The woman question

March 21, 2007 at 3:15 pm (Uncategorized)

A male friend of mine told a feminist friend of mine he was interested in taking a feminist course.His reason was: “Maybe like Freud, I want to understand women better?” The response he got was: “Men shouldn’t really try to understand women, they should just generally comply.”

Indeed, the “woman question” wasn’t just some passive interest, more than it was a crude invasion of women’s freedom. He wouldn’t have enjoyed facing the prospect of “the white person question” so why should we repeat the mistake? Maybe as a male he owe it to just shut the hell up?

Surely, this may not be the view of all feminists. Some people might say it’s absurd. I expect an argument that anyone preventing you from seeking knowledge is stifling progress.

Still, my position is thatย the response was wise indeed. What do you think?

Advertisements

67 Comments

  1. 180proof said,

    she only told you half the story. the male dilemma: either “generally comply” to your woman or serially womanize (aka “mack ’em”.) the latter leads in time, if you’re lucky, to the former. generically, a woman values a man (she fancies) according to the degrees of sacrifice he’s willing to make on her behalf. at the very least a man is always a means to some woman’s ends. again, either give her what she wants (how and/or when she wants it) or tell her what she wants to hear (while playing her “maybe” off another woman’s “yes”) until you get what you want from her, then move on to your next mark (repeat & rinse ad infinitum/nauseam).

  2. floyd said,

    180 Proof wrote:
    generically, a woman values a man (she fancies) according to the degrees of sacrifice he’s willing to make on her behalf. at the very least a man is always a means to some woman’s ends

    I find that women usually value men more by the less he’ll do for her; they see his lack of the-need-to-be-accepted as manly. Although they usually like to keep the submissive ones around for obvious selfish reasons.
    soniarottwrote:
    Still, my position is that my responce was wise indeed. What do you think?

    If learning and studying what you don’t know isn’t wise, then I don’t want to be wise.

    -Floyd

  3. petunia said,

    180 Proof wrote:
    generically, a woman values a man (she fancies) according to the degrees of sacrifice he’s willing to make on her behalf. at the very least a man is always a means to some woman’s ends.

    Spend some time volunteering in a battered women’s shelter, and you may gain a more balanced perspective. It is worth noting that essentially EVERY person, who violates and uses other people, feels completely justified in doing so. To develop prejudicial thinking towards women as justification for mistreating and using them is one example of the thinking process that justifies such acts of selfishness and violation. The women who do mistreat men have gone through this same process to justify their actions.

  4. NeonQwerty said,

    Well, first off, anyone who says that I should not try to understand a given topic gets a big facefull of my laughter.

    Second, maybe what your friend was getting at is that given the following possibilities, the latter is much more likely than the former:

    i)you get a good understanding of women’s issues
    ii)you get a superficial understanding of women’s issues, and arrogantly assume that you know what their issues are and what it is like to experience the world as a woman

    Although I am Arabic by descent, I’m a white man for all intents and purposes. I can read up on, say, American black culture, I can really wonder what their issues are, and if I’m very, very diligent and sensitive, I might get some decent feeling as to what it means to black man in the USA, an experience that I’m sure is fraught with contradictory impulses of solidarity and desires for individuation. If I were to take a course on Black History in America and told a black friend about it, I would understand why he might bristle if he interprets what I’m saying as “Look, the entire range of your issues can be condensed into a thirty hour class that is easily mastered in my spare time.” Now, that might not have been my intention, but since I’m dealing with issues that are sensitive to my friend’s identity, I need to be aware of the need to phrase my intentions in a respectful way. Also, the fact is that men and women are still viewed in an asymmetrical way. If you’re going to argue that that is not the case, let’s at least agree that women perceive it to be the case. Given that, it’s understandable that a group would be suspicious when the socially dominant group attempts to appropriate their culture, especially when that culture and its issues are often a direct result of the power relations between it and the dominant group.

