• WISDOMfromPO-MO
    448
    Is feminism a sort of tribalism?Jake Tarragon

    I don't know.

    What do you think?
  • WISDOMfromPO-MO
    448
    I don't agree with how she worded it but if I interpret it charitably I suppose her point is that it all boils down to gender stereotpying (instead of mysogyny) and that's a result of juxtaposing men and women. So when I say "women should be [x]" its corollary "men should be [y]" is probably implicit and vice versa. (Don't cry cuz you're a guy --> I'm a girl so I can cry).

    If she didn't mean that, I'll have to disagree with her conclusion.
    Benkei

    I think that it is clear that she is saying that hate/contempt for men does not exist and that all gender-based problems/issues are the result of misogyny.
  • WISDOMfromPO-MO
    448
    I highly doubt you "see" the actual person that she is and would be motivated by a number of other reasons to make it worth your while to get to know her as a friend.TimeLine

    I hope that "you" is being used generically there and does not refer to me.
  • Benkei
    639


    Do you think my point was to divine what she truly meant or to explore different interpretations? You missed my point and that makes it all the more likely you missed hers.
  • WISDOMfromPO-MO
    448
    However, using an extremely small portion of radical feminists as an example of women's rights is not really correct of you, now is it...TimeLine

    Every feminist source I encounter is oblivious to men suffering as men.

    I think a discussion about men' rights or masculinity studies is certainly something that should be brought to attention.TimeLine

    That discussion has already been going on at least since the 1975 publication of The Hazards of Being Male: Surviving the Myth of Masculine Privilege, by Herb Goldberg, if not since the 1971 publication of The Manipulated Man, by Esther Vilar.

    But it has never been the kind of dominant, mainstream narrative that feminism has been. It has struggled for relevance. Considering the attitude in the quote at the start of this thread, are the latter and former any surprise?
  • WISDOMfromPO-MO
    448
    Well if I were to speculate, based on my own prejudices, I would say that this result is due to the notion that women are 'the weaker sex'. Now it is arguable whether weakness is something one necessarily dislikes - do you want to argue it? When weakness provokes aid, it becomes an advantage, and I dare say that there are other advantages to being identified as inferior, like not being seen as a threat in strange neighbourhoods. But it doesn't seem like the greatest example of misandry.unenlightened

    The author here says that microaggressions are gendered violence and that an example of such violence is women being interrupted.

    And you think that being confronted by the police; members of the public not noticing or caring that you are being assaulted; etc. are not good examples with respect to men?!
  • unenlightened
    1.4k
    And you think that being confronted by the police; members of the public not noticing or caring that you are being assaulted; etc. are not good examples with respect to men?!WISDOMfromPO-MO

    You miss my point, I fear. I do not deny that your examples are the result of gender stereotyping, nor do I deny that they operate in these cases to the advantage of women. My claim is that they stem from exactly the same stereotypes that in the vast majority of cases operate to the advantage of men; the same prejudices that women are not worth hearing out in a discussion, operate to suggest that they are not worth arresting, and need our help in a domestic.

    Excuse the graphic parody, but it is as though in the good old days, you were to justify women not having the vote on the grounds that men don't get doors held open for them. The conception of women as weak, irrational, and the opposite of all the manly virtues sometimes works to their advantage, but this does not turn misogyny into misandry.
  • WISDOMfromPO-MO
    448
    You miss my point, I fear. I do not deny that your examples are the result of gender stereotyping, nor do I deny that they operate in these cases to the advantage of women. My claim is that they stem from exactly the same stereotypes that in the vast majority of cases operate to the advantage of men; the same prejudices that women are not worth hearing out in a discussion, operate to suggest that they are not worth arresting, and need our help in a domestic.

    Excuse the graphic parody, but it is as though in the good old days, you were to justify women not having the vote on the grounds that men don't get doors held open for them. The conception of women as weak, irrational, and the opposite of all the manly virtues sometimes works to their advantage, but this does not turn misogyny into misandry.
    unenlightened

    You start out talking about stereotypes. Then you conclude with misogyny and misandry.

    Misogyny is about hate, contempt, etc.

