|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| I'm a woman and I'm a feminist. |
| I'm a woman and I have reservations about the word with regard to myself. |
|
17% |
[ 4 ] |
| I'm a man and I'm a feminist. |
|
34% |
[ 8 ] |
| I'm a man and I'd never use that word about myself. |
|
47% |
[ 11 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 23 |
|
| Author |
Message |
unknown9398
Joined: 03 Nov 2006
Location: Yeongcheon, S. Korea
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 7:52 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| unknown9398 wrote: |
However, many men find that being married to a feminist is difficult because we're expected to be men while being slowly stripped of the responsibilities and characteristics that made us men to begin with.
|
Curious as to what those characteristics might be...?
Laziness?
Bossiness?
Smack-her-about-a-bitiness?
Leave-her-to-do-all-the-housechores-herselfiness? |
That's a pretty stock feminist answer. I wonder if you actually *thought* about male characteristics and responsibilities within marriage before your knee-jerk reply. Is it possible for you to take off your feminist badge long enough to stop insulting men at the first sign one of us might disagree with you?
As I said, women still want to be swept away by a "knight in shining armor," yet the qualities that made a knight's armor so shiny are no longer acceptable to feminists. Strength and leadership are sought after by women before marriage, but once married, discouraged in the name of equality.
Last edited by unknown9398 on Sat Jul 21, 2007 8:00 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
djsmnc
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Location: Dave's ESL Cafe
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 7:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think women are excellent for raising kids and cooking great food. Better than any man could, that's for sure. Count me in as a feminist! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Unposter
Joined: 04 Jun 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
We, as in a social sense, expect a lot from women. They should be mothers, lovers, care givers, home makers, and even provider. And, while men are starting to pick-up the slack, in general, society does not expect the same from them.
So, in order to achieve equality, it can seem that feminism asks more from men.
My wife and I endeavor to do things as equally as possible in our relationship. We both work; take care of the children and the house. Now, this does not mean we split everything down the middle. There are things in taking care of the children or the house which she is just not strong or tall enough to do. And, there are things which she is just more skilled than me at and she does. There are times I have to work and there are times she has to work. Sometimes, we visit our friends apart from each other and the other takes care of the kids.
There is a lot of give and take. Relationships, in my experience, are hard work. I consider it a full-time job. If either one of you is not willing to put in the work, it just is not going to work.
I think feminism has made my relationship stronger. And, I think this is one of the great successes of feminism. It has allowed marriage to be seperated from a religious or social duty. It can be a partnership or agreement between two people. One does not nor should have to marry, and, one does not have to nor should have kids -- unless one wants to.
This is an amazing and modern concept given to us by Feminists and Feminist thinking. It has freed people, both men and women, to enjoy and get what they want from life.
Of course, just as the "pursuit of happiness" has freed people, it has also raised expectations and increased stress. Freedom is not easy as it is also full of responsibilities. People don't always like freedom. Some like an easy, clear, direct set of rules to follow. To each their own.
If Feminism has been the cause of preventing someone from experiencing love that is truly sad. In the end, underneath our education and intellectual clothes, we are still human beings full of emotions and needs. Denying this is usually to your own detriment.
To the extent that Feminism frees people and makes equality possible it is a proper Feminism. To the extent that it imprisons people, denying them the chance to fullfill all that life has to offer, it is not a proper Feminism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ella
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| women still want to be swept away by a "knight in shining armor," |
Some. Others are glad to fight alongside our knights as equals. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
unknown9398
Joined: 03 Nov 2006
Location: Yeongcheon, S. Korea
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ella wrote: |
| Quote: |
| women still want to be swept away by a "knight in shining armor," |
Some. Others are glad to fight alongside our knights as equals. |
Please note that in my OP I pointed out that unless writing about specific individuals, I would have no choice but to make generalizations. So it's really not necessary to point out that there are exceptions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ella
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm not sure yours was an accurate generalization, but I was willing to allow it to point out the differences. It's important for the purposes of this discussion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JongnoGuru
Joined: 25 May 2004
Location: peeing on your doorstep
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think if *I* were a feminist of the girly persuasion, I would avoid like the plague any discussion of women's rights & plights in the Third World or the Islamic World. My reasons would be:
1. We gotta keep the focus and pressure on Whitey Man. He's the man with the goodies, and we know how to play him. Gimme, gimme, gimme! For let us be quite honest with ourselves, from which other culture can we expect as fair a deal?
