Resident feminist HeatherN tackles the first round of questions in our new series, Ask the Feminist.
Editor’s note: This is the first set of answers from a new series called Ask the Feminist, headed up by our friendly feminist friend, HeatherN. To learn more about this series, see the original post here.
This first series of questions for Ask the Feminist have been really great. Since I can’t really answer everything in one article, I’ve chosen a few questions I think would be good to start. And, let me tell you, I had a hard time narrowing it down. So, if I didn’t answer your question, feel free to ask it again. And, of course, if you have a new question, don’t hesitate to ask it. You can write it in the comments below or you can e-mail me at [email protected]. So, now for the answers:
♦◊♦
Random_Stranger and KC Krupp both asked a few questions about the definition of feminism, so I figured that’s where I’d start. According to Professor Cheris Kramarae, “Feminism is the radical notion that women are human beings.” It’s a bit of a snarky answer, but it fits. Feminism is the idea that men and women should be treated equally, and that society doesn’t currently do this. That’s really all there is to it. What that equality will look like and ideas about how society is currently preventing it, is where you get divisions between feminists. Here’s a handy little list of some different types of feminism, which I recommend glancing at. If you have a lot of time on your hands, you can scroll through a very long list of different kinds of feminisms, here, though even that doesn’t cover everything.
Part of the reason there are so many different kinds of feminism is because there are so many different kinds of women. A Muslim lesbian in India is going to have a different perspective on women and equality to a heterosexual atheist in the United Kingdom, for example. My feminism doesn’t neatly fit into any of the categories listed in the two links I mentioned above. It’s mostly academic, because I learned about feminism at university. But mostly I just tend to take bits and pieces from whatever branches seem to be working toward the most inclusive equality.
♦◊♦
Speaking of my feminism, Alastair asked me to list five books, five feminist thinkers, and five feminist blogs that I find particularly insightful. My top books are Understanding Patriarchy (which is really an article) by bell hooks, Race, Monogamy, and Other Lies They Told You by Agustin Fuentes, Gender Trouble by Judy Butler (which is available for free online), Feminism Is for Everybody by bell hooks, and finally Gender Outlaw by Kate Bornstein. Of all of those, Gender Trouble is probably the most difficult to get through; Butler is known for her inaccessible writing style. Speaking of which, one of my top feminist thinkers is Judy Butler, and if you have a hard time getting into Gender Trouble, try the Routledge Critical Thinkers book which explains a lot of her ideas. My other top feminist thinkers are bell hooks (no surprise there), Spivak (a post-colonialist), Anne Fausto-Sterling (who writes a lot about the category of intersex), and Michel Foucault (who wasn’t exactly a feminist, but had a lot of ideas that have contributed to feminism). The thing about that list, though, is that if you ask me again in a month it’ll probably change a bit.
As for my top five feminist bloggers: There’s Julie Gillis, whose writing always touches on the emotional heart of an issue. I quite like Jamie Utt’s blog, in which he discusses feminism from the perspective of a white man. There’s Danielle Paradis’ blog, in which she writes a long of things I wish I had written. Ozy Franz’s blog is awesome, as anyone who is familiar with zir’s No Seriously What About Teh Menz, might expect. And then last, but not least…is my blog. No, I’m kidding. Actually, I’d recommend Finally, A Feminism 101 Blog, for anyone looking for some introductory info on feminism. Also, I’m cheating and adding a sixth to this list. I really like Busty Girl Comics, on Tumblr. It is 300 very funny comics all about women and their breasts. It might not explicitly discuss what feminism is, but underlying every comic are feminist ideas.
♦◊♦
Glen asked about the different ways society reacts to violence against men, versus violence against women, in movies. I’ll answer this one with some feminist ideas about gendered violence in movies. Often violence against women in movies is all about showing how helpless the woman is. In some of the old comedies, a man might slap a hysterical woman across the face to calm her down. The idea there being that the woman is so overcome by her emotions she needs to be slapped out of it to return to sanity. In a horror or suspense movie, a female victim is there to look pretty and scream and then die. They are often there only to ratchet up the body count, and make the situation seem more frightening for the audience and the protagonist. The other thing feminists might point out is that violence committed by men against women is a statistically larger issue than violence committed by women against men.
Violence against men in films is also sometimes used to highlight how serious a situation is; the beginning of Saving Private Ryan comes to mind. In comedies, a woman hitting a man is generally used to highlight how nonthreatening the woman is. Often the laugh is generated by how much the slap didn’t hurt the man. Or the laugh is generated by turning this on its head, and it is the surprise at the pain of the slap (or in this case, punch) that is supposed to be funny. No one expects a woman to be able to hurt a man, so when she does, that’s supposed to be funny.
Of course, using violence against anyone in a comedy is simply playing off of ridiculous stereotypes. Whether it’s about how women are inept or about how men are strong and unfeeling, violence isn’t funny. Feminism is just starting to convince larger society that the old stereotypes that made violence against women in movies acceptable aren’t okay. It’ll take a whole lot of work to convince society that all the old stereotypes that suggest violence against men in movies could be funny aren’t okay either.
