Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Feminism
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedFeminism
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 678910 14>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Kati View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 10 2010
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 6253 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2014 at 19:29
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:


Originally posted by The Pessimist The Pessimist wrote:

rogerthat: I understand if it seems like the issue is more complicated than I'm making it sound, but it really depends how deeply you look into it. You're arguing that sexism that denies equal opportunity comes from a different place to that of the sexism that evokes lewd remarks and molestation... However when anyone or anything is molested in such a way - whether it be a woman, a child or in some cases even an animal - it is almost always a display of the power the molester has over the molestee. Not only is it a display, but it's also an enforcement of that power. I would argue also that for example, women not being able to vote 100+ years ago was also a trait of mankind that was just another enforcement of the former. In both examples, it's a power thing. In both examples, it's men seeing women as objects of reproduction and nothing more. I mean, just look at the old school family image... Man going to work 9-5 while the woman stays at home to look after the children, being sure to have the man's tea ready by 5.30. This is probably the most obvious display of a patriarchy, and it ALL stems from sexual authority.

My point is actually pretty simple.  Every man who thinks women are not fit for certain positions (like say the so called glass ceiling) is not necessarily a molestor or rapist in waiting.  If this were not true, we would have dysfunction on a daily, hourly basis and it would be impossible to let women work in the office because many men still privately believe they are better equipped for certain jobs and women ought to live up to their 'biological' role.  They are just afraid to say it in public because it's not politically correct anymore.  But they are equally also timid enough that they are unlikely to resort to such extreme forms of sexual harassment or even pass lewd comments on women in their vicinity.  And that's the reason I believe the problems are not so tightly interlinked and need different solutions.  


Roger
love or hate the Tories, there is no doubt Margaret thatcher ruled that party with an iron fist (even the Russian's called her the Iron Lady), even US President had her in high regards and took advise from her. Again love or hate her, compared to recent political parties, at least you knew what she stood for, she was black and white, no grey lines.   

Edited by Kati - January 29 2014 at 19:30
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2014 at 19:37
Originally posted by Kati Kati wrote:

Dean I insist! :)
You took your grumpiness to another level here. I was a social economic consultant and have done quite significant research on oppression and spousal abuse matters. Statistics accumulated around the whole world, 89% of women have suffered some form of mental or physical abuse, these studies were done by the UN. The rate of physical spousal abuse towards men are only 1.7% compared to 89% towards women, although spousal abuse to men is equal as serious, the numbers are certainly more alarming towards women abuse.
I'm not grumpy. I treat serious matters seriously.

I'm not claiming that abuse towards women should be understated, or that abuse to men is anything like as prevalent. I do say that much of it is unreported and will never appear in any study, no matter how well conducted or who conducts it. I do question the numbers when they are presented, as should everyone, and 89% is a figure that is so high it raises several questions that need to be addressed. I would like to see the study that produced this figure. However, I don't care about the numbers - if only one person in the whole world was ever abused in their lifetime then that is one too many.
What?
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2014 at 19:40
Just to clarify, I am not saying that I myself believe in any of those artificial sexist constructs.  They are based mostly on lazy assumptions.  I cannot comment on Thatcher but there were at least five male Indian heads of state (including the present one) who were much worse than Indira Gandhi.  While I can at least understand where physical strength can give an edge to men in many sporting activities, I don't think there is any solid basis for believing women would do much worse than men at running a business or an institution.  It's just men trying to form a boy's club, nothing more. 
Back to Top
Kati View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 10 2010
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 6253 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2014 at 21:12
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:


Originally posted by Kati Kati wrote:

Dean I insist! :)
You took your grumpiness to another level here. I was a social economic consultant and have done quite significant research on oppression and spousal abuse matters. Statistics accumulated around the whole world, 89% of women have suffered some form of mental or physical abuse, these studies were done by the UN. The rate of physical spousal abuse towards men are only 1.7% compared to 89% towards women, although spousal abuse to men is equal as serious, the numbers are certainly more alarming towards women abuse.

