Feminism and gender roles

[Rejected Rosebud]

You disagree with the PUA crowd and think they should be.... What. Banned? Abolished? Outlawed?

heck NO!!! Where on Earth did you get that idea? I just said that if the job of feminism were actually all done as another poster suggested, there would be no way for such a thing to exist. For PUA to exist there has to be a culture that supports preying on women right? If we were done with feminism, our "go to" place would not be "Men do this" and "women are that," and "WE can do this to THEM" (it works both ways too) we would go first to the actual fact that we are all human and need to treat each other as such BEFORE we get down to the differences of genders.

 

What of the people that disagree with the feminist movement? Do they get the same power?

What power? I think you might be embellishing what I posted with quite a bit of your personal stuff!! :confused:

[Rejected Rosebud]

Funny how when feminism fought for "equality" they never fought to pay for their own engagement ring and the like. That's why many men don't take them seriously. They fight for women to have equal pay and all that jazz, but men are still expected to pay for dinner.

Once again I suggest and even urge you to expand your social circle. If you insist in living in a vacuum of backwardsness, please hold yourself back from extrapolating from your own little world that everyone in every social group behaves the way you and yours do!!

 

In my life, everybody is already free to choose which conventional traditions they choose to include in their lives. Couples tend to be on the same page on these things - one reason why they are compatible!

[Woggle]

I am not a supporter of the PUA movement because I don't believe games create healthy relationships but is it any different than books like The Rules or Why Men Love B words? It is all about manipulation and games from both ends.

[PrettyEmily77]

Funny how when feminism fought for "equality" they never fought to pay for their own engagement ring and the like. That's why many men don't take them seriously. They fight for women to have equal pay and all that jazz, but men are still expected to pay for dinner.

 

Actually, they fought so that women can afford the choice not to get married at all and therefore not have to depend on a dude to pay for dinner and the engagement ring...

 

Look around you; women DO pay for dinner, mortgages, cars, whatever b/c they can or want to, whether single or as part of a couple.

[joystickd]

My problem with feminism is just like my issue with people fighting racism. These people hate to create their own structures. They beg people in power to make them equal but don't create their own businesses and other structures to help their group. I say this in reference to US. Government is a reactive entity and it takes a while to make things happen so if one created their own structures then put money into officials that help their cause and money to control images of their group. It's a capitalist country change only happens when you either become a group that brings capital or become a group that finds a way to take capital from power structure.

[Pull n Pray]

She didn't create the data. They were from this book: Child Custody Made Simple: Understanding the Laws of Child Custody and Child Support.

 

It's written by a dude, if that helps. And is linked to by a fathers' rights group. More convincing now?

:/

 

According to the link you provided, "there are gender bias problems in family court".

[RedRobin]

Where did I bring up hobbies? Did I give any examples of what activity is "feminine" and what is not?

 

I am not projecting. I have the average amount of children, I wear pants, I never homeschooled, and for most of my adult life I have worked full time, even being the primary support for the family for a time.

 

And WTH do the Kennedys have to do with anything? Are you just pulling stories out of a hat, or are you implying that men cheat more when there are traditional gender roles in the marriage?

 

Bottom line, there is a sect professed "feminists" who will pity, make fun of, condescend toward, and criticize any woman who does not choose what THEY think is progressive enough. Just own the bias and condescension.

 

 

so, what's your beef?

 

 

I've been living my life by example, not messing with anyone... but there are plenty of people I've come across who have a bigger stake in ME exiting the job market, having a passle of kids, and making life generally easier for THEM as a result. Some men, some women.

 

 

You know who have given ME the hardest time? Wives of men I work with. So paranoid that their cash cow will get snatched up by a female co-worker, I've had them try to convince their husbands not take me to a conference... after I wrote the journal article or invented the product. Shun me at office parties after I tried to be friendly to them. After everything I've done to support their husbands in the spirit of teamwork and camaraderie. Ridiculous.

 

 

Don't even start with talk about the condescending crap. It's been much more directed at me than it ever has been at them.

 

 

You wanna be 'traditionally feminine'? I don't even know what the hell that means. All I'm trying to do is make a living and lead a decent life. If it means I have to play weak so some guy feels like a man, then no thank you.

Edited September 1, 2015 by RedRobin

[RedRobin]

Funny how when feminism fought for "equality" they never fought to pay for their own engagement ring and the like. That's why many men don't take them seriously. They fight for women to have equal pay and all that jazz, but men are still expected to pay for dinner.

 

 

If you don't agree with what you consider the 'status quo' (ie, men paying for everything), then take a stand and stop doing it.

 

 

I've never expected a man to pay for me. The funny thing is, so many women send mixed messages that way... "oh, if I'm not interested, I'll insist on paying my way, but if I like him, I'll let him pay for me"... Kinda makes things tough for a woman like me who just wants to level the playing field for everyone and doesn't agree with men having to do stuff like that.

