. see, that is the thing

i have read enough of your posts....

i am surprised at the approach you take on this thread.

that is all.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

108. The subject is academic feminism

not should women be chained to the stove and beaten according to the bible or koran.

The question is why are young women simply not terribly interested in feminism. I believe the answer to be that previous accomplishments of feminism have been disassociated with feminism and mainstream debates over sexist language and academic rants about the patriarchy simply don't attract much interest. Young women don't think reproductive choice and associate it with feminism - they don't think about it at all. Outside of the political and activist realm people don't think about these issues and won't unless something were to threaten them.

The argument that the media idealizes negative images knows no gender either, how many "aspiring rappers" are out there who think the key to success is being the next eminem as opposed to being the next Steve Jobs or Google guys.

[uppityperson]

196. No, it is not. It is feminism.

It uses studies as part of the OP, but no, it is about feminism.

[ismnotwasm]

107. Why?

Are you trying to make nice?

[seabeyond]

104. major driving force for women's rights should be legalizing prostitution.

yup. lol lol. on du i have learned the most sexist yell they are feminists.... legalize prostitution and let women be sexual enjoying what they want to do most, lol. yup. another one.

wow

[Cerridwen]

114. Thereby putting proof to the "old" axiom that Libertarians are nothing more

than republicans who want to smoke pot and get laid.

I come from a long line of government employees who don't want the government to interfere with their lives except for their pensions and health care benefits. Yeah, and they think women are walking uteruses (uteri?) who should do the women's work of moving households and running households while wearing pearls and heels.

Yeah, it's sad and weirdly "American."

[Berry Cool]

89. I've read this book. It is excellent.

I wish everyone on DU would read it. It might open up some eyes.

[seabeyond]

90. is it? thank you. i saved so that i can go chek it out. appreciate. nt

[Cerridwen]

97. You!

Dear sir or madame,

Are wonderful for getting us back on track.

:hi:

Kidding and goofiness aside, thanks Berry Cool.

[varelse]

93. One of the reviews has me interested in reading this book

http://www.amazon.com/review/R2BN2K9MOHR2OT/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm

[Cerridwen]

98. Thank you!

I'm going to take advantage of our "four paragraph" rule and post the review here:

This is a book I might not have picked up on my own, but my wife bought a copy Saturday night and she kept reading me passages from it. Finally I decided to read it myself and I have to admit I was blown away. I thought: great, another angry rant, but Sexism in America is compassionate and empathetic and a very good read. Berg tells the story of the Second Wave Women's Movement (something I didn't really know much about although I lived through it) with wonderful anecdotes, compelling stories, passion and even humor. Once establishing the rights women achieved, she shows how their progress has been thwarted and, in some cases, halted under different administrations. She draws on sociology, psychology, and history and a remarkable number of interviews to make her case. This isn't about Berg's experiences, but about the lives of women, many from vastly different backgrounds, who opened their hearts to her. This is a highly intelligent, thoughtful study with a novel explanation about how and why women have been losing ground.

As a fiftysomething male who's run his own company for many many years, I was in for quite an awakening about the many practices, comments and lapses that I as well as many of my colleagues engage in that are detrimental to women. And I have two daughters whom I adore and have always prided myself on being pro-women!

This book was definitely a wake-up call for me. It's no longer going to be enough to say, "Yeah, I know women are discriminated against." The important thing is understanding the depth, prevalence of it. (I didn't for example know that women are dying at younger ages than men or about the very successful campaign on the right to grant fetuses personhood which would eliminate choice without a Supreme Court decision.) But once we know what is happening and why, then, we can begin as Berg says, "To make a society that will enhance all of our lives." Everyone should read this book.

[niyad]

127. thanks for posting that review. might open some eyes.

[Pithlet]

160. Let's hope so.

It's lazy (and I'm being charitable) to blame it on boring academia and ranting and raving.

[Echo In Light]

129. On a bizarre note, I find women themselves are often the chief proponents of sexism these days

... with an Orwellian twist, of course: the obvious sexual exploitation/manipulation is lost on them, and is instead perceived as sexual liberation.

[seabeyond]

132. exactly. point on.

that is how i see it. conditioning of both genders and not one chief over the other.

but i see it no different than in the 50's that women were submissive and less, than todays conditioning that womens role is thing for male entertainment.

i dont see any difference between the two

doesnt behoove either gender

back to the 50's and beyond women willingly accepted this role as who they were. then boom, nope, nu uh. they thought as much as the male it was biologically a part of them. then simply disappeared when they learned, bullshit.

women were as much a part of it as males.

[omega minimo]

137. Thank Madonna and Mad Paglia for that.

[Echo In Light]

140. Well, I'm no prude, but the pornification of women is now an aesthetic of the Corp Consumer Culture

That's not to suggest that I think women need be 'traditional' or modest, and lord knows that as mortal man, I'm not made of stone, and am at times susceptible to having my attention captivated by risque women, er, risque looking women lol ... it's just that when I experienced my formative yrs in the 80s, young women weren't as open in regards to looking and playing the part of Sexual Ornament in service of males.