    I do not see how stereotypes are relevant. Probably everybody is stereotyped in some way. However, most examples that immediately enter my mind have nothing to do with hate or contempt. The people of Appalachia are stereotyped as poor and uneducated, by I don't see any hate or contempt there.

    No, I think that there is widespread mistrust of and hostility towards males.

    A clinical psychologist said to me many years ago, "I believe that girls are socialized to hate men".
  • unenlightened
    1.4k
    I do not see how stereotypes are relevant.WISDOMfromPO-MO

    In order to love or hate a group or type, whether it's gender, class, race, or whatever, you first have to stereotype them. Mysogyny is contempt for women as you say, it is stereotyping them as inferior and then treating them as inferior. you seem to have a difficulty in grasping this, so let's try the ideas out on race for comparison.

    Suppose we as a society think that black people are inferior to white to the extent that we treat them as property. They cannot vote, or make decisions about their lives or jobs, or appeal to the justice system. You get the picture.

    Now I say to you, "they are so lucky these black people, they do not have to worry about losing their jobs, or what the government is going to do, they do not have to fight for their country, and my friends and I do not hate our slaves, we love them. And yet a clinical psychologist told me that black people are socialised to hate whites."

    You might think I had missed something.
  • Roke
    38
    Life is complicated and you can view it through an endless variety of paradigms. This culture of victimhood and fashionable misandry is an overcorrection. And it will be looked back on as the period when we drifted too far astray in that direction, from the vantage point of wherever we'll have drifted too far next. The errors of the current age are always in our blindspot, but are easy enough to see if you take a step back and look. Misogyny as a theory of everything is only worth a yawn.
  • Bitter Crank
    3.6k
    Suppose we as a society think that black people are inferior to white to the extent that we treat them as property.unenlightened

    Is it possible that enslavement came first, and the stereotype followed? It seems like one would be required to think of one's slaves as inferior, especially if one consigned them to only physical labor. What else would cover the cognitive dissonance of enslaving one's fellow man? Did the Romans have a more complicated view of their slaves because they served as tutors and teachers as well as ditch diggers?
  • ArguingWAristotleTiff
    947
    @BlueBanana A portion of your reply has been posted on The Philosophy Forum Facebook page. Congratulations and Thank you for your contribution.
  • unenlightened
    1.4k
    Says man from future?

    Did the Romans have a more complicated view of their slaves because they served as tutors and teachers as well as ditch diggers?Bitter Crank
    I don't think it was a race thing at all, but a class thing. But ask a time traveller.
  • WISDOMfromPO-MO
    448
    In order to love or hate a group or type, whether it's gender, class, race, or whatever, you first have to stereotype them...unenlightened

    Yet, it is insisted that negatively stereotyping males is not hate for males.

    Mysogyny is contempt for women as you say, it is stereotyping them as inferior and then treating them as inferior...unenlightened

    The stereotype that seems to dominate is that males are morally inferior.

    What could be more negative than saying that a class of humans is worse than everybody not in their class simply due to the way they were born?

    Yet, we are told that misandry does not exist.

    you seem to have a difficulty in grasping this,...unenlightened

    Predictably, any time that someone is concerned about men's issues other people say from a feminist perspective, "You don't get it".

    A lack of empathy, a lack of respect, and an almost complete failure to listen seems to always be the feminist response to men's issues and concerns.

    so let's try the ideas out on race for comparison.

    Suppose we as a society think that black people are inferior to white to the extent that we treat them as property. They cannot vote, or make decisions about their lives or jobs, or appeal to the justice system. You get the picture.

    Now I say to you, "they are so lucky these black people, they do not have to worry about losing their jobs, or what the government is going to do, they do not have to fight for their country, and my friends and I do not hate our slaves, we love them. And yet a clinical psychologist told me that black people are socialised to hate whites."...
    unenlightened

    That is a straw man.

    Men are hated for being men, it seems clear to me. A clinical psychologist even told me that--based on his observations in the clinical setting, I assume--he believes that girls are socialized to hate men.

    Men are human too, believe it or not. Anything that questions, denies, undermines, etc. men's humanity is misandry.

