Do Women get Men?

[Guest]

If you invite a girl out then I can see your thinking. But if a girl invited you wouldn't the opposite then be true?

Feministing | Young Feminists Blogging, Organizing, Kicking Ass

or for an alternative view:

Men Are Better Than Women, by Dick Masterson

Thanks!

Hmm. Dunno. Anne does buy stuff for me a lot, like. Still think whenever it's a date the guy should pay. Also, realistically, how often does the girl ask the guy out? I know quite a few feminists but all of them agree on the fact the guy should still do the chasing. Is this down to their individual personalities or gender roles? I would say the latter.

[Oedo 808]

Still think whenever it's a date the guy should pay. Also, realistically, how often does the girl ask the guy out? I know quite a few feminists but all of them agree on the fact the guy should still do the chasing. Is this down to their individual personalities or gender roles? I would say the latter.

When you pay through a sense of moral obligation what's the point? Equality demands you pay your own way.

Marc Rudov goes on and on about this kind of thing. It's very American but it's still interesting.

YouTube - Will She Buy YOU Dinner?

Also, his debates with FOX news presenters are usually very funny.

I don't think anyone should have to be doing the chasing. Chasing is tiring and boring.

[Shaki]

I dare say it depends on the person with this kind of chivalry thing. Some men are skinflints, some women like to be treated like a 'lady', some women like to be pay their own way, some men want to be generous etc, some folks like to split the bill. I think you soon work that out.

What I do now is pay my entire salary into a joint bank account I don't even know how to access, I assume she pays the bills and what not and then I get a transfer into my pocket money account. This is 3 years down the line mind you and I've stolen 3 of her cigarettes tonight just in case she's diddlin me out of cash.

[Oedo 808]

What I do now is pay my entire salary into a joint bank account I don't even know how to access, I assume she pays the bills and what not and then I get a transfer into my pocket money account.

Ah. She's Westminster, you're Holyrood.

[Paranoid Android]

I hit a woman once.

xx

Didn't read any more of this post, didn't want to. It would ruin it.

Stroopy wife beater.

You Dick.

Is this thread back to jokes yet or is it still serious? I can't tell as I'm a little tipsy and skimmed the last few pages.

[Monster Zero]

I once read one of these women's mags that on one page was making the case for how women should be able to eat as much chocolate as they like, as men should accept their bodies no matter how many flabby bits or what have you existed, and yet 2 pages later was stating how men should be taking the time to ensure they are not flabby because women deserve to have the effort put in for them.

I'm no expert in the sexism debate but this seemed to say something....

[KarmaTsunami]

An equal amount of respect whilst admitting that each sex group can be considered different?

Would you agree that by and large men and women do have some inherently different characteristics common with their sex? While personalities and interests can be similar between males and females, on a purely evolutionary basis we do have different roles to play which I think can shape the facets of our identities and that there are common female and male traits. There must be something other than the way society has shaped us that make it more likely that a woman would rather do a) than b) of a Saturday afternoon while a man would choose the opposite. I agree it shouldn't be a battle but are you saying that the sex of someone shouldn't even be an issue worth considering in terms of any aspect of society?

Complicated, and I'll honestly say that my own views regarding this are nowhere near being set in stone.

Do I agree that by and large men and women do have some inherently different characteristics common with their sex? Obviously yes, there are biological differences but then you can get into Essentialist arguments about whether or not people should be defined by these differences. Simone De Beauvoir wrote that woman is made, not born and is against any attempt to reduce woman to her 'unique physical property' - reproduction. Essentialists would seek to define the identity of every woman, no matter how different, by her ability to reproduce. I'm anti-essentialist, I don't think anyone should be defined by their physical attributes. Why should the physical sex of someone be an issue in any aspect of society?

A lot of the reading I've been doing seeks to redetermine ideas of 'man' and 'woman'. Judith Butler, for example, is a difficult read but worth at least reading around to gain some understanding of 21st century ideas regarding gender. You're almost there by saying that we've evolved certain roles for men and women, but it's still a sociocultural evolution. Her basic ideas can be found here: Judith Butler - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't agree with everything she says, but people in the field of Gender/Queer studies would tell you this is still the definitive text on the subject and changed the field after it.

Sorry, I know that was a bit long-winded and maybe not as well articulated as it could be but hopefully it helps you know where I'm coming from.

[Benji]

I don't even know where to start with this.

You got there in the end huh

[KarmaTsunami]

Yes, with regard to points made later in the thread that were both better articulated and reasonably sensible. Not your own original point.

[ca_gere]

Complicated, and I'll honestly say that my own views regarding this are nowhere near being set in stone.

Do I agree that by and large men and women do have some inherently different characteristics common with their sex? Obviously yes, there are biological differences but then you can get into Essentialist arguments about whether or not people should be defined by these differences. Simone De Beauvoir wrote that woman is made, not born and is against any attempt to reduce woman to her 'unique physical property' - reproduction. Essentialists would seek to define the identity of every woman, no matter how different, by her ability to reproduce. I'm anti-essentialist, I don't think anyone should be defined by their physical attributes. Why should the physical sex of someone be an issue in any aspect of society?

