What women (don't) want.

[russycarps]

And yet the headlines are all about the male artists' responses:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/dancing-man-pharrell-williams-and-moby-are-among-the-celebrities-saying-they-will-attend-a-party-held-in-his-honour-in-la-10093759.html

Ha ha I thought that too, but I think it's more to do with people's obsession with celebrity rather than a male/female thing.

Hopefully this whole sorry saga motivates him to try and get healthy though, he is dangerously overweight.

[feral chile]

Ha ha I thought that too, but I think it's more to do with people's obsession with celebrity rather than a male/female thing.

Hopefully this whole sorry saga motivates him to try and get healthy though, he is dangerously overweight.

I just thought they were jumping on the bandwagon. That's typical though isn't it, the mainstream appropriating things.

I deliberately didn't link the article I got it from, for that reason.

Edited March 8, 2015 by feral chile

[russycarps]

I just thought they were jumping on the bandwagon. That's typical though isn't it, the mainstream appropriating things.

I deliberately didn't link the article I got it from, for that reason.

Yeh the whole story makes me feel uneasy. The girls throwing this strange party for him are getting great publicity too. Call me a cynic but...

[feral chile]

Yeh the whole story makes me feel uneasy. The girls throwing this strange party for him are getting great publicity too. Call me a cynic but...

That's true, my first reaction was that it was also publicising that bloody post, and that could have caused him a great deal of pain.

I wouldn't have done it that way, for that reason, and in the version I linked, they do mention that some group members were against it because of sensitivity issues.

I had a friend once, who was big, and when a male acquaintance made a derogatory remark about her, I jumped all over him, really wiped the floor with him. I felt really pleased with myself, until she had a quiet word with me later, to explain that I had done more harm than he had. I had removed her control over the situation. She would have ignored him if I hadn't removed all her choices. Not only that, but by drawing attention to what he said, I had extended her embarrassment.

I had also implied that she was too weak to defend herself, and she definitely wasn't.

So it's risky, what they did, but at least they challenged it.

Edited March 8, 2015 by feral chile

[bunique]

Doesn't it come down to a debate about whether there is any true altruistic act?

[russycarps]

I'm not ignoring it. I absolutely accept it. And I reject it when and where I can

Being successful in business isn't the only thing that matters in my life. There are parts of everyone's life where, if you want, you can choose to reject it. There'll be hundreds of moments during everyday where the opportunity arises.

Good for you, but this thread is about women, not tonyblair.

A lot of people, most people, don't reject the capitalist world. And the point is, women cannot go anywhere near as far as men can within it. The whole rotten system is run by men.

Our own personal views on capitalism are not really relevant in this thread.

[russycarps]

I thought, at least in part, that you were saying that because it's a male dominated world, that change can only come from men.

Not that I necessarily agree with that. I think the only change that will make any real difference is agreement (to change) from every side.

Yeah I do think change can only come from men, definitely with regards to women and capitalism.

I also believe that change will never ever come. It's hopeless

Edited March 8, 2015 by russycarps

[feral chile]

Yeah I do think change can only come from men, definitely with regards to women and capitalism.

I also believe that change will never ever come. It's hopeless

what sort of change do you envisage, more women as heads of business, or changes to capitalism itself?

[feral chile]

Good for you, but this thread is about women, not tonyblair.

A lot of people, most people, don't reject the capitalist world. And the point is, women cannot go anywhere near as far as men can within it. The whole rotten system is run by men.

Our own personal views on capitalism are not really relevant in this thread.

yes, but you've been saying change can only come from men, so it involves all of us.

[feral chile]

here's a woman in control :

Wow!

[feral chile]

I'm stealing these from a colleague on FB - she's an activist and fellow rep who I don't know well but secretly admire!

[russycarps]

what sort of change do you envisage, more women as heads of business, or changes to capitalism itself?

I think if there was a revolution that brought about the downfall of capitalism, the revolutionary leaders would be men, and the post capitalist world would be controlled by men. A different set from before, but men nonetheless.

yes, but you've been saying change can only come from men, so it involves all of us.

