You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Feminism’ category.
“There has been little acknowledgement of the way in which trans politics demands far more of women than it does of men, perhaps because this would require an acknowledgement of the fact that male/female remains as much, if not more, of a dominant axis of oppression as trans/cis. Why aren’t we claiming that “men” needs to become a more inclusive category? If men can get pregnant too, why aren’t men’s rights activists campaigning for abortion rights? Why does pregnancy become a de-politicised “people’s” issue while testicular cancer remains a men’s issue? If sex is irrelevant, why are female people always the ones expected to cede linguistic and physical ground?
Pregnant with my third child, I faced more than one self-righteous male informing me that “biological sex is a construct.” The arrogance of this is staggering. Every single human being on this planet exists because of the reproductive labour of female bodies. Around 830 women die every day due to preventable pregnancy complications. The world is missing an estimated 90 to 100 million women due to the extermination of female – not feminine – infants. In such a situation, to boldly declare that you “see no sex difference” reveals both ignorance and privilege. We’re back to the idea that female people cannot be credible witnesses to their own lives.
If men were genuinely invested in supporting trans women, there’s an obvious thing they could do: stop pretending it is inevitable for “masculine” men to respond with violence to the idea that those who wish to socially transition to womanhood remain biologically male. As feminists have been arguing for decades, maleness and femininity can coexist. If the thought of that makes some men violent, then the problem lies with how men see maleness, not with feminists refusing to treat womanhood as a catch-all category for anything men don’t want to be.
Andrea Dworkin suggested when it comes to justifying misogyny, the right has religion while the left has nature. Trans politics has offered up a suitably postmodern amalgam of both. Are we dealing with scientifically verifiable proof of the “gendered” brain? Or with some mystic, soul-like essence known as “gender identity”? In many ways, it doesn’t matter which, as long as both are reinforcing a male view of how masculinity and femininity work.
I am tired of men posing as more open-minded than feminists, when in fact they’re behaving in the exact same way men have always behaved towards women. If you’re a male person telling a female person to be silent about her experiences of gender and power, you’re not only doing feminism wrong, you’re exemplifying the very values you claim to undermine. “
*slow clap*
Societal norms are mostly patriarchal norms. Being portrayed a certain way, and being expected to act a certain way certainly couldn’t affect one’s prospects in society…
And that is it, right there folks. Unless you take the time to try and understand the situations and particular challenges people face in society from their point of view, your opinions on how they should act, or what they should be doing, just are not that relevant. This should not be a hard concept to understand, but as it seems to be most men cannot, or will not take the time to understand that society *works* differently if you happen to be female.
Like, it would take just a little time to stop and listen to the many female narratives available here on the vast-wideness of the internet, but frack that noise, I’ll just assume that everyone is treated the same as me, and should base all my arguments on that flawed assumption.
The bone jarring stupid is so prevalent in the dude class. Like I can understand that you benefit from the current unjust system and really, because you are not particularly downtrodden, haven’t given any thought to the topic at hand. But, seriously, have the common decency to listen when others tell of a different narrative and experience in society. You may just learn something.
Huh. It seems that even the New York Times acknowledges that something may be up with the way we socialize females in our society. Similar results could be gleaned if say oh, we actually listened when women spoke and took what they said seriously.
“The census data on the labor market show a persistent gap in what white men and women earn and how much they participate in the labor force, though that gap has narrowed over time. But that gender gap varies by states — and it’s that variation that helped the researchers isolate the effects of sexism, by place.
The researchers looked at men and women who were born in the same state and then moved to the same state, like North Carolinians who moved to New York, or Texans who moved to Colorado. They found that the gap in wages and employment between men and women in those groups was bigger for those who were born in states with higher levels of sexism.
They also find that, compared with women around them who were born elsewhere, the women born in more “sexist” places marry and have their first child “at appreciably younger ages.” Another recent paper, in which Ms. Pan was also one of the writers, found a sharp decline in employment for women after their first child is born, and also that women’s attitudes toward gender roles grow more traditional after a birth.
Mr. Charles, Mr. Guryan and Ms. Pan found that the results held even when controlling for age, education and migration patterns, which is to say, Americans historically tend to move to states close to their state of birth as adults, if they move at all.
The research cannot say for certain why those differences persist. The economists say that women appear to internalize social norms when they are young on issues like when to have children, what tasks are appropriate for women in the work force or even how much society values the work of women.
Those traits could, in turn, affect a woman’s willingness to bargain for higher wages. “We know that whatever it is, must be something of a product of where they’re from, and continues to affect them now,” Mr. Charles said. “A notable example here might be the willingness to ask for raises, or the willingness to confront a manager over a raise that was too small. A woman imbued with her value in the marketplace is likely to reject an insufficient raise.”
Those internalized norms appear to have affected a young woman named Nicole, who grew up in Indiana, earned a business degree and a master’s in information systems, and left her home state to build a career. Nicole, who asked that her last name and current employer not be identified, said she has struggled with the assertiveness needed to ask for a raise or a higher starting salary.
By the time she started as a consultant at a large accounting firm, some of her high school friends were married, ready for children, working part time or not at all. Nicole said she was working harder than many of her colleagues and wondering why she earned less than they did. “Sometimes, my male job recruiter friends are like, ‘Why don’t you just ask? When someone offers you a job, they expect you to negotiate,’” she said. “Whereas my friends and I, we’re just happy to have job offers. It didn’t cross my mind that you negotiate.”
Internalizing a culture that does not value women working outside the home, or that makes a woman’s role as a mother a priority, could also discourage women from working longer and less flexible hours. The Harvard University economist Claudia Goldin has found that much of the gender gap in pay comes from differences within occupations, such as law and medicine, where men are rewarded for their disproportionate willingness to work long hours and agree to be on call when they are off duty.”
Women not doing as well in a society regulated by and built for men? Shocking.
Good to know the meanings of terms when they come up. :)
Just watching the manly magic in action. I apologize for the acronym heavy preface, it hurts the rational brain, but it is an example of the language and ideology being used to push women (adult human females) to the margins.
Also, this example #439024 of why movements cannot be all-inclusive. You cannot include members of the class that oppresses you in your movement. It is like a union asking management to join their ranks. It just doesn’t work.
Men have barged into feminism proper and are demanding it be reshaped to meet their qualifications. You know, just like it is in everyday society – the replication of patriarchal structures and hierarchies lies behind the thin edge of the wedge of ‘inclusion’.
Feminism is the movement to liberate females from the oppressive structures of society, it is female centred and female led. If you are pulling for a movement that doesn’t support those goals, then what you are doing *isn’t* feminism.
The Intransigent One
Mystro
Your opinions…