 

 

I don't doubt there were a few guys along the way who assumed I wasn't interested because I offered to pay my share. Or, even funnier, assumed I was desperate, easy, or some other negative thing because I didn't insist on him paying for me.

 

 

tsk, tsk.

[Rejected Rosebud]

I don't know why you continue to act as if all of the LS threads on issues like this do not exist.

I don't act like that. All I'm saying is that if a person doesn't like the mainstream expected ways of doing things they don't have to participate in that stuff, it's a CHOICE

A guy is free to choose not to pay for a first date if he wants, but the majority of women out there will call him cheap, say they are no longer attracted to him, ect.

Well since it is so very important to you not to pay for a date, why not be true to yourself and let those girls who expect it weed themselves out?? What do you care if the majority of women do this or that anyway, there are still plenty of women who pay for their own stuff all the time, you could be dating them.

[RedRobin]

Sure, paying for things justifies your sexism and double standards. It's the old tit-for-tat. "Me man, pay for things, therefore me man allowed to treat you, woman, however man see fit" (thumps chest).

[RedRobin]

There ya go guys, feminism in a nutshell. A guy does something nice for a woman, and feminist calls him a sexist for it.

 

This, ladies, is why many men do not like feminism.

 

 

Doing something nice? Hardly. If you were doing it out of the goodness of your heart, you wouldn't crab about it. I swear, in just about every one of your posts defending your double standards, you use this (man pays for dates) as one of the reasons why you are justified.

 

 

God forbid you ditch that thing that makes you feel justified judging women for doing things you do yourself. Sounds more like a crutch to me. Not a gesture of kindness.

[Shining One]

Where does a man meet these women who don't judge men for not paying for them? I've met two women in my life who fall into this category and in both cases, it was by chance.

 

For a brief time, I specifically dated several self-identified feminists from OLD. Unfortunately, they were the "equality everywhere except in the relationship" type of feminist.

 

Perhaps it's regional and I'm just in a bad area for this sort of thing.

[elaine567]

There ya go guys, feminism in a nutshell. A guy does something nice for a woman, and feminist calls him a sexist for it.

This, ladies, is why many men do not like feminism.

 

Men doing "something nice" is usually not the driver. Men do not pay for dates to be "nice".

Paying for dates is often about control, it is often about setting up a dynamic where, "I paid for the date, so what are you going to do FOR ME in return."

It is about a display of wealth and power. "YOU are poor and weak, you earn less than me, so I will show you just how far above you I am."

It can be patronising, it is about a show of superiority - "I am richer than you, it will make ME feel good to do something good for you."

"It strokes my ego, I am such a nice man."

 

From the off, the first date, there is a flexing of muscles and a competition entered.

By taking centre stage, the person magnanimously paying, is usually the one who is showing dominance right away, the one who is trying to dictate how the relationship will play out.

If he steps back and allows her to pay, or she actively demands that he pays, then that dynamic can result in the woman having the perceived "upper hand" from the start, and to many men that is unacceptable.

Many men do not like feminism, as they do not want equality, they fear it, they want to be in charge and paying for dates is a way of saying, "I am the leader here."

 

It is why I guess "the man pays" is still practised widely, despite the complaints by some men.

Men in general start feeling uncomfortable when a woman "takes the lead" and pays for the date, or she splits the bill and pays her own way. She wants equality and to be seen as an equal and some men cannot deal with that. They see her as a threat.

She is then not beholden, she is then not in his control, she is not playing the game "right", and some men do not like that, as it is "emasculating."

[elaine567]

Buddy, I would stay far away from any woman who describes herself as a feminist. Just check out this post for why, and how they feel about men.

 

Typical feminist mumbo jumbo. Thankfully, most level headed ladies do not believe this type of hogwash. I'd venture to guess that you are losing more support for feminism than you are gaining.

 

Ok, so nothing to say but insults...

[Keenly]

So many contradictions.

 

Also love how they are bagging on your for bringing up paying like it's some kind of power play, when women are the ones making the demand that the guy pays first, in direct contradiction to their desire for equality.

 

You can't have equality and special treatment at the same time. That isn't equalit. So many femeninst feminists are hypocrites when it comes to relationships. Equality equality equality, but ladies first, man pays, open the door for me, plan all the dates etc.

 

Then when you call them on it you are being misogynistic. Feminism is another excuse for women to act irrational and demanding in a relationship but they have the fall back position of calling you sexist anytime you aren't cool with it.

 

If you want to be a feminist, great. Should probably leave that at the door during a relationship though, because throwing around your political ideology just makes you high maintenance and just a pain. Especially true for the beginning stages of dating. Equality, right? But why isn't he wooing me? Why am I not being whined and dined and chased and pursued? Oh noooo, I can't pursue him, men are the pursuers. That's your equality.