OK…. You say feminism is for everyone… Name the feminist campaign that is helping men in education and how much money is going in to that campaign? You do know men have 4x fewer scholarship opportunities than women and are graduating less as well… So feminism is for men or for men to support women? (I would argue the ladder). Name the feminist campaign that his trying to make forced penetration equal to rape.. a penis that is forced into a vagina or anus is not rape in the eyes of the law.. And yes it does happen… How much… Read more »
“What is and what is perceived to be” is exactly what I was attempting to get at. In my opinion, objectively and externally established sets of standards are inherently coercive to individuals, if their only choice offered to them is to accept these standards, or be subject to judgement and the eventual stigmatization that is inexorably derived from them.
Schala makes some interesting points. I fail to see how being valued as a work-horse is humanizing. The fact is, is that our humanity is never derived, or bestowed. No one gives us our humanity, not our families, friends, or society. So having or doing anything that society considers more worthy than another does not mean that one is given more humanity than anyone else. We are all born equally human beings, and that innate humanity can not be given, but it can be taken away. And the belief that one’s humanity is dependent upon ones utility to their society… Read more »
What is, and what is perceived can be two different things. So, for example, we are all born equally human…but society doesn’t really recognize that. Yes, feminism definitely suggests that it is dehumanising for “one’s humanity” to be “dependent upon ones utility to their society.” Most certainly. That’s why a lot of feminism is quite tied into Marxism, or at the very least tied into a critique of capitalism. But, so basically…from a feminist perspective…it’s capitalism (and a very specific kind of post-industrial capitalism) that treats humans as utilities for society. As cogs in a machine…and this is something that… Read more »
There is a gendered difference, however, in that men are treated as utility subjects…as people doing things for society, which make them valued. Women, on the other hand, are treated as utility objects…as the things themselves, which makes them valuable. A man is valued for what he can do for society, whereas a woman is valuable for what she is perceived as (i.e. a walking womb).
How does that not mean that a man is valued for being percieved as someone that can do something for society?
Well first, just to clarify, obviously when I’m talking about “man” and “woman,” I’m thinking in the most traditional gender terms. “Man” and “woman,” here could possibly be better understood to be physical embodiment of the masculine, and physical embodiment of the feminine…this isn’t absolute..we’re talking about narratives and trends…but…okay I digress… So how does that not mean that a man is valued for being perceived as someone that can do something or society? It does mean that. That’s what I’m saying…men=perceived as doers. Men are valued members of society…more highly valued and appreciated based on what it is they… Read more »
I appreciate the clarify but not needed in this case.
I’d argue that between beautiful, fertile, young, etc… I’d say that a lot of those point back to being valued to do something specific. Being able to bear children. And that’s the thing that women are viewed as being contributors of. Yes its cold, limiting, and sexist but that is the expected contribution.
But before this goes off the deep end I do think that regardless of who is labeled as what and all that we do agree that the expectations imposed on both are limiting, sexist, and unfair right?
Sorry, I should have posted my comment below as a reply to this thread. Unfortinately, I’m not able to move my response back to the appropriate thread. Anyway… All this leads me to another question, if I may: If we can not and should not attempt to set “objective standards” then how can people determine if one group or individuals experiences should be compared to those of another? How can we determine if one person has it worse than another, or that one person’s trauma is more significant than another person’s, as people debating gender politics often do. I have… Read more »
“Women, on the other hand, are valuable…more highly valuable for various aspects of being (not doing). Being beautiful. Being fertile. Being young, etc. Women are not viewed as contributing to society through their actions. Women are viewed as objects of society.” Women give birth, that is EXTREMELY valued, women have often been elevated to a level between human and angel because of that, why do you think chivalry existed? Women’s contribution is one of the most important aspects….we need new humans to replace old humans. I am not so sure either gender throughout history really has been valued above the… Read more »
EVERYONE wants to indulge in friviolities to an extent. We call this leisure. Hobbies. Culture. Talents unrelated to work. When men indulge in too much leisure or concern themselves with their own well-being as opposed to their responsibility towards society, they work less. And their ONLY value is in working. A man who is supported by someone else is seen as valueless, even if he does other stuff. He’s “not pulling his weight”. His value is extremely conditional. Women’s value is conditional on the hypothetical possession of an uterus (thus why known trans women get shat on – they don’t… Read more »
Because society needs little docile beasts of burden, called men, or robots. It doesn’t need them indulging in stuff.
While women’s usefulness to society is making children. Or even the potential thereof. As such nothing preventing them from indulging in stuff. Ask yourself why there is no imperative for women to support themselves financially at all costs as there is for men?
Because society values men more?
I tried to post on Ozy Frantz’s blog, to only have my posts held in moderation for a day and a half, and then deleted summarily. All of them, reasonable or not. And Finally Feminism 101 as a reasonable site? Seriously? The site that says female privilege cannot exist by definition, that sexism against men is impossible, and that treats the system of what they call patriarchy as Class A oppressing Class B, and saying that evidence that Class B isn’t oppressing Class A is proof that privilege is unidirectional. Wrong. System is setup so that Class A and B… Read more »
The thing is, Schala, I could levy critiques of every single writer, book and blog I mentioned. I never agree with anyone 100% of the time. So the reason I listed the things I did was because they are useful, relatively accessible and put for some amazingly important and interesting feminist ideas. Anyway, I’m not going to argue who is right or wrong…but rather again explain how feminism interprets gender oppression. (This is simplified, of course). But basically, on the one hand you are right. Our gender system places restrictions on men and women in what behaviour is deemed acceptable…and… Read more »
The big difference, however, is that feminism also highlights how women’s gender roles have been undervalued. Men’s gender roles are more highly valued. The masculine is treated as better than the feminine, in western society. THAT is what the Feminism 101 blog is highlighting with the explanation of gender oppression. I will argue that, thanks to feminism smashing limitations on gender roles, men’s clothing options have lost value. Men’s clothing option no longer signify manly, masculine, rugged, virile. Now they signify, basic, useful, practical, and nothing else. They don’t express stuff anymore, and they’re unisex. Don’t tell me women’s clothing… Read more »
You’re looking at it in too small a scale…fashion is more variable for women. However, this isn’t due to feminism…this is due to old gender norms.