A lot of the reading I've been doing seeks to redetermine ideas of 'man' and 'woman'. Judith Butler, for example, is a difficult read but worth at least reading around to gain some understanding of 21st century ideas regarding gender. You're almost there by saying that we've evolved certain roles for men and women, but it's still a sociocultural evolution. Her basic ideas can be found here: Judith Butler - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't agree with everything she says, but people in the field of Gender/Queer studies would tell you this is still the definitive text on the subject and changed the field after it.

Sorry, I know that was a bit long-winded and maybe not as well articulated as it could be but hopefully it helps you know where I'm coming from.

It's amazing that Simon de beauvoir is still a main reference point when it comes to sexism. It either shows we've not moved forward much or what she was banging on about was a universal truth. Out of interest, do you read much Julie kristeva in your studies? I find her arguments on semiotics and how words are inherently male-oriented really fascinating. The whole abjection thing too I presume is particularly relevant to you, what with you being a gay woman and all. Id genuinely like to read your take on her stuff because a lot of it I just can't grasp eventhough I know she's talking sense. Fascinating woman. I could be talking out my arse but I'm sure she came to aberdeen university once.

[Oedo 808]

there are biological differences but then you can get into Essentialist arguments about whether or not people should be defined by these differences.

Individuals should be taken on a case by case basis. Groups can only be judged through generalisation. The problem occurs when you try to attribute the group generalisation to any particular individual within the collective.

On an instinctual level I disagree with the idea of gender performativity in the absolute sense but I agree that those who behave in a manner outwith the prescribed gender norm are generally punished. The obvious instance is homosexuality but the issue is more complex than sexual orientation. When any individual is seen to tread upon the social territory of the opposite sex they are invariably punished by both sexes.

So, to come back to an earlier example.

It is men who 'chase' women

But what if a woman chases men? Or even worse, has a 'male' attitude towards sex? Well, she's a slut...

From here we launch into evolutionary biology. The simple fact is that a woman who runs around acting like a man in her sexual life mucks everything up. Especially for other women - feminists included.

This is why I find most debates about feminism to be a bit of a dead end. Society is just a product of evolution and evolution is inherently selfish. Evolution has handed men and women different tasks so gender roles can never be performative alone. I'm not saying that sex and gender is the same thing but no amount of intellectual feminist thought can reverse millions of years of evolutionary biology and break the two apart.

Is There Anything Good About Men? And Other Tricky Questions - NYTimes.com

[KarmaTsunami]

Individuals should be taken on a case by case basis. Groups can only be judged through generalisation. The problem occurs when you try to attribute the group generalisation to any particular individual within the collective.

On an instinctual level I disagree with the idea of gender performativity in the absolute sense but I agree that those who behave in a manner outwith the prescribed gender norm are generally punished. The obvious instance is homosexuality but the issue is more complex than sexual orientation. When any individual is seen to tread upon the social territory of the opposite sex they are invariably punished by both sexes.

So, to come back to an earlier example.

It is men who 'chase' women

But what if a woman chases men? Or even worse, has a 'male' attitude towards sex? Well, she's a slut...

From here we launch into evolutionary biology. The simple fact is that a woman who runs around acting like a man in her sexual life mucks everything up. Especially for other women - feminists included.

This is why I find most debates about feminism to be a bit of a dead end. Society is just a product of evolution and evolution is inherently selfish. Evolution has handed men and women different tasks so gender roles can never be performative alone. I'm not saying that sex and gender is the same thing but no amount of intellectual feminist thought can reverse millions of years of evolutionary biology and break the two apart.

Is There Anything Good About Men? And Other Tricky Questions - NYTimes.com

You make some really good points here. I definitely agree that when you try and apply generalisations about a group of people to individuals or even sub-groups that you run into problems. And people acting outside the 'norm' regarding gender are often punished to some degree and it does go beyond homosexuality. I mean, what about androgyny or the third gender? However, just because they are does not mean they should be; people shouldn't be punished for acting outside gender norms and it's ridiculous to suggest otherwise. To my mind anyway.

Yes, society may be a product of sociocultural evolution, but if you look at how we live now and how we lived hundreds of years ago then there have been drastic shifts in gender roles and equal rights. Why should feminists and equal rights activists stop campaigning just because of sociocultural evolution? Because you don't think it will make a difference? It has in the past and there's no reason to suggest it won't again. It's certainly not going to happen overnight but if people keep debating then it can over time.

[Oedo 808]

people shouldn't be punished for acting outside gender norms

I agree with you wholeheartedly.

