What women (don't) want.

[eFestivals]

ok, so do you think a divide between those who want unity, compassion and understanding between genders/people (diversity awareness), and those who want to promote male oppression and female victimhood (feminism/patriarchy), is more or less divisive, or just different?

I think it's a divide. And I think that because they're divided.

Chipping away at one side doesn't make that divide go away. The divide only goes away when the chipping away has finished and everyone is in agreement.

I'm not commenting on what is being divided. I'm pointing out that tonyblair's words are literally wrong, by the very definitions of those words.

Edited February 13, 2015 by eFestivals

[feral chile]

I think it's a divide. And I think that because they're divided.

Chipping away at one side doesn't make that divide go away. The divide only goes away when the chipping away has finished and everyone is in agreement.

I'm not commenting on what is being divided. I'm pointing out that tonyblair's words are literally wrong, by the very definitions of those words.

Well what I'm finding difficult to grasp, is that most people think that patriarchy is wrong.

We might think it's wrong for different reasons, because as I've been trying to point out, it can disadvantage men as much as women, and you can look at various aspects as either.

So, is there a divide so much as most people in agreement, but coming at things from different perspectives?

I think what tony and I are both arguing, is that there aren't 2 sides to the power game, but there are lots of different perspectives.

We're not even agreeing on the definition of power, for one thing. So how can we all be discussing the same thing?

Edited February 13, 2015 by feral chile

[eFestivals]

Well what I'm finding difficult to grasp, is that most people think that patriarchy is wrong.

yep, I know. That became clear when you said there was nothing bad about patriarchy, and that women being united with patriarchy was more important than tackling patriarchy.

So, is there a divide so much as most people in agreement, but coming at things from different perspectives?

you showed just how big the divide is when you supported patriarchy against women.

[feral chile]

yep, I know. That became clear when you said there was nothing bad about patriarchy, and that women being united with patriarchy was more important than tackling patriarchy.

you showed just how big the divide is when you supported patriarchy against women.

Or maybe you showed how trapped within the concept you were by refusing to understand how overt sexuality could be seen as liberation from one particular form of patriarchy?

I'm thinking of the pressure on women to be pure, submissive and respectable.

[eFestivals]

the point of 'chipping away' is that it isn't confrontational or divisive. It's more subtle and it doesn't follow rules. It's adaptable to everyones different needs.

laughable idiot bollocks.

It follows the "rule" of your take being right.

It follows the "rule" that everyone must go along with your take of what is right.

It's only "adaptable" as far as everyone agrees you're right.

FFS.

There's no point in lecturing a woman (for example) to not do the ironing because it's anti-feminist, if she likes doing the ironing.

There's no point in lecturing a woman (for example) to not get her tits out for the lads because of patriarchy, if she likes getting her tits out due to patriarchy.

(Amazingly, Feral actually said that! )

Meanwhile, patriarchy is given a free pass via that idea, and nothing changes.

Oh dear. Back to that thing called thinking, and hopefully a better job next time, eh tony?

[eFestivals]

What's your plan for lessening the divide?

Not trying to pretend there isn't one is a good starting point.

If you start from the wrong place, y0ou're likely to end up in the wrong place.

[feral chile]

the point of 'chipping away' is that it isn't confrontational or divisive. It's more subtle and it doesn't follow rules. It's adaptable to everyones different needs.

There's no point in lecturing a woman (for example) to not do the ironing because it's anti-feminist, if she likes doing the ironing. It also doesn't hurt to do some ironing ( if you like your shirts ironed?) yoursel.

THIS.

I stubbornly take pride in not ironing, even though I like it.

But - do I like it because I've been conditioned to it, or just because it's relaxing?

And am I being a good feminist for not doing it? or is that some kind of conditioned response to patriarchy too?

I don't know.

But as long as I don't get the authority figure invading my kitchen, telling me off for having grey whites, I don't bloody well care

Edited February 13, 2015 by feral chile

[eFestivals]

Or maybe you showed how trapped within the concept you were by refusing to understand how overt sexuality could be seen as liberation from one particular form of patriarchy?