In post-industrial Europe, fashion has always been considered a thing that women concern themselves with. But also consider how frivolity, and non-utilitarianism has been treated. Women have more fashion options…but concerning oneself with your appearance is considered vain, flighty and unimportant. The utilitarian (i.e. masculine), is more highly valued.
And yes, there is a HUGE industry around fashion…but it is a highly exploitative industry.
In post-industrial Europe, fashion has always been considered a thing that women concern themselves with. But also consider how frivolity, and non-utilitarianism has been treated. Women have more fashion options…but concerning oneself with your appearance is considered vain, flighty and unimportant. The utilitarian (i.e. masculine), is more highly valued. Wrong, concerning yourself with vain things has been considered the province of things *rich people do*, because poor people barely got by, they didn’t have the means or the time to indulge in such. Aristocratic men also indulged in this. Being useful is also the mark of a slave – pure… Read more »
Well first, responding to everything with, “wrong,” is really off-putting. Telling something directly that they are wrong, particularly when we’re talking about such subjective issues, is kind of unhelpful when it comes to a debate. But that little bit aside, I’m actually not going to continue arguing about this, because we’re going to venture way off topic from the original article. Suffice it to say, you’re kind of over simplifying things. Being a useful thing is a mark of a slave….being a human being who values utility, that’s the mark of a good, Puritan human being. Quite different. Again, a… Read more »
@ Heather I’m willing to leave it at “Also, the point is that feminism DOES examine how society affects men’s choices. That’s part of what feminism is about…looking at how society has made it less desirable for men to be stay-at-home parents even if they want to, and fixing it.” I did want to say something about perception or framing. A commenter on the previous post ask the feminist had stated that feminism was about opposing gender based discrimination and asked who would be against ending gender based discrimination. I told her that the disagreement often comes down to what… Read more »
‘“Feminism is the radical notion that women are human beings.” It’s a bit of a snarky answer, but it fits.’
No, it doesn’t.
It’s like saying Stalinism is the radical notion that workers are human beings. It’s a gross oversimplification that discards much of the conceptualisations unique to feminism (conceptualisations that are frequently deployed in questionable ways, like X is privilege, or Y is a manifestation of the patriarchy) while reducing it to an emotive definition that is just poisoning the well against people who do not elect to take the label of “feminist”.
Regarding violence against men in media: I just want to make it clear that what I was writing about was feminist ideas about men in media. HOWEVER, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the same interpretation can be used to discuss actual violence against men. Movies aren’t real (of course)…and so interpreting what different characters and stories mean in a movie is different to interpreting those same events in real life. I’ll use Saving Private Ryan as an example, because we’ve already had some discussion about it. In the movie, all the extras are nameless and characterless. They are soldiers and… Read more »
This is a very informative TEDx talk by Colin Stokes about how movies teach ‘manhood’: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ueOqYebVhtc
Sorry it’s taken me so long to reply to this…but yeah I’ve seen that TEDx talk, and I found it really interesting. As with so many things, there are multiple issues going on when it comes to portraying heroes in movies. It’s layered. So we almost always portray the hero as a man, particularly in anything involving action. The other, though, is definitely about how we’ve constructed a toxically masculine idea of what a hero is….a hero isn’t building communities and forging relationships. A hero boldly goes in, takes charge, saves the day and gets the girl, all by himself.… Read more »
Heather,
Thank you for taking the time to write out these responses!
While I may not agree with everything you have to say, I really enjoy the level of discussion your posts bring to these boards. I enjoy the level of measure, thought and decency you show to everyone on these boards; whether you are in a debate or in agreement.
Please keep contributing!
Thanks. 🙂
Several people have mentioned _Saving Private Ryan_. The movie is NOT really all about men. Only on a superficial level is it only about men. Even though all the main characters are (cis-)male, there a gigantic inter-gender dynamic at the heart of the plot. The whole point of the plot, and the source of title of the movie, is about a woman. There is a very illustrative moment in the film that clearly suggests a sense of male disposability relative to women. At one point, a male character quotes a letter from Lincoln to a woman in the Civil War,… Read more »
Great comment. Men’s lives were disposable in order to save 1 womens GRIEF. Men were DYING to go find him, Men were put in harms way to save HIS life over their own to help settle the feelings of a woman who was 20000km away! It’s pretty fucking sick to be honest…
Archy, you make a lot of great comments. You know there is more to it than that. Come on now…
That’s the overriding message though. How many men with mothers died also? Is losing 3 sons worse than 1 son who’s your only son? Is their life worth less?