Yes, society may be a product of sociocultural evolution, but if you look at how we live now and how we lived hundreds of years ago then there have been drastic shifts in gender roles and equal rights. Why should feminists and equal rights activists stop campaigning just because of sociocultural evolution? Because you don't think it will make a difference? It has in the past and there's no reason to suggest it won't again

Yes, there have been drastic shifts in gender roles and gender rights and I think that's the point. If we look at gender equality as the right of a collective of individuals not to be treated unfairly when compared to other individuals and then we read an article in the paper that says "not enough women in parliament" or "gender pay gap at 10%" what are we really saying? That individual women are being stopped from becoming MPs because of their gender? That women doing the same job as their male counterparts are being paid less because of their gender?

I just don't believe that. So if some other force is at work how can we be sure it's sexism? Why must we do more? And what? What are the frontiers that need to be pushed back? I don't know; but maybe you can point me in the right direction.

That's the problem with third wave feminism as I understand it. It's unclear (from my outward perspective) what it's all about.

[Benji]

Yes, with regard to points made later in the thread that were both better articulated and reasonably sensible. Not your own original point.

Your awesome, keep it up!

[Paranoid Android]

Your awesome, keep it up!

oopsy daisy!

[waltz]

Your awesome, keep it up!

I'm not sure why you use the internet.

[Alkaline]

I'm not sure why you use the internet.

Because it helps make your experience of the internet a little worse?

[Benji]

I'm not sure why you use the internet.

Mainly porn but the other 5% is budgeted for people like you - to show you how pathetic you are and how serious this isn't. Anyway, got a life to live to why don't you go right ahead and negative rep this or something you mentalist.

[KarmaTsunami]

I agree with you wholeheartedly.

Yes, there have been drastic shifts in gender roles and gender rights and I think that's the point. If we look at gender equality as the right of a collective of individuals not to be treated unfairly when compared to other individuals and then we read an article in the paper that says "not enough women in parliament" or "gender pay gap at 10%" what are we really saying? That individual women are being stopped from becoming MPs because of their gender? That women doing the same job as their male counterparts are being paid less because of their gender?

I just don't believe that. So if some other force is at work how can we be sure it's sexism? Why must we do more? And what? What are the frontiers that need to be pushed back? I don't know; but maybe you can point me in the right direction.

That's the problem with third wave feminism as I understand it. It's unclear (from my outward perspective) what it's all about.

You're not entirely wrong about third-wave feminism. I've been reading a really good book by Sara Marcus about Riot Grrrl called 'Girls to the Front'. It addresses a lot of the issues surrounding the internal conflicts of third wave feminism and I'd say that's a really good, accessible place to start. It definitely goes into a lot of what was good about the movement, but also issues that arose. I mean it's like any political or social movement, you're going to upset someone, even people you don't mean to. Say a group of feminists set up a seminar, there is always going to be a social group that is under-represented. One of the biggest problems I think it faced (and still faces) is that it's largely seen as a movement started by middle-class white girls and other groups of women felt that they weren't been fairly represented because they weren't.

What frontiers need to be pushed back? How about the fact that women are still stereotyped into careers where they earn less, backed up by the article you posted earlier. Ensuring that women doing the same job are actually earning the same across the board. Raising awareness of gender inequality as perpetrated by men and women, and in doing so hopefully work towards a society where people aren't punished or bullied for acting outside gender norms. There's a lot to do, it might not necessarily fall under 'women's rights', but there is still a lot that feminists can fight and campaign for at home and abroad.

[Old Gold]

Mainly porn but the other 5% is budgeted for people like you - to show you how pathetic you are and how serious this isn't. Anyway, got a life to live to why don't you go right ahead and negative rep this or something you mentalist.

Ain't nothing like the feeling of making yourself out to be the pinnacle of evolution before beating off into a hankie before mum gets in from work, is there?

[Benji]

You know it bro.

[waltz]

Mainly porn but the other 5% is budgeted for people like you - to show you how pathetic you are and how serious this isn't. Anyway, got a life to live to why don't you go right ahead and negative rep this or something you mentalist.

Haha.

I enjoyed this.

[Benji]

I'm glad for you.

[MerryChristmas]

How come she expects me to buy her hello, or ok when I'm at the shop but she refuses to buy me the sunday sport or FHM when shes at the shops

Double standards, absolute double standards

and I love the way women go on about not being able to trust men to take contraceptives - Is it because they judge men by their own standards ?

[Jaaakkkeee]

How come she expects me to buy her hello, or ok when I'm at the shop but she refuses to buy me the sunday sport or FHM when shes at the shops

Double standards, absolute double standards

and I love the way women go on about not being able to trust men to take contraceptives - Is it because they judge men by their own standards ?

One has baps and arse. The others have gossip. I wouldn't ask my mum to buy me FRONT so I wouldn't ask my girlfriend.

Also, I'm not sure men can 'take' contraceptive. I know they're developing a man pill but it's not on the go yet. I'd happily have a male implant instead of my gf as she hates it.

Double standards is her wanking furiously with a vibrator but as soon as you ask for a shot she goes off her head.