    Third, “Men shouldn’t really try to understand women, they should just generally comply.” should be read to me again after I ingest a poisonous substance and need to induce vomiting. It’s not funny, it’s not cute. At best, it’s just really lame, like jokes about airplace peanuts.

    Fourth, to touch on the eternal “What do women want?” question, I’ll just opine that the people that you attract and keep in your life are pretty much direct and indirect consequences of your mindset. A few technicalities aside, you can be an exceptionally nice person that is loving and cares for others and still get plenty of tail, or even a fulfilling relationship.

  5. BlogHead said,

    NeonQwerty wrote:

    i)you get a good understanding of women’s issues
    ii)you get a superficial understanding of women’s issues, and arrogantly assume that you know what their issues are and what it is like to experience the world as a woman

    That second option is the general fear many of us target groups have. Nothing says false sympathy to me better than a white woman trying to “remind” me of my disadvantages in society as a woman of color
    Third, “Men shouldn’t really try to understand women, they should just generally comply.” should be read to me again after I ingest a poisonous substance and need to induce vomiting.

    Yes, that wasn’t necessary at all. It’s jokes like that which make people confuse “feminism” with “pro-woman, anti-male”.
    Petunia wrote:
    Spend some time volunteering in a battered women’s shelter, and you may gain a more balanced perspective.

    Agreed!!

    A radical change in experience and situation might help you see things in a different light — but who would have thought ?!

  6. hateloveschool said,

    Why should men just give women what they want? Why can’t men at least try to understand women? I make attempts to understand women, but I always fail, but at least I sometimes get a glimpse of how they work, kind of. It seems as though it would be for the women’s interest for men to try to understand them so they can better deal with their needs…

  7. SALIMIS said,

    Did you ever think of asking your feminist friend why she thinks that?

    make her qualify and her own statement, rather than fleeing to the internet with your tail between your legs.

    more likely than not she will tell you that it was a joke, and that you should relax.

    however, if she was serious, and refuses to tell you why….then don’t waste any more time on the discussion, and, just to irritate her, spend a lot of time learning how to understand women, and use that knowledge to help you learn how to seduce them, than seduce women that she percieves as more attractive than her…then, while she scolds you, you can just smile and say, “I know you’re upset about this, but I’m sure that one day you’ll meet a nice man who will always comply with you” then get up and walk away….

    AHAHAHA REVENGE OF THE FRIEND OF THE FEMINIST

    but what do I know, I’m just trying to reverse the emasculation of the modern man.

    and your responce was not wise, it was you complying with her.

  8. gaia guerilla said,

    On that note, Salamis, maybe I should puff up my chest, stare down above her, and repeat a randomly picked line from the Rocky series.

  9. SALIMIS said,

    Yours was not a philosophical question, we do not owe it to women to just comply with them. Just because women have been downtrodden and disrespected in the past is no reason for them to allow to tread on and disrespect us.

    That was then, this is now.

    besides, ask her if what she said was a joke, cause I sure got a kick out of it.

  10. NeonQwerty said,

    Salimis wrote:
    Yours was not a philosophical question, we do not owe it to women to just comply with them. Just because women have been downtrodden and disrespected in the past is no reason for them to allow to tread on and disrespect us.

    That was then, this is now.
    Even a bleeding heart like me can appreciate this sentiment, as long as it’s expressed without rancor.

    Even if women are still disrespected today (and I believe that they are) , probably the best way to treat people is to use the “I’m okay – You’re okay” formula. In other words, you treat yourself with respect and treat others as people that treat themselves with respect. In other words, to treat others with dignity, nothing more and nothing less. All sorts of people have lots of reasons to act like jerks: being part of a disadvantaged group, having an abusive past, having low blood sugar levels, being caught in a traffic jam… It doesn’t mean that you actually have to take abusive from others, even if their frustration is understandable. Respecting people does not mean catering to them; it means holding them to a baseline standard that you also adopt, as well as making a commitment to trying to promote or at least advocate justice. At least, that’s how I’m able to reconcile my feelings that women are disrespected as a group (with social, political and economic consequences) as well as my insistance that all people, including women, that I interact with treat me with a certain amount of respect, even if they’re understandably pissed off.