Why was my comment deleted?
courage … more then likely the same reason some of mine have been deleted.
My comment was deleted too.
If you believe that objectification is a useful term could you explain it in a way that isn’t a simile or a metaphor?
I don’t mean to speak for Heather N but thoughtnI’d jump in. Many people are unaware that the concept of objectification comes from psychoanalysis, specifically a school of psychoanalysis called object relations. The idea is that you, and I, and everyone, see others through a filter of our own needs and past experiences. When we interact with people, in our mind, we are interacting with “objects” that we create. I am the subject (of myself), other people (everyone) are my objects. So, for example, to a baby, mother is a object which is the source of milk. A mature, healthy… Read more »
A few more challenging questions: 1. What, if any, privileges would women have to give up in order to create a more equal society? 2. To what extent is the movement of feminism culturally and historically contingent upon the social and technological form of an industrialized or post-industrial society, upon a society where state and market rather than family, community, and civil society are the most determinative social realities, and where an individualistic liberal anthropology is the general consensus? What would feminism look like in a world without birth control and contraception, for instance? How about a society where the… Read more »
Yes. Absolutely brilliant questions. Show me where the “Like” button is!
Wellokaythen, when you find the “like” button, push it for me too,will ya?
Hi Heather N., thanks for giving us a chance to pose our questions, I really do appreciate it. I have two questions for you: Firstly, how does feminism define privilege? For example, is it defined as financial and career opportunity, or could there be different types of privilege, such as emotional privilege, having the option of more time and closer connections with family, and so fourth? I have often noticed that different people seem to have access to different kinds of privilege, and that work and money are not necessarily the most important nor the most rewarding of the different… Read more »
My question about privilege, for you and HeatherN and others, is not so much about definition as it is about diagnostics. I’m less concerned about how you define privilege as I am about how you test it or prove it. However one defines privilege, what would you use as a credible, reliable test to detect it? Is it possible to examine a situation or person and test for a kind of privilege and detect none? I ask because most of the explanations I’ve heard about privilege (race, gender, class, whatever) seem to detect privilege everywhere. The test always comes back… Read more »
interesting…
Thanks for taking the time to answer these questions, Heather.
Yup, yup. I’m only just getting started. 🙂
Hi HeatherN, Thanks for answering. Its feels to me like perception is everything when it comes to gender inequality. For example, I’ve often felt the opposite about your movie experience. When men die in movies its often with little thought and in great volume (think rambo); when women die its seldom treated with insignificance (as you noted) -her cinematic death may or may not be portrayed desirably, but it is portrayed thoughtfully even if from a bad place. By contrast the cinematic death of men is almost always insignificant to the plot, story or protagonist -its barley noticed. As a… Read more »
(So I’m going to reply to your comment with three of my own, just to break up the topics a bit in case anyone else wants to jump in). “I guess, my follow-on question would be, does feminism really believe that men are the primary purveyors of gender oppression?” The simple answer to that question, is no. The longer answer is that feminism is about how the gender system we’ve currently got is the primary means of gender oppression. I was just reading a rather interesting discussion about misogyny within lesbian culture…that’s right, misogyny among lesbians. It’s totally possible, and… Read more »
‘As for achieving gender equality meaning addressing the inequalities of women and the privileges of men..” So, as a white male over 45 I’m definitely privileged, right? O.K., let’s see, from my ‘privileged’ carrier , my right knee’s been replaced (left one’s probably going to be swapped out this winter) my right arm.s held together with titanium screws, no cartilage left in my right wrist (shredded and had to be removed). No feeling in the skin on the right arm (got torn off and reattached, but the nerve endings got destroyed). I’m 1 1/2″ shorter than when I graduated high… Read more »
Social privilege is an interesting thing, in that it’s not about living a charmed life. It’s not monolithically either/or. I’m white, so I benefit from white privilege. Most of the time, the way I benefit from it is basically invisible. I don’t even think about my ethnicity…and part of the privilege of being white is not having to think about my ethnicity. I can walk through the streets in California, and no one looks at me and thinks “hey that person doesn’t belong here.” I can drive through whatever neighbourhood without a cop stopping me simply because of the colour… Read more »
….hmmmm…I really think your confusing class privilege with the masculine experience of gender. I don’t know what bobbt does, but its very likely that bobbt job is a masculine job -reserved for men because of its hardship and risks that would actively discourage women from participating. The division into elite and underclass, what you call class is very much the masculine experience of gender and what I think of as male gender oppression. If women suffer from pressure to conform to a narrow, restricted role in society men are expected to flourish or perish. The extreme division of class is… Read more »
Alrighty…I’m not going to get into whether you or I are right or wrong. But I am going to try to explain what I think you are saying, and then explain what gender theory suggests about “male disposability.” So what it seems to me you are saying, is that in western society men are disposable…and this is mitigated (or alleviated) via wealth and class. Yes? You are quite deliberately combining men’s gender roles and class…assuming, as you say, that part of being classified as a “man” means feeling the effects of class quite acutely. Feminism (and gender theory) would disagree.… Read more »
@HeatherN “Feminism (and gender theory) would disagree. Disposability is something that western society places on the lower class…and this is affected by gender. But it’s a class issue affected by gender, not a gender issue affected by class” Yes, I am saying that the polarity of class and gender are intertwined. But you cannot go further and simply say one is subordinate to the other because feminism believes it so. They are, in effect, one in the same. While men and women experience the stratification of class, that stratification is deliberately exercised more acutely with men. If civilization is structured… Read more »