I'm not grumpy. I treat serious matters seriously.
I'm not claiming that abuse towards women should be understated, or that abuse to men is anything like as prevalent. I do say that much of it is unreported and will never appear in any study, no matter how well conducted or who conducts it. I do question the numbers when they are presented, as should everyone, and 89% is a figure that is so high it raises several questions that need to be addressed. I would like to see the study that produced this figure. However, I don't care about the numbers - if only one person in the whole world was ever abused in their lifetime then that is one too many.


Dean, I call you grumpy but in a good way, kinda like Snow White and her grumpy cute fellow buddy although you speak your mind, you say it in a cute grumpy none offense way
The figures seem very high, I know even I find them high, however one must not forget that women in most African countries and Southern Asia are treated in the most despicable manner. I cannot share my reports, however you can google much of the info; here's an example of the statistics http://www.unifem.org/gender_issues/violence_against_women/facts_figures.html hugs xxx

P.S. I too take things seriously and will act/comment according to whom I am discussing these matters. In this case I rather upon my comment.

Edited by Kati - January 29 2014 at 21:21
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2014 at 02:12
Originally posted by Kati Kati wrote:


Dean, I call you grumpy but in a good way, kinda like Snow White and her grumpy cute fellow buddy although you speak your mind, you say it in a cute grumpy none offense way  
I suspect that few people ever intend to be offensive 
Originally posted by Kati Kati wrote:


The figures seem very high, I know even I find them high, however one must not forget that women in most African countries and Southern Asia are treated in the most despicable manner. I cannot share my reports, however you can google much of the info; here's an example of the statistics http://www.unifem.org/gender_issues/violence_against_women/facts_figures.html hugs xxx

P.S. I too take things seriously and will act/comment according to whom I am discussing these matters. In this case I rather upon my comment.
Example statistics can be found all over the Internet and in all of them, including this one, there is a gulf between the data and the headline grabbing PowerPoint conclusions that isn't fully explained. 


And none of them produce a figure of 89%. The only "89%" I can find is (and it appears in several reports):

"45% women and 26% men had experienced at least one incident of 
inter-personal violence in their lifetimes. (Walby and Allen, 2004) ) – 
however when there were more than 4 incidents (i.e. ongoing domestic or 
sexual abuse) 89% of victims were women. "

This early in the morning just as I prepare to head off to work I don't have the time to track down the original source of statistic in that quote but it crops-up in many of the examples, sometimes worded slightly differently, sometimes omitting the "more than 4 incidents" caveat. Cherry-picking reports for a headline grabber is common practice. 

Yes, abuse in Africa and Southern Asia does skew the results, and skewed results are not representative of the entire population.

When you get big numbers in any set of statistics you have to look at the data very closely. When you purport to represent all women in their lifetime then sample size becomes an important factor, the total female population exceeds 3.5 billion and the average female lifespan is 73 years - a representative sample from that becomes an impossible number to survey no matter how comprehensive the study.
What?
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2014 at 19:02
to conclude...

Originally posted by The Pessimist The Pessimist wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

When it comes to equal opportunity the issue is no different for unreasonable discrimination against someone for their gender as it is for their race, colour, creed or sexual alignment Of course, the issue is not to promote equality through positive discrimination (which is plain daft) Yep but to end inequality through negative discrimination (which is just plain wrong) Agreed also. As my partner quite rightly says "I'm happy for a man to hold the door open for me, providing that he also does it for everyone other man and woman as well".
I think your partner may be missing the point, but never mind.
Originally posted by The Pessimist The Pessimist wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Equality means being treated equally, it does not mean preferential treatment (as a certain person here has suggested)Absolutely. Here even Laura Bates in the TED Talk got a little carried away with numbers rather than the issue - the imbalance of 1 in 5 women being in politics is not a Power-Point presentation bullet-point to raise audience incredulity, it is a reflection many things, of which party selection policy is only one. In employment, no matter what the profession is, there will never be parity of numbers, and that is nothing to do with hiring policy or education or opportunity, it is just the natural order of things, the sexes are different for a reason (Vive la différence!), fewer women go into politics, fewer of those that do will win seats in elections - and that last point is a matter of voting preference, with universal suffrage half the voters are women yet they do not vote specifically for women candidates.
 It's a bit like asking why so many singers are women as opposed to men... 
It's nothing like asking that, but we'll continue your line of reasoning...
Originally posted by The Pessimist The Pessimist wrote:

Could it be that women are naturally wired to sing, or could it maybe be that growing up as a little girl there is an enormous amount of pressure to be feminine (put there mostly by men), and thus they look to the feminine idols in the media, who are most likely singers or actresses? 
...until it falls off the cliff. It's neither of those things, the word I'm reaching for is specious but this argument doesn't even approach even superficially plausible so that's the wrong word.
Originally posted by The Pessimist The Pessimist wrote:

Call me conspiratol, 
You're conspiratol [sic] ... I did warn you about this so you've only yourself to blame, and it's conspiratorial btw. Conspiratol sounds like a suppository to cure the anally retentive
Originally posted by The Pessimist The Pessimist wrote:

 but this is deeply suspicious. 
No it isn't
Originally posted by The Pessimist The Pessimist wrote:

 I know a female trombonist who would roast most male trombonists, so ability difference in gender is complete BS. I would argue the same for politicians too.
No it isn't
Originally posted by The Pessimist The Pessimist wrote:

A woman is pressured every day by the media and by her male peers to be attractive and "hot".
She must be getting pretty fed up with it by now, she should tell them to pester someone else.
Originally posted by The Pessimist The Pessimist wrote:

 This is not equal opportunity, nor equal treatment I'm afraid! 
Why are you afraid?



Anyway. Jokes aside. Stern Smile
Not every female action is the result of oppression. You seem to be reluctant to credit women with the ability to do what they want; and with the ability to know what they want to do; and with the ability to actually go and do what they want to do. I am actually suggesting that women do not go into politics because they don't want to go into politics. Only 1 in 5 politicians are women because more men want to be politicians than women. And yes, I actually do have the audacity to suggest that there are more women singers than men singers because more women want to sing. Women are wired differently to men, just as teenagers are wired differently to adults, no amount of equal opportunity legislation is ever going to change that. 

Originally posted by The Pessimist The Pessimist wrote:

 
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

I'm not saying that discrimination does not happen, far from it, it is just the expectation of what zero-discrimination will actually achieve is unknown, it certainly will not be complete 1 for 1 parity.
Of course, but feminism is an ideal just like any other movement. However, the closer we get to it the better. 
No. Parity is not the ideal goal, it's the great misconception of equality.
Originally posted by The Pessimist The Pessimist wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

So the statistics used in the TED Talk video, while being wholly correct are stated without explanation, for example she says that 1 in 3 women on the planet will be raped or beaten in their lifetime. 

A bold claim and a unpleasantly disturbing one, in fact I found it so disturbing and upsetting I actually found it hard to believe, nay, impossible to believe... just think about it: 1 billion women over a 73 year period, or stating that closer to home: your sister, your mum, your wife/gf/significant other - statistically one of those could be raped or beaten in their lifetime... And that's not a ridiculous assumption to make when you have a probability as high as 0.333 - that is no longer a figure of chance, it is a figure of inevitability. Looking at it another way: 1 in 3 MEN will rape or beat someone in their lifetime
 Discounting serial offenders then I presume? Sorry, I know it's irrelevant to your whole point but it was bugging me.

I don't believe serial offenders are discounted. The stats count the total number of incidents in a year, not the number of victims or the number of offenders, which makes any "lifetime" extrapolation even more inaccurate.
Originally posted by The Pessimist The Pessimist wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

 - that's you, your dad or your grandfather/brother/uncle - or 10 of the 30 men who posted in this thread - could rape or beat someone in their lifetime... and to that I say Bollocks! (or Fallopians! if you prefer). 