2. Any attention to the women of the Third World or Islamic World is only going to illustrate how good we've got it by comparison here in Whitey World. That does our negotiating position no good at all.
Personally, I don't really mind the self-professed man-haters among the feminist crowd. I appreciate the honesty. It's those hypocritical, bloody-minded, transparently selfish, moody, biatchy ones I have no time for. Unless of course they're hawt, in which case they're free to trample alllll over my rights...baby. 
Last edited by JongnoGuru on Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:03 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| That's all well and good Jongno, but we bloody-minded biatches want to know how you voted in the poll. So are you a feminist of the blokey persuasion, or not? Do tell! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JongnoGuru
Joined: 25 May 2004
Location: peeing on your doorstep
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| That's all well and good Jongno, but we bloody-minded biatches want to know how you voted in the poll. So are you a feminist of the blokey persuasion, or not? Do tell! |
Didn't vote yet, but I'll have to tick the last option. Not because I don't agree with what we all understand to be the basic principles of the "ism" -- I do. But because it's just not an accurate description of me. I'm not involved in any women's rights causes, I don't spend my free time familiarising myself with, or discussing with others the latest feminist issues, etc. To me, this isn't one of the "isms" that I can just sit back & agree with and that automatically makes me a member of the club. I think I recall reading some years back a post by The Bobster about his personal and active involvement in feminist causes or campaigns. I don't have any such experience, and I don't feel like I can claim this "ism" unless I do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JongnoGuru wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| That's all well and good Jongno, but we bloody-minded biatches want to know how you voted in the poll. So are you a feminist of the blokey persuasion, or not? Do tell! |
Didn't vote yet, but I'll have to tick the last option. Not because I don't agree with what we all understand to be the basic principles of the "ism" -- I do. But because it's just not an accurate description of me. I'm not involved in any women's rights causes, I don't spend my free time familiarising myself with, or discussing with others the latest feminist issues, etc. To me, this isn't one of the "isms" that I can just sit back & agree with and that automatically makes me a member of the club. I think I recall reading some years back a post by The Bobster about his personal and active involvement in feminist causes or campaigns. I don't have any such experience, and I don't feel like I can claim this "ism" unless I do. |
Well, Bramble and Gopher seem to feel that to call yourself a 'feminist' you have to have read up on all the latest theory. So if you concur with that, you can't call yourself a feminist. However, if you look at Ella's definition of femininst, it seems clear to me that you can do so. Take your pick.
In my opinion, you are a feminist. However, I quite understand why you wouldn't wish to announce yourself as one. Afterall, if some bloke tried to pick me up, and introduced himself as 'Felix the feminist' - I'm not sure I'd be too excited about it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alyallen
Joined: 29 Mar 2004
Location: The 4th Greatest Place on Earth = Jeonju!!!
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think I am equal to anyone male or female....
No offense ladies, but I'd climb over your hunched bodies cleaning the floor to get ahead.
I feel no true affinity to women just because we happen to have the same mixture of hormones....
Sorry ladies, I guess I would vote a big old no on the feminist question... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 9:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| At the end of the day, feminists and the other so-called human-rights advocates either stand for what they say they stand for or they do not. One cannot pick-and-choose with morals and morality -- especially all these purists who love to preach and denounce, no? |
Kudos for mentioning Michael moore and Foucault and the Bell Curve all in one thread to announce to world the extent of your reading and erudition. Unfortunately, not a lick of it makes the slightest bit of sense. Impressive performance, though, typing a lot of smart words, just to try to show a lot of people you've never met that you are smarter and therefore better ... I guess. I mean, if that's how you want to spend you time.