  11. floyd said,

    Women get pissed off… period. Do your actions really depend on if their emotion is understandable or justified? Are emotions supposed to be justified?

    I say, among many emotions, women will get pissed off, we as people or men should be there for them, regardless.

    Of course educating ourselves about women to understand them better is a postive compensation. However, don’t make the foolish mistake of thinking or saying that through any method you’ll be able to understand them completely.

    -Floyd

  12. rabeldin said,

    hateloveschool wrote:
    Why should men just give women what they want? Why can’t men at least try to understand women? I make attempts to understand women, but I always fail, but at least I sometimes get a glimpse of how they work, kind of. It seems as though it would be for the women’s interest for men to try to understand them so they can better deal with their needs…

    Women, as a class, cannot be understood. Dedicate 30-40 years to one woman and you may learn to understand her. But the rest of women? Not on your life.

  13. 180proof said,

    perhaps this is true because we men usually do not understand ourselves as men until we’re old enough not to give a damn any longer.

  14. petunia said,

    Floyd wrote:
    …I say, among many emotions, women will get pissed off, we as people or men should be there for them, regardless…
    -Floyd

    That made me chuckle…hee hee hee ๐Ÿ˜€

    Everything that has been said here regarding men understanding women, can certainly be turned around to apply to women understanding men. It takes great care for any person to understand another person. I always prefer to view gender roles as flexible, not rigid. There can be sensitive men who dance ballet and knit scarves, and hard headed women who drive race cars and smoke cigars. It comes down to respect for individuality and taking the time to understand the unique qualities in each person.

  15. wax said,

    Petunia wrote:
    …It comes down to respect for individuality and taking the time to understand the unique qualities in each person.

    I’ll never understand women.
    Though growing up in a house with three sisters, Mum and Nanna I have developed hard won sense of when they getting pissed off. That and learnt to become invisable around dishes time.

  16. jean coendoe said,

    A PHD biologist told me that women can experience many multiple moods over the course of a day where a man can be in the same mood for as much as 6 months without change.

    Mood can effect reason and in my experincce, I’ve learned that the big frustration is in trying to sort out each and every feeling and perception wether rational or not in such frequency with women, that I don’t have.

  17. petunia said,

    I would be interested to learn more about this. There is still quite a range of behaviors in men and women. I knew a lady back in college that never expressed any emotion. It was a sort of novelty to the people who knew her. One time the college had a comedy program in which the comedians tried to get a panel of students to laugh. She remained completely expressionless the entire time. I wondered if her brain developed differently than others. I have known many men whose moods change rapidly creating unpredictable social interactions. Emotionally as a woman, I need consistency. (Actually, perhaps not so much as a woman, but as someone who was hurt by inconsistency from men nonetheless)

    In this thread there is this common tone about how “women get pissed off”. It is worth considering that statistically more men commit murders, most aggression based sports are male dominated (boxing, wrestling, etc.), domestic abuse typically involves the man battering the woman, bar room brawls more often involve men, etc. Aren’t these examples of men who are a little “pissed off”?

    I do understand that many sitcoms are based on the premise that the guy messes up, the woman get really ticked off, and this tension and interplay appears hopeless. I did hear (and can look this up) that women have twice as many nerves in their faces as men. Maybe women have the developed the fine art of facial expression, including the “grumpy look” to discipline children? There are examples when a person who is physically less dominant uses passive aggression to get their way. This would include stopping communication when angry. Might women do this more than men? I don’t know.

  18. jean coedoe said,

    Yes of course on most points.

    I wasn’t implying that this is absolute.

    Laughing at a joke I don’t think implies a mood though, or possibly she could have been in a bad one.

    To give an example, the other night I couldn’t sleep and got up to watch television, which generally bores me right to sleep, and my girlfriend got up and asked if I was not at that moment sleeping with her because she was too fat.