So, where does this 1 in 3 "World-wide" figure come from? Moreover, how do they know this? It comes from a WHO report of 15 sites in 10 countries, the countries were:  Bangladesh, Brazil, Ethiopia, Japan, Peru, Namibia, Samoa, Serbia and Montenegro, Thailand and the United Republic of Tanzania... (that list alone is hardly a representative sample of the whole planet), how they arrived at that figure is pure extrapolation and is highly speculative - they took a study of 24,000 women from those 10 countries and extrapolated it to the 3,500,000,000 women in 193 countries - simply take the incident rates of all violence directed at women (whether sexual or otherwise) from those 10 countries and multiply it with the average female lifespan... so if 33% is the final result, divide that by 73 years and the annual incident rate is 0.46% or 109 women of the 24,000 interviewed or 1 in 219 ... But 1 in 3 is a far more emotive number.


Wholly agreeing with you here, although the statistics in the video aren't really the important part of the general point.
If the stats were not really an important part of the general point then what was the point of them, what were they for?
Originally posted by The Pessimist The Pessimist wrote:

If we were to take a hypothetical census on every human being that had been raped since the dawn of our species, ow many do you think would be women and how many do you think would be men? This question is, of course, rhetorical, but the answer outlines the general point I'm making.
If we extend the census into the infinite future then both counts would be infinite, it sounds like a nice rhetorical question but it carries no value. We already know that far more women than men are raped, we already know that more women are subjected to domestic violence than men - my point (if we can remember that I ever had one) is that these figures should not be used for points scoring ("I'm more oppressed than thou art"). 

If we go back to the UK Office of National Statistics report that Cactus Choir mentioned:
Quote
    • The CSEW showed that young men were most likely to be the victims of violence. The profile of victims of violent and sexual violence varied according to the type of offence. In 2011/12, as in previous years, more than two-thirds of homicide victims (68%) were male. In contrast, women were more likely to be a victim of domestic abuse. Some 7% of women and 5% of men were estimated to have experienced domestic abuse in the last year, equivalent to an estimated 1.2 million female and 800,000 male victims. Similarly, the survey found that young women were much more likely to be victims of sexual assault in the last year.
If we do as I suggested and ignore the gender issue and simply look at the overall picture I believe it produces far harder-hitting numbers and highlights the greater problem. Instead of saying 1.2 million females had experienced domestic abuse, saying 2.0 million people actually shows the true effect of domestic violence. If we only solve the domestic abuse against women we have only fixed 60% of the problem.
What?
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 01 2014 at 20:49
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
Back to Top
The Pessimist View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: June 13 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 3834 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 06 2014 at 11:17
Dean, I will respond to you soon. I've been a tad busy lately with studio work/writing!
"Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value."

Arnold Schoenberg
Back to Top
tszirmay View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: August 17 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6673 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 06 2014 at 12:03
My only comment is that most of the verbal and physical abuse in schools today emanate from girls and not boys. I had unending hassles with my three daughters being bullied, harassed and insulted by jealous female schoolmates, at times veering very close to violence that was repressed only by using maximum diplomacy and , in some cases with stupid parents, counter threats. My two boys , on the other hand, settled the few issues they had with their mouth (charm skills, sense of humor and the occasional "settle this in the park" ) . 
Lest we forget that in the animal world, the female is, more often than not,  the hunter, the provider and the sexual aggressor. In a few cases, she even kills her male lover (gulp!) . Feminism is just another utopian political movement that tries to reinvent what has always been.  

But my sig says it all 
I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth.
Back to Top
Kati View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 10 2010
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 6253 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 06 2014 at 14:51
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:


Originally posted by Kati Kati wrote:

Dean I insist! :)
You took your grumpiness to another level here. I was a social economic consultant and have done quite significant research on oppression and spousal abuse matters. Statistics accumulated around the whole world, 89% of women have suffered some form of mental or physical abuse, these studies were done by the UN. The rate of physical spousal abuse towards men are only 1.7% compared to 89% towards women, although spousal abuse to men is equal as serious, the numbers are certainly more alarming towards women abuse.