I think the will for change isnt there. Maybe among a few of us drones the appetite is there, but higher up the chain? What's in it for them?

It does involve all of us, but all of us will never want it. That's why I feel it's a hopeless cause (but one worth fighting for regardless)

edit: the quotes seem to have fucked up there

Edited March 8, 2015 by russycarps

[russycarps]

here's a woman in control :

brilliant! That horrible pompous prick has probably never been spoken to like that before in his life!

[feral chile]

I think if there was a revolution that brought about the downfall of capitalism, the revolutionary leaders would be men, and the post capitalist world would be controlled by men. A different set from before, but men nonetheless.

I think the will for change isnt there. Maybe among a few of us drones the appetite is there, but higher up the chain? What's in it for them?

It does involve all of us, but all of us will never want it. That's why I feel it's a hopeless cause (but one worth fighting for regardless)

edit: the quotes seem to have fucked up there

I don't think there'll be change unless there's something in it for the higher ups.

[feral chile]

Might it be, just perhaps, that they hadn't realised they had total domination in the first place?

Or is that a bit too radical for you and your man-hating women-stupid ways?

Oh I missed this one.

isn't that what patriarchy (the feminist theory) is telling them?

How is a feminist theory acknowledging that men hold all the power (which therefore is also acknowledging that women are powerless) constructive?

And am I stupid for not accepting that men have all the power, and for not telling men they have all the power, or for telling women they have agency?

If you believe you're powerless, you most definitely are.

Power and control are not necessarily the same thing, anyway.

I'm pretty sure there are plenty of men who have conversations every day with the women in their lives, and who are influenced and persuaded by them.

And I've been in power situations myself, (not specific to gender, more generic power) and gone in and influenced the decision making process. As in, completely changed it round.

BALANCE of power, male BIAS, is less totalitarian.

Edited March 8, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

Might it be, just perhaps, that they hadn't realised they had total domination in the first place?

Or is that a bit too radical for you and your man-hating women-stupid ways?

Why do you think I'm a man-hater?

[midnight]

It's not mine either, I have trouble myself with top down politics.

That might well be why society's run by the types wh do like to exploit, though.

So it is relevant.

You know how it is, the ones who should have power don't actually want it, and the ones who are in power are those who want power for itself, and not for the good it could do.

What type of people want to become top dogs in the first place?

Maybe I'm letting my personal bias run away with me.

So this song could be your rallying cry, then?

She's very good live, but all the links I've found to a live version of this song have been blocked. Quite ironic.

[midnight]

Oh I missed this one.

isn't that what patriarchy (the feminist theory) is telling them?

How is a feminist theory acknowledging that men hold all the power (which therefore is also acknowledging that women are powerless) constructive?

And am I stupid for not accepting that men have all the power, and for not telling men they have all the power, or for telling women they have agency?

If you believe you're powerless, you most definitely are.

Power and control are not necessarily the same thing, anyway.

I'm pretty sure there are plenty of men who have conversations every day with the women in their lives, and who are influenced and persuaded by them.

And I've been in power situations myself, (not specific to gender, more generic power) and gone in and influenced the decision making process. As in, completely changed it round.

BALANCE of power, male BIAS, is less totalitarian.

I'm spilling the beans on my own family here, but my brother and father (who I happen to be very fond of) would totally deny it, and ridicule me for it, if I told them that men are still privileged in today's society. Actually not would, they have done it. They are nice guys and quite educated too.

Nor have I ever had much luck influencing and persuading the other men in my life, but that may be because I'm not doing it right. Should I have used used my erotic capital more, as a bargaining tool? I am frowning on this, that is true, but I don't know whether many other people do. Perhaps it is the only way forward, and morality be damned.

Btw, I too was wondering where the "man-hating" comment was coming from, that's not how you came across to me here. Does it go back to some previous exchange elsewhere?

