What women (don't) want.

[eFestivals]

But this feels like a conversation that was started 30 years ago, and it feels like you're denying any progress.

not at all.

I'm merely recognising that the process is much lesser than you're wishing to believe - tho only because you're rejecting the effects of male influence without any rational for why.

I'm sure that's not what you're saying (at least I hope it's not) but it feels like you're trying to talk to a pre feminist version of me straight out of the Valleys.

I'm gonna give up with you. There's really no point.

[eFestivals]

But you're dismissing parity of power over household economics, refusal to accept gender defined roles within the household, ...

Not at all.

I'm simply recognising that it doesn't exist removed from wider society.

[eFestivals]

page 3 is a 30 year old battle, and to me, the very fact that it's still there proved its irrelevance.

Really?

PMSL.

[feral chile]

why do you think russy and me recognising the dynamics of society while you don't makes your take right and ours wrong?

So what attempts to tackle sexism would you not dismiss as someone's refusal to recognise the dynamics of society?

You have to have people wanting equality, and working towards it in their limited (on a societal level) way to get it, or nothing changes.

The change comes from within, it starts off small. I've noticed massive changes in attitude over the last 30 years. Sure, there's still lots more to do.

[eFestivals]

errr.. cause I'm talking about me in my environment. How do you have a clue about it?

an environment that includes wider sexist patriarchal society, that doesn't stay outside when you step within your house.

Why do you think nothing of that society enters your house tony? Why do you think not a jot of it effects how you act towards each other inside your house?

[eFestivals]

So what attempts to tackle sexism would you not dismiss as someone's refusal to recognise the dynamics of society?

Any attempts which *actually* try to tackle sexism, rather than give it a free pass as you suggested it should have without any dispute.

A woman being proud about displaying her tits does nothing to undermine why a man might wish her to - and more relevantly, it doesn't undermine men causing her to show her tits.

[feral chile]

Really?

PMSL.

Yes.

Rape laws have changed, language has changed, more women are in the workplace, though that still needs a lot of work, because at the moment that's not all positive, yet Page 3 rundles on.

I assumed it was because most feminists felt it wasn't important enough any more, and had focused their efforts elsewhere.

To be honest, I thought women generally had learnt to be more assertive and therefore dismissive/patronising of the whole perving thing.

[eFestivals]

You have to have people wanting equality, and working towards it in their limited (on a societal level) way to get it, or nothing changes.

Absolutely, i've not said anything different to that.

But if they can't recognise equality because they don't recognise the non-equality that exists (of which tony is an example), then what are they working towards?

[eFestivals]

Yes.

Rape laws have changed, language has changed, more women are in the workplace, though that still needs a lot of work, because at the moment that's not all positive, yet Page 3 rundles on.

I assumed it was because most feminists felt it wasn't important enough any more, and had focused their efforts elsewhere.

To be honest, I thought women generally had learnt to be more assertive and therefore dismissive/patronising of the whole perving thing.

Nothing of rape laws, etc, is anything directly to do with page 3.

The battle against page 3 lost it's profile because women like you embraced it as a good thing and not a bad thing, which changed nothing of it. It still remained women doing something they otherwise wouldn't be doing without it being a male demand.

You don't assert anything by pretending a problem to not be a problem.

[eFestivals]

why do you think it does?

Are you saying nothing ever can be outside patriarchy, because everything is governed by patriarchy? There is plenty of evidence that shows that hasn't always been the case. We, as a society weren't patriarchal before. We can be there again.

I'm saying nothing is outside of patriarchy.

There is no evidence to show that's not always been the case. There is only evidence which proves it the case.

You'd have to actually know what patriarchy is, tony, to say it isn't so. You've admitted that you don't know what it is, so perhaps save opinions on this for when you do?

Edited February 27, 2015 by eFestivals

[feral chile]

Any attempts which *actually* try to tackle sexism, rather than give it a free pass as you suggested it should have without any dispute.

A woman being proud about displaying her tits does nothing to undermine why a man might wish her to - and more relevantly, men causing her to shit doesn't undermine ow her tits.

How would you interpret this event then? A friend and I were sitting in our local rock club, and most of the young guys in there had long hair tied back. My friend was complaining about it, so because I was drunk I spoke to one of them and explained the situation. He just took his hair down, gave a head twirl, and bowed to her. Then several others took their hair down. it was really sweet.