I could understand it once you've explained how a woman getting her tits out for the lads is free of that woman getting her tits out for the lads.

Care to have a go at that?

I'm thinking of the pressure on women to be pure, submissive and respectable.

... and you are not thinking about how to deal with patriarchy in any way whatsoever.

[feral chile]

laughable idiot bollocks.

It follows the "rule" of your take being right.

It follows the "rule" that everyone must go along with your take of what is right.

It's only "adaptable" as far as everyone agrees you're right.

FFS.

There's no point in lecturing a woman (for example) to not get her tits out for the lads because of patriarchy, if she likes getting her tits out due to patriarchy.

(Amazingly, Feral actually said that! )

Meanwhile, patriarchy is given a free pass via that idea, and nothing changes.

Oh dear. Back to that thing called thinking, and hopefully a better job next time, eh tony?

I doubt I put it quite like that.

[eFestivals]

I doubt I put it quite like that.

you didn't, but that's what you said in its full effect.

Which, in case it passed you by, divided women's opinions.

[feral chile]

I could understand it once you've explained how a woman getting her tits out for the lads is free of that woman getting her tits out for the lads.

Care to have a go at that?

... and you are not thinking about how to deal with patriarchy in any way whatsoever.

You have a female wanting to mate, she does whatever will attract a mate. Fair enough, you'd have ambiguity there, but human interpretation of the capuchins' mating rituals is ambiguous, too.

You get a female wanting to escape male tyranny, viewing part of that as a male response to particular aspects of her sexuality, she'll resist what she perceives as her objectification.

She could do that by covering up, refusing to cover up, whatever she perceives as liberating.

[feral chile]

I don't think people having different opinions is a bad thing, by the way.

I do disapprove of people being called morons etc. though, for having different opinions.

There is a difference between calling a person stupid and a particular argument stupid, though I usually try to avoid doing either.

[eFestivals]

She could do that by covering up, refusing to cover up, whatever she perceives as liberating.

all that means is that she's convincing herself that something isn't what it is, if she's posing on page 3.

[eFestivals]

I don't think people having different opinions is a bad thing, by the way.

and nor do I.

I'm simply pointing out that the very fact of different opinions is divisive.

And so all of this "we shouldn't be divisive" stuff from you and tony is either your own emu acts where you're not thinking things thru, or it's proper idiot stuff. Take your pick.

I do disapprove of people being called morons etc. though, for having different opinions.

Hm! Why are you being divisive?

There is a difference between calling a person stupid and a particular argument stupid, though I usually try to avoid doing either.

Either way, it's based in stupidity.

Lets call it what it is, if that's what it's thought to be.

[feral chile]

all that means is that she's convincing herself that something isn't what it is, if she's posing on page 3.

I wouldn't know what her motives are, they're none of my business really, anyway.

Supposing I was 19, gorgeous and buxom - I wouldn't pose for Page 3. I avoided male attention like the plague at that age, I dressed conservatively, if a male paid me any attention I'd agonise over how I'd attracted that attention, etc. etc. I accidentally discovered that being overweight was a pretty good tool for becoming non sexualised, so I have a love-hate relationship with my weight. I'm happier and more assertive and confident when overweight

I was sexually repressed, because of my background. I'd still have hang ups. I could never be confident sexually, I'd always feel used.

I eventually decided that it was the very fact that I was so timid around men that brought out dominance in them, and learnt to be far more assertive.

And I envy sexually confident women. I associate it with not being damaged by patriarchy/male dominance, whatever you want to call it. Good luck to them!

Edited February 13, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

and nor do I.

I'm simply pointing out that the very fact of different opinions is divisive.

And so all of this "we shouldn't be divisive" stuff from you and tony is either your own emu acts where you're not thinking things thru, or it's proper idiot stuff. Take your pick.

Hm! Why are you being divisive?

Either way, it's based in stupidity.

Lets call it what it is, if that's what it's thought to be.