[midnight]

I'm not ignoring it. I absolutely accept it. And I reject it when and where I can

Being successful in business isn't the only thing that matters in my life. There are parts of everyone's life where, if you want, you can choose to reject it. There'll be hundreds of moments during everyday where the opportunity arises.

I don't spend a lot of my time thinking about business and it's impacts or my financial success, but fact is that my life largely depends on it. I am in a relatively lucky position now, I don't have to worry about how I'm going to pay my bills for the next year or so, and I'm entitled to some sort of pension, but love and goodwill alone won't feed me and my son, and life on benefits can be quite miserable for all I know. It's only having a certain amount of financial security that enables me to not think about the finances all the time. When I was skint (and I was skint for quite a long time) I thought about it a lot, and it seemed to matter much more.

The Rima Karaki link is most watchable, btw, thanks.

[midnight]

My daughter's nursery has two men - one working in the toddler room and one in the preschool room. They're both great and I love that the kids get to see a man in a non-stereotypical male role, as well as having positive male role models quite early in life. I don't know how common it is though.

My son's nursery had 2 young men working there, they were both great with the kids and he loved them. I thought it was really good for him to see that it is normal for men to do work like this. The after school club he attends now also has a few men, including the manager. The primary school though has only one male teacher - and the headmaster is a man!

a male friend of mine (now sadly deceased) worked as a child carer in a nursery about 20/25 years ago, and I know from the time he spent living with me and my (then infant) kid he was absolutely surperb with children.

He got run out of town, because it was 'weird' that a bloke should do that. He must have been wanting to touch the kids up.

Fucking sad.

That is sad. I don't know how much things have changed in general, and what regional differences there are, but almost all the other parents I've spoken to thought it was a good thing to have at least some men working with our children. There was only one who thought it was an odd thing to do for a guy, and supicious of the motives. One's bad enough. Particularly bad for me, as it was someone in my family. Progress is frustratingly slow.

Edited March 9, 2015 by midnight

[midnight]

Hey, all is not lost, and a warm glow of optimism suddenly envelops me - apparently, David Cameron is a feminist:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31786675

Quote:

Speaking on Sky News' Murnaghan programme, Mrs Morgan denied that Government spending cuts had disproportionately affected women.

She said of Prime Minister David Cameron: "He absolutely is a feminist.

"He is on the side of women and he has done a huge amount to get women into the cabinet."

She said the "tone of the debate" with women in Parliament was "very different", adding: "We need more women in Parliament".

Mrs Morgan went on: "the prime minister is absolutely on the side of making sure that women have the best possible opportunities, as is the chancellor - as are I think all of my male colleagues.

I'll expect him to pop 'round here and say something like "Calm down, dears" any minute.

Edited March 9, 2015 by midnight

[eFestivals]

what squirrels were they then? and what exactly is a squirrel?

every diversion you give, mostly to avoid facing up to the facts of patriarchy.

You make lots of posts where you accept patriarchy or patriuarchy could be the only thing that's going on, but you explicitly state you reject it.

But you never give an academic reason for why, you only ever give a "I don't like it so I'm not accepting it". And endless squirrels.

[eFestivals]

you can be seriously frustrating at times. if I hadn't used the term patriarchy you'd have jumped all over me and accused me of denying it. It's not a term I would have used, but I know it's a term others in here would have used and so I used it, in an attempt to compromise over a common point of reference.

that's a method that only leads you to the confusion you display in most of your posts.

Either we have a patriarchal society, or we don't.

If we don't, you need to give an evidence-based reason rfor your rejection.

So far you've rejected it because you don't want to accept that men hold these powers, and you've rejected it thru application of non-logic that you called logic.

Each time I try to pin you down, you throw in a squirrel as a way to run away from having to commit yourself.

And you say I'm frustrating?

I'm trying to get the clarity of thought out of you that's so far been absent.

And if you think I'm in this discussion to point score, you don't understand much of anything.

I don't think that, and that's nothing of why i'm here.

Presumably you're looking for clarity of what the problems are. That requires the examination of society and effects that you won't do, where instead you seem to think the answers can be found in an individualic and non-academic approach.