Group sex/group blowjobs, for example, were practically unheard of back then, and mind you I was a heavy metal, druggie delinquent who ran w/strange folk. Yet to hear younger women of today talk shop (I get a lot of it where I work) there are, at least to my interpretation, many porno-esque sexcapades that are routinely engaged in today, which can be chalked up to the broader corp/Empty-V hip hop culture that glorifies women-as-object, and unprecedented numbers of young women having access to hardcore interweb porn. Not that those type of things are simply flat out 'wrong' in my estimation, or can't provide those who participate with fun, or tough lessons learned. But given the technology that accompanies it, it further demonstrates a dangerously monkey-see, monkey-do, media-saturated social climate, and particularly hurtful to the young women who, at age 20 may not have a problem w/her group sex being digitally recorded, yet may soon regret it once it's online, forever, for any and everyone to watch. That's a huge difference in how harassment and bullying can manifest nowadays - a bad rep needn't come via rumors, but by turning on the cell phone or computer and watching as fact.

[Solly Mack]

130. K&R

[SteelPenguin]

142. Question

"one of the things she pointed out, in terms of backlash, was the current popularization of the word "housewife"--a term feminists worked very hard to eliminate from our vocabulary. women, after all, are not married to their houses. but look at the prevalence of shows with that word in the title--and look at the stereotypes portrayed therein. just one small example."

What does the author say about this, specifically? That housewife as a word itself is bad, or that a woman being a housewife is bad, or that women who stay at home to raise a family are depicted poorly? Or is this in reference to those reality shows (I've heard of them, but not seen...were there other shows other than the Housewives of Atlanta, etc?)

My wife is a stay at home mom, but I can't say that I've ever referred to her as a housewife. I don't think I could call her that with a straight face. I think she had to file on her taxes she was a 'Homemaker' or something like that. We joked that she was in construction. If someone asks what she does then I say that she's a stay at home mom, or a full-time mom. She's actually been called a deadbeat before, and told that she was stealing from other people who work and pay taxes...by another woman.

As far as this book goes though, is it talking more about the semantics itself of the words, or is it making a statement that choosing to stay home and raise your children yourself (a luxury many people don't have) is in some way anti-feminist?

I'm curious to read it, gonna drop it on my library wish list.

[burning rain]

143. I've even seen the claim that men are oppressed by female privilege.

It's wholly astounding.

[JoeyT]

150. I've seen that a few times too.

Upon further questioning, it typically worked out to be far more along the lines of "My privilege failed to be recognized." than "Her privilege caused me to be oppressed.". The rest of the time the guy was an honest to goodness misogynist with serious issues.

[SharonAnn]

154. And I saw it a couple times when unqualified male co-workers lost out to a very qualified

female coworker.

As you said, their "privilege failed to be recognized."

[omega minimo]

151. the whole notion that female empowerment = male disempowerment is bogus

deserving of a discussion, with participants of either gender who are willing to discuss and not hijack the thread. Wonder if that's possible .......

[Odin2005]

153. Exactly. Zero-Sum thinking is crap.

[Hannah Bell]

173. for working class men, it's the case, in terms of wages. And for low-income

households, feminism has been a bust too.

Good for upper-class women & families, though.

And for capital.

Families: working more for less

For example, inflation-adjusted wages for the bottom 80% of men in all occupations were higher in 1989 than in 1997. Although low-skilled workers have experienced the most drastic decline in real wages, the erosion of market wages for males has been felt across all occupations. Males in blue-collar occupations experienced a drop of 6.4% in their real wages from 1989-1997, while those in service and white-collar occupations had declines of 3.8% and 0.3%, respectively. The wage erosion experienced by blue-collar workers is particularly troublesome since that occupational category represents 41% of all male employment.

While most women's wages increased during the 1989-1997 period, the increase was not enough to offset the decline in men's wages. Like men, women in service and blue-collar occupations saw their real wages decline during the period, although by a smaller percentage than men's.

http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/54019426.html



But leave us not call *nobody* a HOUSEWIFE. That's the important stuff.

[omega minimo]

175. Blame Reagonomics, not feminism, for your article's claims.

And women still make $.75 per every $1.00 dollar by men for the same job.

[Hannah Bell]

176. blame whatever you like. the fact is, for the bottom 50%, income gains for

women have come, de facto, at the expense of men, & of families, contra the feminist critique.

[omega minimo]

177. wrong

[Hannah Bell]

178. overwhelmed by your evidence.

[omega minimo]

179. overwhelmed by your attitude

:thumbsdown:

[Hannah Bell]

180. i don't have an attitude. capital *is* zero-sum, & so is identity politics.

[omega minimo]

184. You sure as hell do!

You put so much effort into it, might as well take credit.

[Hannah Bell]

185. point out the attitude in our exchange here. its you who made it about me,

not the reverse.

[uppityperson]

197. Women getting paying jobs rather than than all going to men is...bad?

Women getting paid more is bad for "families"?

[Odin2005]

203. You've jumped the shark with this post.

A Trotskyite WOMAN spewing misogynist "women need to be at home so they are not take away jobs from men and depress wages" BS? :puke:

[goldcanyonaz]

149. Yep, it runs rampant around here at times too.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

182. I feel like I have not been taken seriously at work.

I am highly educated and skilled but I feel like I've been treated like a stupid little girl.
I never had a mentor because the baby boomers were all so back stabbing and competitive.

I'm short, white, female and I wear glasses -- all reasons for large males and large females to attempt to intimidate me.

Feminism is not the cause of the stagnant wages and the fact it takes two incomes to pay the bills nowadays -- I blame it on corporate greed.

[Odin2005]

204. I like smart chicks with glasses.

:evilgrin: :hi:

[niyad]

183. ....