    I doubt the reverse of that scenario happens with any frequency.

    To clarify, all people feel emotions due to some external influence. I think woman more frequently experience emotion due to some internal factor not based on reason.

    Granted that men can get angry but usually have some justification wether valid or not.

    So, I think it’s more the reason for the emotion and the source of it rather than the emotion itself.

    Given a level playing field when things are going relatively well, my experince is that woman experience more unprovoked emotion than men.

    Again, that isn’t an absolute and could be a 60-40 type thing, although from my experience, it’s much higher.

    I’m am biased, as I am a fairly even keeled individual.

  19. 180proof said,

    jean coedoewrote:
    To give an example, the other night I couldn’t sleep and got up to watch television, which generally bores me right to sleep, and my girlfriend got up and asked if I was not at that moment sleeping with her because she was too fat. I doubt the reverse of that scenario happens with any frequency.

    i think you’re right … but, well, is she — too fat? ๐Ÿ˜ฆ

  20. petunia said,

    Women also have some justification “whether valid or not”. Weight is a constant issue for women. I don’t know what your girlfriend’s experiences are, but many women have had father figures tell them they are fat, no man will want them, boyfriends who actively prefer skinny ladies, girls who tease each other about weight, magazine articles that suggest your lover will reject you because of your weight, countless images of glamorous, thin women, etc. It is very likely that she had some reason for feeling that way. Women (and probably men) don’t always react immediately to the event that triggers a negative feeling. It can fester and grow and emerge at an unlikely moment. Sometimes the person may not be immediately aware of the initial motivator.

    I knew a woman who had gained weight due to very severe medical problems. Her husband attempted to “motivate” her to lose weight by videotaping thin women in bikinis on their family vacation. (he was habitually a bully) When I heard about it, I was really “pissed off”.

  21. tobias said,

    Why are women marrying bullies? :/
    Even after I tell them, they still mary them. I never get that

  22. petunia said,

    While physical abuse is commonly male directed towards female, I have also seen too many cases of emotional abuse from women towards men. This is a complex question you raise, but there are reasons. These are some which I understand.

    During our early development we must accept a massive amount of information at face value. Whatever we encounter we experience as “normal”. It creates a baseline for our expectations. If someone is mistreated during development, that becomes their sense of normalcy, and they will seek out people and environments throughout their life to maintain that normalcy.

    Related to this is emotional scarring and how it affects our choices. Those with very deep scars live continually with emotional agony which they cannot face, so they find external stimuli to validate these horrible and complex feelings, but are easier to process. It is the same reason people self-harm. It simplifies, and so lessens, the emotional pain. In the long run, of course, it is greatly increased.

    When someone is mistreated, it often leaves the person with a lack of closure. They long to correct this problem and may look for another person with the same problem in hopes of correcting it this time. It seems unbearable to face the possiblity that pain is the only outcome and there was no meaning, no resolution.

    A person who bullies someone, usually rewards them as well. If you create both an emotional need and fill it, the person can become emotionally addicted to you. They stay by such a person for the times their needs are filled. They can come to feel they deserve the punishment. They feel that losing the person is to lose everything and be left empty and alone without a crumb of fulfillment.

    Some women (and men) are very gentle and kind, and have trouble processing a hard cruel person. They instead project their own vulnerabilities onto this person assuming that this cruel behavior is motivated by tremendous pain. (and sometimes it is). They can experience their own suffering as his suffering. They see the cruel person as a vulnerable child who needs their nurturing and will be lost without them. “Other people will just hate him and mistreat him. They won’t understand his pain. He needs me to protect him.” It is as though they lose a sense of self into the other person. Interestingly, the abuser can also project their own coldness onto their victim. Inadvertedly, the victim is a living criticism, a constant reminder of what a worthless jerk the abuser is. The abuser often assumes the role of victim in his mind and justifies his cruelty by seeing his victim as a deserving “bitch”.