They clearly didn't see me asking them to get their hair out as a threat. I don't think that was because of the absence of Hair Fetish pages in the newspapers. The other way round, though, yes. The absence of Hair Fetish pages is telling. Obviously, middle aged ladies with a hair fetish don't dominate society. But if we did, I wouldn't want men to feel demeaned by me liking their hair, I'd want them to be as they are now.

So yes, Page 3 might well be a symptom of a screwed up attitude towards women's breasts, maybe its removal will be symbolic of a true change in society. But it's not the cause, and removing it will change nothing in itself (though its eventual removal may well mean something extremely important, as the cause of its removal will hopefully be equality).

[eFestivals]

How would you interpret this event then?

you not understanding very much of what patriarchy is.

It's not an interpretation, btw.

[feral chile]

Absolutely, i've not said anything different to that.

But if they can't recognise equality because they don't recognise the non-equality that exists (of which tony is an example), then what are they working towards?

If he's deliberately arranged his household to promote equality though, isn't he doing something to challenge inequality outside his home? He's a parent, for a start.

And everyone who can challenge their own bias, and try to be supportive of equality, can start to make a difference.

Of course we're all full of unconscious bias, I don't deny that. There's probably still a huge amount of things left to challenge that we haven't even noticed as a society yet, because it's become so ingrained.

but someone will notice. And things will change. But it'll take time.

Edited February 27, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

you not understanding very much of what patriarchy is.

It's not an interpretation, btw.

Keeping on repeating that isn't helping me to understand you any better.

[eFestivals]

I do recognise the inequality that exists.

not when you think there's none of it in your home, you don't.

[eFestivals]

Keeping on repeating that isn't helping me to understand you any better.

The only thing that will help you is some serious reading.

I've been saying this for weeks, but you're too superior to think there's honesty and knowledge behind it.

Edited February 27, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

If he's deliberately arranged his household to promote equality though, isn't he doing something to challenge inequality outside his home? He's a parent, for a start.

he'll only be challenging what has been been brought to his attention &/or what he accepts as requiring a challenge.

From what he's posted, he's made clear there can be no issues that exist beyond his current recognition.

That means he's not open to examining the issues, to find out what he doesn't know.

[eFestivals]

Tell me then, what's unequal about my home?

the influences from the sexist society outside of your home.

[russycarps]

Tell me then, what's unequal about my home?

do your wife and daughters wear make up?

do you?

Edited February 27, 2015 by russycarps

[eFestivals]

and that manifests itself how, at home?

You should be asking yourself how come you think it stays outside the door.

[feral chile]

do your wife and daughters/ husband and sons/ wear make up?

do you?

no.

and no.

You should stop making assumptions.

Though my son did dabble with eyeliner once.

Edited February 27, 2015 by feral chile

[russycarps]

they don't put it on if they're not going out

next?

so that's a "yes" then.

skirts? dresses?

Edited February 27, 2015 by russycarps

[feral chile]

he'll only be challenging what has been been brought to his attention &/or what he accepts as requiring a challenge.

From what he's posted, he's made clear there can be no issues that exist beyond his current recognition.

That means he's not open to examining the issues, to find out what he doesn't know.

so am I so are you so is the whole world.

?? Nobody can challenge what they haven't noticed/read/heard discussed etc. etc.

The whole point is, if you're aware of it, it's already getting challenged. or we'd be unquestioningly accepting of it.

Now, there's still inequality, yes. But one of the contradictions in patriarchy is that it invades everything. But then, you wouldn't be aware of it, because it would seem like the only way. And not only are we aware of inequality, but most of us think it's wrong.

patriarchy goes much further than saying there's inequality, it makes absolute claims that the very existence of the concept itself negates. Or nobody could think up the theory in the first place. Nobody could think 'hang about, how come men have it all their own way'. If patriarchy was a perfect control mechanism, we wouldn't notice or question it.

it's the bits that are escaping our notice that I'm worried about (if you see what I mean).

[feral chile]

so that's a "yes" then.

skirts? dresses?

Again, I rarely wear a dress. But I don't think that proves anything, since I relate to men so much anyway. You can't get more male dominated than having a woman being masculine.

I was pretty much brought up as a boy.

(or at least, given boy's toys to play with, taught to read write and do maths before school age, given language dictionaries and text books etc.)

Bloody hell, I've always thought of my grandparents as really conservative. I've only just realised this myself. No wonder I found the 70s so bloody difficult!

Edited February 27, 2015 by feral chile

[russycarps]

no, not at home. I'm talking about at home... not when they're out, not when they're walking past a police station... at home

so the second they walk through the front door they scrub their faces clean.

Right-o.