The thing is, what you’re saying relies on the idea that polarization of class is felt more by men than women, and that just isn’t the case. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3177584?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21101981217793 Like, factually…class division is not something that men are more affected by than women. That’s where I’m running into problems with your explanation…IF men did feel class more than women, perhaps what you are saying would work. But considering women and men are both affected by class just as drastically (just in different ways)…that makes what you are suggesting not true…just like, factually. Gay men are not subordinate to gay women, black… Read more »
“it’s actually gay men that tend to be privileged within gay culture. ” Must be very different to society on the whole then because gay men cop violence far more than gay women do they not? Society is largely more accepting of gay women than gay men. Maybe gay men are the face more because they have been the ones that have copped more violence? Are you speaking of gay culture alone, not the rest of society? “Brazilian gay group Grupo Gay da Bahia (GGB) reported 190 documented alleged homophobic murders in Brazil in 2008, accounting for about 0.5% of… Read more »
This is a very big conversation about intersectionality…and I’m not going to stick my foot in my mouth to try to provide examples with regards to race. I will, however, attempt to explain what I mean with regards to gay men and gay women. What you’re talking about in terms of “acceptance,” of gay women is actually ignoring and invisibling gay women. Society isn’t more accepting of gay women…society is more willing to pretend gay women don’t exist. A lack of physical violence against a group does not automatically mean they are more accepted…just less visible. But yes, I’m speaking… Read more »
HeatherN, We’re now at logger heads over perception and the complexities of race, class, sexual orientation and gender. Still, I must insist that you consider that acute class polarization is an intrinsic, and oppressive component of masculinity. Can you accept the following: 1. The population of the power elite, such as major CEOs and high government officers, in western civilization are overwhelming male? 2. The population of the lowest order of the underclass, consisting of the homeless, the incarcerated, the institutionalized, the criminal, the chronically unemployed and the prematurely dead, in western civilization are similarly overwhelming male? 3. The population… Read more »
Alrighty, what I’m about to write might not make a whole hell of a lit of sense. So, if it doesn’t just let me know and I’ll try to explain it better. But basically…your list consisted of masculine experiences with class, and then asked me if I thought that showed that class differences were inherently part of masculine oppression. But the problem is that the list you provided was treating masculine experiences of class oppression as though they were the definitive examples of class oppression. So let me try a counter example: 1) Do you agree that people with the… Read more »
@ Random. I can sort of understand what you’re saying but in my case, the “class” issue didn’t apply to me. I was a corporate world workaholic and had a great paying job. At 40, I had my first heart attack. At age 41, I had a quintuple bypass. I am now 59 and have had 5 more heart attacks. Friend of mine, president/owner of a manufacturing company in Chicago, 2 hours after his annual physical, while on his treadmill at home, he dropped dead. Another friend, a high school football coach on his way back from a down state… Read more »
List off my privileges as a white male, and I will tell you how far off you are.
Diz, I’d like to see what they are as well. I don’t expect an answer in that I and others asked in another string as to what rights do men have that women don’t. Other then forced selective service of course. Never got the answer.
Why ask for a list when you only need one? As a white male, you have more elected representatives in political power on the federal, state and local levels that represent your race and gender, than any other race/gender combination. (Assuming you are in the U.S. But I’d imagine it would hold for Canada, the UK, Australia and others.) That is what institutionalized patriarchy looks like. And I am NOT one to throw around the p-word lightly. I feel like when men ask for the “What exactly are my privileges” question, they’re looking at Micro-level things. They expect an answer… Read more »
So basically, politicians share my skin color and gender. Can you list the ways in which I benefit from sharing skin color and gender with politicians?
diz, I look forward to hearing the response. The word “privilege” is thrown around so much, I sure as hell would like to know. Now we’re going so far as to clump Politicians skin color and gender into the picture.
I think what she means is that it’s easier for you to become a politician than a woman everything else being equal. Feminists will look at disparities in outcomes and when the disparities are large assume that there is some systemic bias against women. If you believe that men and women have the same capabilities than they should have similar outcomes. It makes sense. MRAs tend to look for the tangible. Tell me why you’re being barred from politics. Usually they aren’t in a legal sense. Politics is a job like any other. The wealthy have more access to it… Read more »
Choice and agency…two really big words…well small words…but big meanings. And it all boils down to the age old question of free will. Just how much free will do we have? Feminists aren’t necessarily concerned with equal outcomes…rather, instead, feminists recognize that everyone acts in response to societal pressure. Literally everyone. You cannot get away from it. If I choose to have children…whether I raise them myself, hire a nanny, put them in childcare, am a working mother…whatever action I decide is always mitigated by social pressure. So feminists are concerned with the social pressures which create unequal outcomes. A… Read more »
A man can have a family and a career and fill traditional male roles. A woman cannot have a family and a career and fill traditional female roles.
Can he really “have a family”? I ask this because usually in the traditional male roles have a family means making sure they financially supported even at the cost of not providing other forms of support.