I'm not grumpy. I treat serious matters seriously.
I'm not claiming that abuse towards women should be understated, or that abuse to men is anything like as prevalent. I do say that much of it is unreported and will never appear in any study, no matter how well conducted or who conducts it. I do question the numbers when they are presented, as should everyone, and 89% is a figure that is so high it raises several questions that need to be addressed. I would like to see the study that produced this figure. However, I don't care about the numbers - if only one person in the whole world was ever abused in their lifetime then that is one too many.


Dean, I have to admit that the studies I mentioned above were conducted in Mozambique, although even given the alarming statistics in this Country it certainly does not relate to general the world population.

I too honestly see no point in feminism, quite the contrary, I see no reason why one would advocate for this, it's silly really, in this modern age women have equal rights (exc. 3rd World Countries of course) thus I much rather spend my energy towards causes that are in dire need of our attention.
Also abuse of any kind or form towards all genders should be dealt with no matter the gender.
A huge     to you!

Edited by Kati - February 06 2014 at 14:53
Back to Top
Kati View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 10 2010
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 6253 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 06 2014 at 14:54
P.S. I do not know how to delete that demented smiley at the end of my post without deleting the rest. I does not belong there tho' hugs to all.
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 06 2014 at 14:58
Sorry Kati, as shown in all news networks and conversations in the US, women should never be part of any conversation about women, feminism, abortion or anything related. So please.... 




Oh wait you are in Mozambique. 

Tongue
Back to Top
Kati View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 10 2010
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 6253 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 06 2014 at 15:04
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Sorry Kati, as shown in all news networks and conversations in the US, women should never be part of any conversation about women, feminism, abortion or anything related. So please.... 
Oh wait you are in Mozambique. 
Tongue


Ha! The T,
Thus you're saying that it's restricted to men only in taking part of any conversation about women, feminism, abortion or anything related?     You ought to add menopause to that too, just in case.
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 06 2014 at 15:07
Only men should be able to talk about menopause too, you are right. 

And maternity. Stern Smile

Tongue
Back to Top
Kati View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 10 2010
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 6253 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 06 2014 at 15:09
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Only men should be able to talk about menopause too, you are right. 
And maternity. Stern Smile
Tongue


hahahahaha!!!!! You're so funny hahaha!!!
Back to Top
Kati View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 10 2010
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 6253 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 06 2014 at 15:31
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 06 2014 at 15:32
Back to Top
Kati View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 10 2010
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 6253 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 06 2014 at 15:35
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:
Back to Top
Kati View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 10 2010
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 6253 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 06 2014 at 15:54
Originally posted by Blacksword Blacksword wrote:

Originally posted by Kati Kati wrote:

I only read the topic and to be honest I find it very silly. To me as a women that lived in Holland for many years felt no discrimination, equally lived in South Africa also no discrimination, now live in Mozambique and actually am doing very well in terms of my career. Thus I cannot relate to this topic, never understood the purpose of Feminism really. I think we have more important equal rights to fight for i.e. gay marriage and in other countries the equal rights for women.


Film director Aaron Russo once claimed that Nicholas Rockerfeller told him that the Rockerfeller Foundation bankrolled and promoted the womens lib movement of the 60's, officially as an emanciptation movement, but really it was an initiative to get more women into the work place where they could be taxed!


Hello Blacksword how old is this statement? I do certainly believe that he could have said that, however since then we have progressed a lot.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 06 2014 at 19:40
Originally posted by Kati Kati wrote:

 
love or hate the Tories, there is no doubt Margaret thatcher ruled that party with an iron fist (even the Russian's called her the Iron Lady), even US President had her in high regards and took advise from her. Again love or hate her, compared to recent political parties, at least you knew what she stood for, she was black and white, no grey lines.   
Certainly no grey lines here from the wizened harridan: 

‘The feminists hate me, don’t they? And I don’t blame them. For I hate feminism. It is poison.’
What?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 678910 14>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.293 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.