Well, for one thing, the argument gets side tracked, and for another, we might think someone else has a stupid argument for disagreeing with us, but isn't that also divisive, dividing people into stupid (disagrees) and sensible (agrees)?

You know the tale about the blind men and the elephant?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant

[eFestivals]

I wouldn't know what her motives are, they're none of my business really, anyway.

and then patriarchy can't be either.

Either the patriarchal society concerns you, or it doesn't. Which is it?

And I envy sexually confident women. I associate it with not being damaged by patriarchy/male dominance, whatever you want to call it. Good luck to them!

Page 3 isn't the same "sexually confident". It's all about gaining male approval, &/or the money; it's not being done for itself.

Perhaps that's where you're going wrong?

[eFestivals]

and?

and .... you have nothing to say?

I'm starting to think of your posts back against mine as someone trying to poke me with a shitty stick.

[eFestivals]

seeing as I've acknowledged a divide, that doesn't mean anything

so we've accepted there's a divide. Now what?

Now what you said that got us here is admitted as wrong, and you need to start again.

That's what.

[eFestivals]

Well, for one thing, the argument gets side tracked

only if one side has great difficulty accepting that anyone could ever think they could say anything stupid.

That's today's self-centred world for ya, I guess.

, and for another, we might think someone else has a stupid argument for disagreeing with us, but isn't that also divisive, dividing people into stupid (disagrees) and sensible (agrees)?

care to tell me what the thing is called where we all come together as one, then?

Where opinions differ, there can only ever be a divide. That is the nature of difference.

This is just another version of "why can't we just all get along?" line that's been spun many times on these forums over the years, and is either based in a massive lack of self-awareness or it's a demand that everyone agrees that the person saying that is right (or at minimum suppresses their disagreeing voice in favour of that other).

I say fuck that.

Everyone has the right to voice their opinion - and to be called out on having voiced their opinion.

Anything else is people stopping thinking.

Edited February 13, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

say what...?

seeing as I've acknowledged a divide

I'm starting to think of your posts back against mine as someone trying to poke me with a shitty stick.

[feral chile]

and then patriarchy can't be either.

Either the patriarchal society concerns you, or it doesn't. Which is it?

Page 3 isn't the same "sexually confident". It's all about gaining male approval, &/or the money; it's not being done for itself.

Perhaps that's where you're going wrong?

Well I'm not sure what the Page 3 girls think, but if they say they don't give a stuff about patriarchy, they're proud of their big boobs, they like male attention, AND they get paid for it....

I just don't think I should be telling them they shouldn't do it.

I have mixed feelings about prostitution, as well.

[feral chile]

only if one side has great difficulty accepting that anyone could ever think they could say anything stupid.

That's today's self-centred world for ya, I guess.

care to tell me what the thing is called where we all come together as one, then?

Where opinions differ, there can only ever be a divide. That is the nature of difference.

This is just another version of "why can't we just all get along?" line that's been spun many times on these forums over the years, and is either based in a massive lack of self-awareness or it's a demand that everyone agrees that the person saying that is right (or at minimum suppresses their disagreeing voice in favour of that other).

I say fuck that.

Everyone has the right to voice their opinion - and to be called out on having voiced their opinion.

Anything else is people stopping thinking.

But you know I disagree with lots of your posts, and I haven't had to insult you to make you aware of that, I've just presented a different perspective.

[eFestivals]

Well I'm not sure what the Page 3 girls think, but if they say they don't give a stuff about patriarchy,

whether they give a stuff or not, it's given them a job and they're acting it out and they're reinforcing it - causing others to have to submit to it.

Has that never occurred to you?

I just don't think I should be telling them they shouldn't do it.

then you have much less of a problem with patriarchy than I do, as you're happier to go along with it and for it to be reinforced within society than you are to condemn it.

[eFestivals]

But you know I disagree with lots of your posts, and I haven't had to insult you to make you aware of that, I've just presented a different perspective.

Is "stupid" an insult? Or is an opinion on another's view?

And so we're back to the problem some people have with the idea that another could ever think anything they said as stupid.