“A man can have a family and a career and fill traditional male roles. A woman cannot have a family and a career and fill traditional female roles. ” That is a flawed view of it though because you fail to take into account the power of being allowed to be around your children. It’s more that A man can have a family he sees FAR LESS to have that career and fill trad male roles, and a woman gets far less of a career but far more time spent with the family. A woman also has a much higher… Read more »
I was trying to keep the comment short, but let’s break apart those two statements. Men having a family in traditional male role – means being a provider Men having a career in traditional male role – means being a provider Women having a family in a traditional male role – means being a caretaker Women having a career – well it doesn’t work with the traditional female role And so feminism started by looking at that last bit and focusing on that…hey let’s make it so that women can have careers! And as feminism has progressed, there’s been more… Read more »
“Men having a family in traditional male role – means being a provider Men having a career in traditional male role – means being a provider Women having a family in a traditional male role – means being a caretaker Women having a career – well it doesn’t work with the traditional female role” No, no, and NO. Men having a family in traditional male role – means providing for a family which there is a caretaker that is NOT the man Men having a career in traditional male role – means being a provider for a family which there… Read more »
That was a type-o, so let me retype what I meant:
Men having a family in traditional male role – means being a provider
Men having a career in traditional male role – means being a provider
Women having a family in a traditional female role – means being a caretaker
Women having a career – well it doesn’t work with the traditional female role
That makes my analysis make a lot more sense.
“Men having a family in traditional male role – means being a provider Men having a career in traditional male role – means being a provider Women having a family in a traditional female role – means being a caretaker Women having a career – well it doesn’t work with the traditional female role” Men are providers, women are caretakers, what exactly is your point here. Women didn’t get access to the career move, men didn’t get access to the caretaker position. The cost of a family was to provide for men, and for women the cost is to care… Read more »
The point, or rather feminists’ points, on this…is that being the provider was more highly valued than being the caretaker, traditionally, and still today even. Careers are sought after. Caretaking is not something people aspire to. But also, my point is that feminists look at the social pressures which causes the divide, and actively try to close it. Feminists are all about making it socially acceptable for men to make the choice to be caretakers. And they are all about making it socially acceptable for women to make the choice to be providers. AND then on top of that, a… Read more »
Today men have ONE choice and that is to work full time. Women have three choices that all work pretty well. Work full time, work part time or be a stay at home mom. It is not that there are no challenges with these choices for a woman but they are all perfectly doable. Tons of women have careers and families. My mother did. Yet the SAHD and part time options for men are not very workable options. In addition to societal expectations the big problem is female attraction. At exactly the point where a woman starts earning more than… Read more »
Can you list the ways in which I benefit from sharing the same gender and skin color as politicians?
KKZ, I would agree that the people in power tend to share a common life experience and that life experience informs their judgement of what is and is not worthy of investment. And as a person who shares their gender, more often than not, my perception of the world will be shared by those in power. But sharing common perception with those in institutional power does not necessarily translate to unbroken privilege -when these institutions demand sacrifices or define punishment, the male becomes the entity of sacrifice and punishment. Men may own property, but he must pay tribute. The government… Read more »
So it doesn’t really make sense to ask for a list of individual privileges that can be bickered about back and forth, back and forth, ad nauseum with no resolution. Playing “who has it worse” is pointless anyway – and for the record, I get annoyed when femi nists do it too. Equality doesn’t mean we all suffer equally, but that we join in arms to handle own suffering and lessen that of others as much as we can. As the saying goes, we’re all in this together. I think the problem some people have is that by not listing… Read more »
Okay, I stopped holding my breath…. I guess I won’t really get the list. I guess I’ll just have to accept them as real without proof.
Curious about what category this scenario would fit. Man and women get’s married. He works, she stays home as a home maker. Pretty common in a lot of circles. Many would consider the man being privileged in that he is likely to have a well paying career. But what about the wife?
In the reverse, men who don’t work are still looked at as lazy slugs.
To the extent that any of our values are shaped by the stories we watch and read, and I think they are to some extent, I agree that both men and women suffer. Women have to look for a while to find women independently shaping their lives, and men have to look past the pile of men’s bodies that were sacrificed on the heroes journey. In so many action movies men are like sperm; many of us seem necessary for one to succeed. Pretty cool if you’re the one……and the hero/male stories help us believe that we’ll be the one.… Read more »
Meant to be part of the Private Ryan discussion
Based on how that article describes “men’s” behavior I don’t know any men. I think that would come as a surprise to a lot of people I know who thought they were.