  23. jaoman said,

    Add to that, women generally tend to be more attracted to “powerful males” and the same experience can produce a negative reaction in a man. This has some anthropological/cultural and evolutionary basis. Just so, men have more accomplishment pressure pressed upon them, while women are driven to looks. Again, mind you, an generalization – but culturally the case is undeniable, and biologically there are good reason to assume such a split also. I’m sure we’ve all heard the women needing support while with child theory. This would be fine, but cultural development toward a male dominated society further strengthened necessity. So, to answer why women marry bullies, we say bullies have an air of confidence and capability about them. Sometimes an error, but nonetheless…

    As for fatness, the radar some women have for it is absolutely terrifying, as are the lengths to which they’d go to preserve their looks. My mother, for instance, has insomnia – resultingly, depression, exhaustion, irritability, etc,. She’s recently stopped taking melatonin supplements because, she claims, she’s gaining weight. I can’t tell the difference and she hasn’t dated in at least ten years – and yet…

  24. 180proof said,

    Petunia wrote:
    Some women (and men) are very gentle and kind, and have trouble processing a hard cruel person. They instead project their own vulnerabilities onto this person assuming that this cruel behavior is motivated by tremendous pain. (and sometimes it is). They can experience their own suffering as his suffering. They see the cruel person as a vulnerable child who needs their nurturing and will be lost without them. “Other people will just hate him and mistreat him. They won’t understand his pain. He needs me to protect him.” It is as though they lose a sense of self into the other person. Interestingly, the abuser can also project their own coldness onto their victim. Inadvertedly, the victim is a living criticism, a constant reminder of what a worthless jerk the abuser is. The abuser often assumes the role of victim in his mind and justifies his cruelty by seeing his victim as a deserving “bitch”.

    from the outside-looking-in it appears to be a variation on “the stockholm syndrome” but on the inside it’s just joylessly sublimated sado-masochism. there’s no such thing as an adult victim who’s not on some level complicit in his or her own victimization; likewise there’s no such thing as an abuser who’s not to some degree also a victim acting out his or her own traumas. females in secular liberal bourgeois societies are denied (mostly) by socialization the resourcefulness needed to break out of these emotional (pathological!) vicious cycles, though it does seem (btw, don’t these anecdotal overgeneralizations just goose ya?!) that they are better at avoiding self-destructive traps like these than their male counterparts. the ugly truth may be that for many pain is an aphrodisiac …

  25. petunia said,

    180 Proof wrote:
    there’s no such thing as an adult victim who’s not on some level complicit in his or her own victimization; likewise there’s no such thing as an abuser who’s not to some degree also a victim acting out his or her own traumas.

    There is some truth in that statement, and it can serve as the only real hope for some people. I have noticed a powerful human instinct to blame victims. This involves defining why that person has chosen their pain, and why such a pain would not happen to “me”. This is a copout that allows people to feel superior and above feeling compassion. On some level we can only speak for ourselves.

    What I cannot resolve is how many victims are unaware they are being victimized. Someone dear to me is in an emotionally abusive relationship. It took seven years of throwing up twice a week, crying endlessly, before this person could even comprehend that they were being mistreated. I also had an experience as an adult that was emotionally destructive, and at the time I felt confused by it and couldn’t tell if I was being violated or if I just had anxiety problems. Later on a psychologist told me it was definitely a form of violation. Circumstance helped me find a way out eventually. I think it is important not to pass judgment on those who have been mistreated. There is choice involved, but not at every moment. Some moments allow us choice, other moments do not.

  26. 180proof said,

    i’m not blaming the victim; i’m just pointing out what the stoics taught: abuse takes two … granted, if one is not taught to recognize when one is being violated then the inevitable lesson will be harder to learn when it comes. i hope you’re stronger, healthier, better because of what you’ve suffered … and have not remained ‘a victim’ as many do. btw, genuine “compassion” entails refusing to stoop to pity. as a rule i’d kick you while you’re down in order to drive you to your feet rather than to your knees; it’s the exceptional case, man or woman, who will stay down, maybe only kicking themselves, without kicking back. in hindsight it becomes obvious that our tormentors are very often our true benefactors.