Next time, try to say something true and real and even a little bit important, and by that I mean more important than trying to convince people you know more than they do. Because, you know what? When it comes to core human values about what makes the world work - you know, trivial stuff like, oh, I dunno, love, trust, feeling safe when you go to bed at night, hoping the best will happen for your children rather than the worst - you DON'T know any more than any other human breathing on the planet.
So, well, I'm just thinking you might try to stop pretending you DO more than the rest of us. That's all.
| Quote: |
| But at the end of the day, Bobster, it is the worst crime of the history of the universe that men objectify women! (Disclaimer: except in the Middle East where one would be a racist to think so.) ROFL. |
Yerah, I know you are ROFL but it's mainly because you lack some important clues. You work so hard to look so smart about most other things, this is amazing, and part of me hopes you are being satirical.
Of course, there are worse crimes than to "objectify" a woman. Among them are rape, murder, genocide, torture - all of it bad stuff, but never on any discussion topic about them have I ever heard YOU come around and say so. Not once. I could probably research your posts and find places where you were an apologist for some of it, especially, the torture stuff.
Anyway, a woman is no less a feminist if she is a woman who enjoys a man looking at her because she is beautiful. On first meeting, "objectification" is inevitable - hey, big surprise, I like getting the odd glance from across the room of a smoky bar from a lady I don't know, too. I'm married and happy about it, but it's nice thing whgen it happens, and i give my smiles out for free also.
Most healthy women enjoy being looked at by men, if the man knows the right way to look at a woman, and there's nothing un-feminist about that, in fact it's empowering. But Goph, it's mostly in the WAY that you do it. They have to feel not only sexy and beautiful but also safe to be in the same room with you. A lot of it is in how you smile at them while you look, but the truth is, they notice your eyes a little more, I think.
I really thought your dad woulda explained all this stuff to you long ago. It's pretty basic primate behavior, you know. If you are still confused, let's have a beer some time and I'll try to fill you in on what your dad didn't have time for.
Don't worry, it's not too late to learn the important stuff. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Well, Bramble and Gopher seem to feel that to call yourself a 'feminist' you have to have read up on all the latest theory... |
How can you claim to subcribe to something when you do not know what it is in its present manifestation? And are you satisfied with merely looking up "feminism" in a dictionary to inform yourself?
________
And Bobster: I suggest dropping the self-righteousness and giving the sermons a rest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| And Bobster: I suggest dropping the self-righteousness and giving the sermons a rest. |
This he says, while giving a self-righteous seron ... 
Theory is useless. Things that exist in the world are defined after they already exist. Make it exist, or don't. If you are a feminist, it's because of the actions you take in your life, not because you agree with something in a book you read somewhere in some class in uni. Don't talk about about feminism, go out and DO. After you've done it, THEN you can talk about it.
Are you a feminist? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Bobster wrote: |
| Gopher wrote: |
| And Bobster: I suggest dropping the self-righteousness and giving the sermons a rest. |
This he says, while giving a self-righteous seron ... |
What, pray tell, is "a self-righteous seron," and why does it invoke sarcasm...?
| The Bobster wrote: |
| Theory is useless... |
Glad we agree. Who are you arguing against?
| The Bobster wrote: |
| Things that exist in the world are defined after they already exist. Make it exist, or don't. If you are a feminist, it's because of the actions you take in your life, not because you agree with something in a book you read somewhere in some class in uni. Don't talk about about feminism, go out and DO. After you've done it, THEN you can talk about it. |
You are preaching again. I thought you were already told to stop.
| The Bobster wrote: |
| Are you a feminist? |
I voted in your poll and commented in your thread. That ought to suffice.
That will be all, Bobster. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