“We need to change a system which places a higher value on the masculine, than the feminine” Society doesn’t necessarily value the masculine more. They are valued differently. The bias in favor of women in family court is because the feminine is valued more when it comes to child rearing. Yes, I’ve heard feminists suggest that child care is considered beneath men as it’s in the realm of the feminine so that’s why men are denied custody in family court, however, it is disingenuous to suggest that courts are telling men that you can’t have your children because your too… Read more »
Agree 100% John Anderson. I tend to perceive gender norms as a means of control intended to shape the choices of men and women towards activities that favor the expansion of the culture without regard to the well-being of the individual. Neither role is necessarily superior to the other, rather they are both subordinate to the collective. The problem with feminism is that it insists on a hierarchy to gender that causes the believe system to make some strange (and honestly frustrating) leaps of logic, as you pointed out, to maintain its narrative. Reminds me of an argument feminists used… Read more »
“I guess it starts with the easy sequitur you made from “Feminism is the radical notion that women are human beings” to ” Feminism is the idea that men and women should be treated equally.” As though one simply begets the other without further examination.” To be fair (to myself), I try to keep these answers short…and that means making a few statements without elaborating too much. So for this one, the underlying assumption of Kramarae’s statement is that men are considered human beings by society, is something that could garner further examination. Men, as a group, are considered the… Read more »
Your analysis of the movie you mentioned are missing one key component…the hero is male. And that is key…really quite key. In war movies and action movies, yes, swaths of men are gunned down like so much cannon fodder…and if you as a viewer are focusing on that, then it can seem to be saying that men are disposable. HOWEVER, movies are created with the idea that you will identify with the protagonist, not the extras. And the protagonist is almost always male (particularly in action films). What’s more, in the movies most of the time violence against men is… Read more »
So are you saying ‘Saving Private Ryan’ should have shown women storming the beaches of Normandy?
Nope. Although, there’s an interesting thing that’s happening in some t.v. and movies right now. The BBC’s show Merlin, for example, has a person of colour playing Guinevere. And the previously mentioned Spartacus has got women in the rebel’s fighting force. I’m not completely sure whether that is accurate, or not…but I’m willing to bet it’s not quite as common as the show makes it out to be. Of course the difference there is that Merlin is largely about a myth, and Spartacus is about a historical figure so old it might as well be a myth. They’ve both got… Read more »
You seem to shrug off ‘Male Disposability’ as in “Those deaths just set the tone of the movie”. In the ‘Real Deal’ those weren’t extras, those were someones Brother, Father Son ,Uncle cut down in the prime of life. Many of them seeing their first ‘Action’. It seems a lot of Feminist like to go on about this thing called ‘Male Privilege’ (which I’m still waiting for someone to give me an example of how I’ve benefitted) , but they seem to want to gloss over ‘Male Disposability’ (if they’re even willing to admit it exists).
I’m interested in exploring the topic of male disposability, from issues of war to issues of the dirty/dangerous jobs going to men in general. But just like so many men go “What are we supposed to do about it?” when confronted with specific ways that women are harmed by male P-word, I can’t help feeling like what you’re saying is the truth, but what are we supposed to do about it? Stop sending our men to war? As I recall, it’s not women who are starting and pushing for war to begin with. Should wives not permit their husbands, or… Read more »
Ya know it kind of bothers me a lot when people look down on those who do dirty or the so called undesirable jobs. In my former career, (part of my job had to do with settlements of workmans comp and GL cases) I worked with all levels of employees. Weird thing is that when I met a lot of these factory workers, I found them to be far less complicated and happier in general. Where as you wonder how they could stand it, I looked at them and envied them. At the end of their day, they were done,… Read more »
@KKZ- So why don’t you ask them, why they do what they do?
Or do you just see them from the shareholder’s deck?
Privilege I think is meant to be more like the averages. Take an average male n average female, he is more likely to have better success in a job, she is more likely to have better success in having a stay at home parent relationship (as in a breadwinner for their family whilst she takes care of kid). She’s less likely to be a victim of physical/non-sexual violence, he’s less likely to be a victim of sexual violence (not by too much though). He has more role models on tv, she has more role models at school and in growing… Read more »
“As I recall, it’s not women who are starting and pushing for war to begin with.” It’s not men either, it’s society, both men n women as a collective although some monarch societies have a man OR a woman declare war. People often forget women’s role in war, how many women here marched against the IRAQ war? Voted in those who voted for war? How many females in the power structure voted to goto war? Women need to step up and take responsibility for their role in war, their hands are bloody too. Inaction isn’t an excuse, women played a… Read more »
“the person firing it has primary responsibility along with the leadership”
Remember that russian soldiers not willing to fight was shot. In many battles the option was run into certain death or be killed by your won officiers.
As I recall, it’s not women who are starting and pushing for war to begin with.
But that doesn’t stop women from pushing for it and supporting it when it happens.
I’m sure you aren’t interested in trying to start up an argument over who causes war but this bit right here comes off like you’re trying to say that when it comes to war women have nothing to do with it.
Personaly I don`t want women to go to war at all. I think they are ill suited physically and in most cases mentaly for it and that they do not function as well in the type of hyper masculine group dynamics found in the military and I think their presence weakens the group psychology in dangerous ways. They will start to try to acomodate the military to fit what makes them comofrtable and we are already starting to see with for example Norwegian officers in charge of recruiting women saying that we need to deemphasize masculine qualities and virtues such… Read more »
@ KKZ
“it’s not women who are starting and pushing for war to begin with.”