I'm in this discussion to try to understand the points of view of others, and to develop my own, and also to try to get myself understood in turn.

Your ideas would develop much better via an examination of the issues - which you run away from every time, to throw in endless examples which are meaningless examples without being examined.

[eFestivals]

How is a feminist theory acknowledging that men hold all the power (which therefore is also acknowledging that women are powerless) constructive?

And am I stupid for not accepting that men have all the power, and for not telling men they have all the power, or for telling women they have agency?

If you believe you're powerless, you most definitely are.

You don't have all the money in the world, but the money that you do have gives you an amount of purchasing power.

You don't have all political power in the world, but the power you do have gives you an amount of purchase onto those that do.0

Etc, etc, etc.

You've decided for no logical reason at all that recognising any fact gives you no power over that fact.

Why? Nothing in the world works in that way.

I've asked you (countless times) to show me what isn't male defined, yet you don't even bother to try to prove the angle you take. You8've decided that's how it is and that's good enough for you. Fair enough. You can think what you want.

When you reject an idea on the basis of no-idea, I'm not going to think you're clever for it.

And for all the while you run from this, you're merely proving you can't make your own ideas stand up.

And you say you find midnight's ideas fascinating, and then wonder why I'm calling you out for what you're clearly doing.

Power and control are not necessarily the same thing, anyway.

True. You get control via power.

You certainly get no control if you can't find the power to try and seize some.

I'm pretty sure there are plenty of men who have conversations every day with the women in their lives, and who are influenced and persuaded by them.

Hurray!!!

So despite men controlling the world, women are not powerless.

And I've been in power situations myself, (not specific to gender, more generic power) and gone in and influenced the decision making process. As in, completely changed it round.

But did that happen because of your own sole power to change things, or because those with the power allowed you to change things?

[feral chile]

You don't have all the money in the world, but the money that you do have gives you an amount of purchasing power.

You don't have all political power in the world, but the power you do have gives you an amount of purchase onto those that do.0

Etc, etc, etc.

You've decided for no logical reason at all that recognising any fact gives you no power over that fact.

Why? Nothing in the world works in that way.

I've asked you (countless times) to show me what isn't male defined, yet you don't even bother to try to prove the angle you take. You8've decided that's how it is and that's good enough for you. Fair enough. You can think what you want.

When you reject an idea on the basis of no-idea, I'm not going to think you're clever for it.

And for all the while you run from this, you're merely proving you can't make your own ideas stand up.

And you say you find midnight's ideas fascinating, and then wonder why I'm calling you out for what you're clearly doing.

True. You get control via power.

You certainly get no control if you can't find the power to try and seize some.

Hurray!!!

So despite men controlling the world, women are not powerless.

But did that happen because of your own sole power to change things, or because those with the power allowed you to change things?

Ah this might boil down to semantics then.

When I hear patriarchy, I get confused, for one thing, with feminists saying it's a man's world, and misogynists saying it's a man's world.

So - how should women defy the misogynists, claim their agency, without seeming to avoid the problem?

You use male bias and uneven representation, and I'm fine.

it's just that because patriarchy focuses on power, I keep thinking the other side of the coin is that women must be powerless, as in not in control or able to influence anything - without agency.

So that's the only bit I'm disputing - that women have the ability (agency, control, power, whatever word you want to use) to influence change - even if political power is still mainly in the hands of men.

I know you've asked me to give you an example of what isn't male defined, but I'm so confused by the question I don't understand what you mean.

For me, things like 'fireman' 'postman' were male defined, and now the ob title's changed.

But I don't think that's what you mean.

And when you get to 'masculine' and 'feminine' traits, such as mastery, appeasement, compromise etc., I wouldn't know where to start, because you're talking positive and negative values assigned to traits that I don't believe are specific to gender in the first place.

As for creating diversions, if you think I'm posting something irrelevant, if you let me know what it is, I'll either stop or argue its relevance, because whatever the diversionary tactic is that you think I'm doing, I don't know what t is.