  27. olivier martinez said,

    To love a woman is to understand her. It’s impossible to understand a woman without loving her. (That goes for a man too, I presume). The underlying problem is, always, lack of love. This can often be obscured by an excess of passion, sex, fun, pain, or whatever, but there is only one problem, and only one cure — love.

    No philosopher expressed this better than Kierkegaard in “Works of Love”.

  28. 180proof said,

    well, considering that ‘love’ is involuntary, this bit of sentimentality seems quite besides the point.

  29. petunia said,

    180 Proof wrote:
    i’m not blaming the victim; i’m just pointing out what the stoics taught: abuse takes two … granted, if one is not taught to recognize when one is being violated then the inevitable lesson will be harder to learn when it comes. i hope you’re stronger, healthier, better because of what you’ve suffered … and have not remained ‘a victim’ as many do. btw, genuine “compassion” entails refusing to stoop to pity. as a rule i’d kick you while you’re down in order to drive you to your feet rather than to your knees; it’s the exceptional case, man or woman, who will stay down, maybe only kicking themselves, without kicking back. in hindsight it becomes obvious that our tormentors are very often our true benefactors.

    Lot of good thoughts here. I didn’t intend to imply you were blaming victims, just pointing out what extremes can result. It is important to note that embracing oneself as “victim” is what motivates much cruelty. It becomes a means to justify any behavior. It is always destructive. Pity involves an underlying disrespect for the other person, assuming they are less somehow for being down. Sometimes compassion can be expressed by “kicking someone to drive them to their feet”, but this message can also be misinterpreted as simply more abuse. Believing in the strength of those who suffer, and expressing kindness with respect for them as our equals, or even our mentors, is compassion. Becoming stronger and kinder as a result of suffering is the truest form of defiance.

  30. olivier martinez said,

    180 Proof wrote:
    well, considering that ‘love’ is involuntary, this bit of sentimentality seems quite besides the point.

    Considering that you are quite mistaken about the voluntarity of love, “this bit of sentimentality” is the only point that matters.

  31. rabeldin said,

    Tobias wrote:
    Why are women marrying bullies?
    Even after I tell them, they still mary them. I never get that

    Tobi, you can’t handle all the women who want husbands. There are too many because there are more bullies around than you can shake a stick at.

  32. 180proof said,

    Petunia wrote:
    Pity involves an underlying disrespect for the other person, assuming they are less somehow for being down. Sometimes compassion can be expressed by “kicking someone to drive them to their feet”, but this message can also be misinterpreted as simply more abuse. Believing in the strength of those who suffer, and expressing kindness with respect for them as our equals, or even our mentors, is compassion. Becoming stronger and kinder as a result of suffering is the truest form of defiance.

    we’re of like minds then. good, i’m glad …

  33. olivier martinez said,

    I’m a bad elaborator . I respond better to questions. Anyway, what I think is the only point that matters is that we are able to foster love for other people in our selves. Once we realize this, and once we accept our duty to struggle in this direction (and it is a very hard struggle), then “the problem” simply melts away — in the sense of “I don’t know what to do”, not in the sense of “it’s solved”. It is far from solved, the hardest part — doing it — is ahead.

    This depends, of course, on a definition of love. However, love is a word so often misused, and it is a power so often misunderstood, that to “define” it, in the abstract, is more liable to result in confusion. Perhaps it is better to keep with pointing at accidents instead of attempting a formal definition — in other words, what St. Paul did in I Corinthians 13.

    I could, it is true, follow Kierkegaard’s definition in the work I mentioned — to love another person is to help the beloved in loving God — but I’m quite sure it would result in more heat than light . St. Paul is more eloquent than that.