Have women never complained about lack of resources? When you demand resources, you are complicit in their acquisition. People may abhor what happened in Bangladesh, but then complain about why things cost so much and patronize the retailers that use this labor bordering on slavery.
ht tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Servile_War Everyone who could fight picked up the sword/whatever n fought alongside Spartacus, women included and probably children too. In a war like that, EVERYONE has to fight. The creativity in that show is probably the model-looks on many of them, and somehow the slave women had makeup just before a fucking battle! That show is the epitomy of testosterone laden movies n reminds me of the 80’s action heroes quite frankly:P. Enemy at the Gates shows female soldiers dying, Pearl Harbour has female nurses cut down by “Zeroes”, anything on modern day military may have female soldiers being… Read more »
Agreed, throughout history war has been about men fighting for territory and resources to benefit the group. In hunter gather societies, the men didn’t have a choice, I suppose, because (a) if they didn’t fight, their neighboring tribe would come kill them and take their women and their hunting territory and (b) they wouldn’t have the opportunity to grab women and resources for themselves, and wouldn’t be seen as desirable mates by women in their own community. With the growth of civilization, war was scaled up massively but it is still largely about territory and resources which men are expected… Read more »
which is often very unfair to the individual men, and the benefit to the community (nation) is often debatable.
Individual men?
I wonder. How many individual men does it take before we get to the point of acknowledging that it might be affecting men overall, on the average, or in some large scale capacity?
I’m asking because it seems that when something harms men we are individuals but when something benefits men we are a collective entity.
It’s interesting someone suggested that it is feminists who are concerned with outcomes, but this kind of highlights the opposite. Let me explain. The number of men (or women) affected isn’t all that accounts for whether something is affecting a group as a collective entity, or as individuals. That’s part of it, certainly…but that’s not it. All that is, is outcome. What feminists and gender theorists (and social theorists of all kinds) look to is whether people in a group is affected because they are part of that group. So we’ll take slut-shaming, for example. Regardless of how many women… Read more »
So from there…. When it comes to sending people off to war its most often done on the basis that men are fit for it but women are not. Thus the vast majority of military casualties are male because males are supposedly the ones that are fit for military service. Or the ways male rape/assault victims are shamed and silenced. This shaming is not quote the same as the shaming that female victims go through. Yes when a woman is raped the shaming commentary is usually about what kind of woman she is. You don’t see quite as much “she’s… Read more »
I don’t understand this part at all: ” Privilege works in the same way…it’s not about how many people in a group are individually affected…it’s about the fact that privilege exists because they are part of that group. ” By this logic, if I live in a state with a lottery, then I’m “privileged” because someone in my state will win the lottery and I have access to lottery tickets. People who live in other states don’t have access to lottery tickets, so they lack my “privilege.” But from a policy analysis standpoint this is absurd. The overall welfare of… Read more »
@ Heather
The other side of slut shaming is virgin shaming, which only affects men as a group. So are men actually privileged because they won’t be slut shamed or are women privileged because they won’t be virgin shamed?
A feminist once told me that men had privilege because their sexual availability wouldn’t be determined based on what they wore. I said that is because men are always considered sexually available. At least women could theoretically signal that they are not sexually available while men can not so who is actually privileged? I would say the person with options.
I just meant that soldiers are told to go die for the sake of the nation, but for individuals who get maimed or killed, it sucks. It also sucks for groups of men who get asked to make sacrifices others don’t (lower income men and men of color who were disproportionately drafted during Vietnam for example). Dying for the folks back home is easy to believe in when you are George W. Bush sitting pretty in the National Guard ’cause daddy pulled some strings for ya.
Couldn’t disagree with you more. The scenes were there due to historical fact.
….yeah, I still think we’re looking through our respective restricted lens of the world: As a guy, I don’t experience a world that assumes masculinity carries a higher value than femininity -and I think most men would share that perspective. In my world, masculinity is highly disposable, and value is withheld, made scarce and granted selectively upon achievement of whatever high risk often self-destructive exercise society has for me. The fact that our heroes are men is not self-evident that the masculine is valued -you have to put that in context with an underclass which is also men. Is it… Read more »
Random, I fyou were here I’d give you a chest bump!! YEAH!
I find your analysis of this interesting and mostly correct. Men do get most of the roles on both sides of the equation. Where it falls apart is the rare examples of female protagonists in action movies. Usually their body count is mostly male too (basically anything with Angelina Jolie). Women are certainly getting a much bigger share of the bad guy market (historically reserved for a single amazonian) and tis is not a bd thing, but it is only really in the past couple of years that male characters have been ‘allowed’ to fight them one on one. On… Read more »
“Your analysis of the movie you mentioned are missing one key component…the hero is male. And that is key…” Of course the HERO IS MALE. There were no females on the beaches in Normandy. AFAIK, mothers didn’t lose 3 or 4 daughters in a war but they sure did lose 3 or 4 sons. I also believe that using movies to illustrate a point is extremely troublesome, you are using fiction to explain reality, when you could actually use reality, but the problem is reality doesn’t allow you to make your point because reality says you are wrong. Look at… Read more »
On another note: I watched some TV coverage of the Boston bombings on the local news here that was shot on a cell phone camera from a person at the race. The news commentator was asking the question and rightfully so. “Why are all the people running towards the bombing area MEN and most of those running away from it, WOMEN”
It really does post a good question.
Saitek … I think you know the answer. It’s what men do. It’s simply one of those “Okay, I stopped holding my breath…. I guess I won’t really get the list. I guess I’ll just have to accept them as real without proof. Curious about what category this scenario would fit. Man and women get’s married. He works, she stays home as a home maker. Pretty common in a lot of circles. Many would consider the man being privileged in that he is likely to have a well paying career. But what about the wife? In the reverse, men who… Read more »
That was supposed to be two different responses….sorry