[autumnnight]

Men doing "something nice" is usually not the driver. Men do not pay for dates to be "nice".

Paying for dates is often about control, it is often about setting up a dynamic where, "I paid for the date, so what are you going to do FOR ME in return."

It is about a display of wealth and power. "YOU are poor and weak, you earn less than me, so I will show you just how far above you I am."

It can be patronising, it is about a show of superiority - "I am richer than you, it will make ME feel good to do something good for you."

"It strokes my ego, I am such a nice man."

 

From the off, the first date, there is a flexing of muscles and a competition entered.

By taking centre stage, the person magnanimously paying, is usually the one who is showing dominance right away, the one who is trying to dictate how the relationship will play out.

If he steps back and allows her to pay, or she actively demands that he pays, then that dynamic can result in the woman having the perceived "upper hand" from the start, and to many men that is unacceptable.

Many men do not like feminism, as they do not want equality, they fear it, they want to be in charge and paying for dates is a way of saying, "I am the leader here."

 

It is why I guess "the man pays" is still practised widely, despite the complaints by some men.

Men in general start feeling uncomfortable when a woman "takes the lead" and pays for the date, or she splits the bill and pays her own way. She wants equality and to be seen as an equal and some men cannot deal with that. They see her as a threat.

She is then not beholden, she is then not in his control, she is not playing the game "right", and some men do not like that, as it is "emasculating."

 

I am so glad I do not view men in this way. How can one love any man when this is how they view all men?

 

I'm not sure how hating on an entire gender, assuming the worst about a gender, etc. is supposed to help bring about MORE equality? That is like saying that touting constant racial stereotypes is a great way to end racism.

 

I think all people...of both genders...just want to be respected. Why don't we start with that instead of all this playground "you're meaner!" "You did it first!" "You go first" tripe.

[mrldii]

For the record (since this thread IS about "feminism" and not "militant feminism", "radical feminism", "feminazism", etc)

 

a "feminist" = "a person who believes in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes".

 

Period. Nothing more, nothing less. Thought now (9 pages in) would be a good a time to remind everyone what the definition of the word "feminism" (i.e., the movement involving "feminists" ) is all about...yanno, so we could have an on-topic discussion about what OP posted.

 

I am a feminist; I only date - and therefore only form relationships - with men who are feminists, also. Fortunately (because of feminism?), it's not that difficult to find opposite-sexed, heterosexual feminists these days. Even more fortunately, it's easy to spot the ones who aren't feminists, which I (personally) refuse to date.

 

Ironic, isn't it? I'm a "feminist" and I won't date a non-feminist. "Who pays?" has never been an issue in any of my relationships.

[autumnnight]

For the record (since this thread IS about "feminism" and not "militant feminism", "radical feminism", "feminazism", etc)

 

a "feminist" = "a person who believes in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes".

 

Period. Nothing more, nothing less. Thought now (9 pages in) would be a good a time to remind everyone what the definition of the word "feminism" (i.e., the movement involving "feminists" ) is all about...yanno, so we could have an on-topic discussion about what OP posted.

 

I am a feminist; I only date - and therefore only form relationships - with men who are feminists, also. Fortunately (because of feminism?), it's not that difficult to find opposite-sexed, heterosexual feminists these days. Even more fortunately, it's easy to spot the ones who aren't feminists, which I (personally) refuse to date.

 

Ironic, isn't it? I'm a "feminist" and I won't date a non-feminist. "Who pays?" has never been an issue in any of my relationships.

 

These definitions are very helpful. It is a shame, however, that the militant, hateful, misandrist, neo-feminists are so loud that they drown out the women who just want plain old equality and respect.

 

maybe when those women stop being celebrated, quoted, followed, and protected, the feminists who actually value both genders will have more of a voice.

[elaine567]

So many contradictions.

 

Also love how they are bagging on your for bringing up paying like it's some kind of power play, when women are the ones making the demand that the guy pays first, in direct contradiction to their desire for equality.

 

You can't have equality and special treatment at the same time. That isn't equalit. So many femeninst feminists are hypocrites when it comes to relationships. Equality equality equality, but ladies first, man pays, open the door for me, plan all the dates etc.

 

Then when you call them on it you are being misogynistic. Feminism is another excuse for women to act irrational and demanding in a relationship but they have the fall back position of calling you sexist anytime you aren't cool with it.

 

If you want to be a feminist, great. Should probably leave that at the door during a relationship though, because throwing around your political ideology just makes you high maintenance and just a pain. Especially true for the beginning stages of dating. Equality, right? But why isn't he wooing me? Why am I not being whined and dined and chased and pursued? Oh noooo, I can't pursue him, men are the pursuers. That's your equality.