    And just to ease a little bit on the “sentimentality” side, it is certainly true that this point of view can lead to great hurt. Love is not “heaven on earth”, but it is not merely “the best that we can reasonably expect” either. It is more. It is no guarantee of safety — to love safety more than one loves the beloved is to lack in love. In the scenarios which you and Petunia are discussing, it seems to me that there is a lot of concern for safety, self-esteem, human dignity, etc. etc. All of these things are good things. But love is greater. It is far preferable to love someone than to stop loving him/her to preserve any of those things.

    The “trick”, so to speak, is to love the beloved rather than what the beloved gives (or refrains from giving) to you. Sounds simple, but we’re needy little beings.

  34. floyd said,

    Sounds fictional…

  35. 180proof said,

    love, like hunger or fear, is not voluntary; the use/misuse of love, however, is voluntary. in other words, we cannot choose who what or when we love. we can only choose, once we’re in love, how we deal with the details or boundaries of our loving. ‘love of a woman’ might be a necessary condition to understanding her but love alone (or primarily) does not suffice; a man must understand himself as a man in order to see her as she is rather than as he is. i suspect this is why only older men really appreciate young women … ๐Ÿ™‚

  36. olivier martinez said,

    180 Proof wrote:
    love, like hunger or fear, is not voluntary; the use/misuse of love, however, is voluntary. in other words, we cannot choose who what or when we love.

    I can. And I think everyone can, too. Thank God .

  37. petunia said,

    Our initial emotional responses are like physical responses. We can’t always choose how situations affect us emotionally, but this is different than love. Emotional attachment and love are not synonymous. Love is not an emotion, it is an all encompassing quality that includes, but is not limited to, emotion. Its foundation is stronger and more pure than any emotion. Love is a desire to contribute to the well being of another, attachment is desire to have ones needs met. These can be intertwined, and usually are, but the distinction is important.

  38. soniarott said,

    Petunia wrote:

    Our initial emotional responses are like physical responses. We can’t always choose how situations affect us emotionally, but this is different than love. Emotional attachment and love are not synonymous. Love is not an emotion, it is an all encompassing quality that includes, but is not limited to, emotion. Its foundation is stronger and more pure than any emotion. Love is a desire to contribute to the well being of another, attachment is desire to have ones needs met. These can be intertwined, and usually are, but the distinction is important.

    Very well put. ๐Ÿ˜‰

  39. hemmet said,

    How is “taking a feminist course” an attempt at understanding women (real people). The only “mackin” is your college brenkin pockets and checkin you kids.

  40. the crooner said,

    The same way taking a zoology course helps one understand animals.

  41. hemmet said,

    Your comparision is offensive and not even valid. Feminism is a movement. Feminest coarse not ‘course on woman’. Zoology is a ‘course on animals’.
    Regardless that’s not what I was refering to. Tell any chick that you’re ‘taking a feminist course to understand women’ and that’s going to be a red fuckin flag on you right there. And rightly so. (Pull head out of bum)

  42. the crooner said,

    I guess that’s the kind of thing you could learn in a feminist class, huh?

  43. olivier cocteau said,

    Feminism classes should be scraped. It isn’t useful in a Patriarchal society like ours ie., in the west. It makes women think that they have more power than they actually have- or deserve. What happened to women just looking after their man? i mean come on, “happiness is a warm gun” we’ve all heard that song huh?

    However, i don’t entirely believe that. What i do believe is that “feminism” can be over-worked and that this itself can cause problems for men and women alike- i personally dont see much difference between ourselves. We all want the same goods that life has to offer etc., If there is an issue of inequality, or sexism, then this should be addressed, i don’t think lumping the problem into “feminism” wins any points.

    So drop the feminism! ๐Ÿ˜‰

  44. petunia said,

    It is true that some people use victimization to entitle them to mistreat others and obtain power. Any aspect of the feminist movement that embraces this does women more harm than good. Overall, the treatment of women is rather good in western society, but they are not equal to men.If you have not experienced, or personally observed, environments in which women are treated in a suppressive, abusive manner, it is better not to speak for them or assume that it isn’t happening.