    This childish game of "Who is really a victim?", "Whose oppression is really the problem?", "Who has really suffered?", etc. needs to stop. If feminists want to completely be treated as human then they should act like humans in response to everybody. If we are talking about any people other than feminists--fascists, white supremacists, PETA, Westboro Baptist Church, etc.--who show no empathy and compassion to humans we see them as bordering on less-than-human. However, the humanity of feminists does not seem to ever be questioned--not even by anti-feminists--no matter what they do. I don't know why the latter is the case, but I suspect that if these feminists who categorically deny the existence of misandry were to change their approach to men's issues and instead try listening, empathizing and showing compassion they would find that being male is its own set of negative experiences and nothing done in the name of women's liberation has addressed a lot of that.
  • BlueBanana
    244
    However, the humanity of feminists does not seem to ever be questioned--not even by anti-feminists--no matter what they do.WISDOMfromPO-MO

    Every feminist source I encounter is oblivious to men suffering as men.WISDOMfromPO-MO

    I think those quotes summarize your bias on the matter.
  • unenlightened
    1.4k
    The stereotype that seems to dominate is that males are morally inferior.

    What could be more negative than saying that a class of humans is worse than everybody not in their class simply due to the way they were born?
    WISDOMfromPO-MO

    If this were the case, one would expect to find women dominating in matters pertaining to morality, in the judiciary and the priesthood, for examples. But they don't. Quite the reverse, because the dominant stereotype is the exact opposite - that women are morally weaker, and this is part of the justification for male dominance in every other sphere. If the dominant stereotype was that men are morally inferior, we would not put them in charge of everything.
  • TimeLine
    750
    Every feminist source I encounter is oblivious to men suffering as men.WISDOMfromPO-MO

    Feminism is not oblivious to the suffering of men but concerns itself with the study of women. That is the point.

    For the most part, being a feminist is not about being an aggressive woman walking around topless and having sex with whoever you want, but it is having the attributes of one who fearlessly continues despite their vulnerabilities, those that fight hatred and violence and cruelty with goodness and love, by never giving up. It is about being yourself, whether you feel feminine in nature or not, and being virtuous and principled. This is the same for men. There needn't be a stereotype, an image that would classify you as a 'man' or a 'woman' but it is wholly subjective.

    My father was taught to be 'manly' and that masculine attributes were physical in nature as well as being aggressive and showing dominance. He would boast about stories on how he made people disabled and would often beat my mother up - she was a tiny woman mind you - because in his pathetic culture violence against women had become normalised. He was a mindless follower of the constructions of masculinity and did the every bidding of his social environment that he cared for more than his own family and children, his false facade showcasing someone different to what we experienced when he came home.

    I care about the construction of masculinity because of the impact it has on me and my mother (who became lost because she could not escape) and siblings, all of whom bullied and harassed me as I was the youngest in the family to vent their frustrations. I have never had sex neither even kissed a man because I was for a very long time scared of men and of being hurt. While I am lucky that I was never raped or severely hurt in some physical way, psychological and in particular emotional trauma was significant because of the constant threat of violence and it took a lot to recover from the realisation that I was long hiding from the pain pretending I was protecting myself since I thought men were the enemy. I know now that by exposing my vulnerability and being myself, I am much stronger than my father.

    At the same time, it is not difficult for us to hastily generalise when you see the incredibly significant and widespread gender violence that occurs globally. I believe that masculinity studies is relevant to feminism because it will enable feminists to understand the underlying cause of why gender bias exists and encourage an interdisciplinary approach to the subject.


    But it has never been the kind of dominant, mainstream narrative that feminism has been. It has struggled for relevance. Considering the attitude in the quote at the start of this thread, are the latter and former any surprise?WISDOMfromPO-MO

    The problem with the construction of masculinity is that a man exposing his vulnerabilities is considered 'weak' - for a very long time, men never exposed their experiences of sexual assault where a terrible number of boys had been raped and remained quiet; this includes the alarming rate of suicide. What you appear to be confused about is that you seem to be blaming feminism for this failure, but on the contrary, it is the construction of masculinity that has prevented the struggle of men to be voiced.

    If anything, you should perhaps be praising feminism for working hard to fight these social constructions and stereotypes for ultimately shedding light on the issues that men face.
123Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.