 

Seems to me that a woman who feels a man should pay is NOT a feminist and those that demand he pays, he wines and dines ME, he pays for all the stuff I want, he opens doors, he bends over backwards and I just need to flutter my eyelids, are actually traditionalists.

Traditionalists want to take the secondary role in the relationship, they want a man who treats them to all the goodies, organises dates, a man who does most of the work etc. whilst they sit back and look sweet.

 

Feminists want equality, they want equal treatment, not better treatment, equal treatment. YOU hold open the door for me, I hold open the door for you, you treat me to a meal, I treat you to a meal...etc.

 

So ranting about feminists when they are actually on your side in this, is frankly nonsensical.

[mrldii]

I can't speak for every feminist on the planet, but I don't subscribe to the 'all men are evil' premise...at best, I believe that most people,given the *right* set of circumstances, can be evil.

 

I do espouse - and live - equality. I have always believed that automatically giving the woman custody of the child(ren) is not right; I lived that belief by giving primary (i.e., residential) custody to my ex-husband and father of my one-and-only child when we divorced. We weighed the options and - due to the facts that he made more money, could afford to stay in the home we'd bought to raise our child, and because he had a larger and closer extended family to help care for our child - we decided he would make the better provider. The fact that I knew he would remarry sooner than I would and provide a more stable family life (which is what I wanted for our child) made the choice even easier and wiser.

 

I do believe men can be "raped" (i.e., forced to have sex against their will). I was outraged at the double-standards displayed by the public, as a whole, over the Mary Kay Letourneau and Debra Lafave scandals (school teachers who had sex with underage male students).

 

Again, it is being presumed by many that "feminists just want special treatment". Anyone who is desiring special treatment is NOT a feminist...they're an "opportunist".

 

This thread is NOT titled "Opportunists and Gender Roles", so I'm not sure why that's what is being discussed, instead.

 

Edited September 1, 2015 by a LoveShack.org Moderator
removed quote to deleted post. ~T

[elaine567]

I

I'm not sure how hating on an entire gender, assuming the worst about a gender, etc. is supposed to help bring about MORE equality?

 

No-one is hating on a gender, but that is the message being flung around re feminism and many who are uncomfortable out with the confines of their own little world, merely repeat it ad infinitum by rote.

 

Have nothing to say re equality for women, OK, I know let's try "feminists hate men" how about that for a popular little "truism"...

 

smh

 

The same old, tired, anti Feminism arguments were ranged against the Suffragette movement, when they campaigned for the vote. Nothing really changes, but women DID get the vote.

[jen1447]

Is there really an argument being made against feminism here whose underpinnings are the 'unfairness' of men buying dinner and engagement rings?

 

Feminism would promote the notion that no sex has a social or societal obligation greater or lesser than the other, while allowing for elective customs to continue or not as desired. You don't have to buy dinner. If you don't want to, don't. And there's no secret society plotting your downfall if you take a pass ....you'll only be affecting the sensibilities of an individual whose just as free to have and exercise those sensibilities as you are.

[mrldii]

Ahhhh...I forgot about 'The Man Has To Buy the Engagement Ring' rule (which conveniently overlooked The Rule that states The Bride's Family Must Pay for the Wedding).

 

For my first wedding I agreed to my husband 'recycling' his previously-purchased wedding set (for another woman) with me; it made good financial sense, as - at that time (1982), the price of gold was ridiculously high.

 

When I got married the second time, my soon-to-be second husband bought me a diamond solitaire for an engagement ring. I paid to have it reset in my wedding ring, which is the one I wanted and could afford. I also paid for his wedding band.

 

When and if I get married a third time, I will use this same ring as my wedding ring...traditions and old wives' tales be damned. I love it just that much.

 

Again...I live my beliefs; I suspect if others would open their eyes, they'd see many other feminists who do, too.

 

And again, the irony is that many won't ever see those feminist who live our beliefs, because they've taken our actions and mislabeled them as "feminazis" at the get-go. Self-fulfilling prophecy at its finest, from where I sit.

[Keenly]

The only thing I'm arguing here is the repetition of shouting it's for equality of both sexes, equality equality equality, but they don't actually do anything for the other sex.

 

 

Just say what it is, a women's only empowerment movement, and stop saying things that don't actually take place.

 

Equality means we are all equal, Right? So why then are we not equal to so many feminists?

 

 

All are equal, but some are more equal than others. - George Orwell

[mrldii]

...So why then are we not equal to so many feminists?

 

 

All are equal, but some are more equal than others. - George Orwell

 

 

These are both erroneous statements, as they've bastardized the terms "feminists" and "equal" to mean things the words actually don't.

 

It's difficult to have a discussion if one - or another - keeps arbitrarily changing the meaning of words in an attempt to support a foregone conclusion.