    For those who are very young and haven’t experienced domestic abuse or rape, there is not much evidence of inequality at school, compared to other environments. Many of the teachers are women, and students are generally treated equality in regard to gender. There are issues that need addressing still in the larger context of society.

  45. stephane sednaoui said,

    It is indeed a pleasant surprise how the so-called ‘woman question’ as raised by the feminists in our midst has generated a lot of response, for or against. For whatever this is worth, allow me to submit my view on the subject, if I may.

    It is quite logical to be feminist in worldview if you were a woman than man. In short, it is rather self-serving that any women’s organization still need to advocate some self-serving interests. I like to believe that in an open society, no single man can discriminate against any pack of women, or on a one-on-one basis for that matter, just no nobody.

    Male or female, either one has what it takes to do whatever task, make whatever face, and all that. So what must distinguish one for the other if not their mere biological make up in terms of their reproductive systems, if I may so state.

    Then, there seems to be a commonly-held perception that woman’s moods swing from north to south and all that kind of stuff and than men, at least generally thought, does not swing, if ever it just stays. But speaking of a single human nature, is that of women really one of pendulum? Maybe not.

    What do psychoanalysts might have to say on the subject? At least in terms of given stimuli, human beings can only either tend toward a stimulus or tend away from it. So depending on the set of stimuli, men or women will tend in a particular way and if were are to get some statistical facts, we can gather that men and women alike may actually manifest similar or dissimilar behavior or moods for that matter.

    I therefore believe that nothing differentiates a man and a woman. However, if placed in a relationship where one is subject of the ‘domestic leadership’ of a man, then some givens must be laid. For instance, does the woman agree to subordinate herself to the man or vice-versa. It involves the willingness to regulate or deregulate one’s freedom. A freedom regulated or deregulated is not a freedom violated, or is it?

  46. petunia said,

    Here are some statistics regarding the treatment of women in America for your perusal.

    The National Crime Victimization Survey

    ? One out of every six American women have been the victims of an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime (14.8% completed rape; 2.8% attempted rape). This is according to the Prevalence, Incidence and Consequences of Violence Against Women Survey, National Institute of Justice and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1998.

    ? A total of 17.7 million women have been victims of these crimes. [rape]

    ? In 2003, nine out of every ten rape victims were female according to the 2003 National Crime Victimization Survey.

    ? 38% of girls are sexually abused before the age of 18.

    ? 16% of boys are sexually abused before the age of 18.

    American Bar Association Commission on Domestic Violence

    ? by the most conservative estimate, each year 1 million women suffer nonfatal violence by an intimate. Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report: Violence Against Women: Estimates from the Redesigned Survey (NCJ-154348), August 1995, p. 3.

    ? by other estimates, 4 million American women experience a serious assault by an intimate partner during an average 12-month period. American Psychl. Ass’n, Violence and the Family: Report of the American Psychological Association Presidential Task Force on Violence and the Family (1996), p. 10.

    ? nearly 1 in 3 adult women experience at least one physical assault by a partner during adulthood. American Psychl. Ass’n, Violence and the Family: Report of the American Psychological Association Presidential Task Force on Violence and the Family (1996), p. 10.

  47. hemmet said,

    84% of sexual assalts in Canada are woman under the age of 18. One third of these girls were under the age of 6.
    I think that the original post contained resentment toward females. Please take that shit out of your heart if it’s there. What do you want? Advice; If your a chump, your a chump -Don’t try to be cool.
    Woman deserve respect and consideration. They can make up their own mind on who they can fuck or how many partners or whatever, without being condemned by men or other women. If a pregnant lady or a lady with children comes to your place of work -see if they can be accomadated (do they need the staff bathroom for e.g) in any way. Our society doesn’t respect our mothers! but individuals can help. Come fuckin on! Don’t hate!

  48. stephane sednaoui said,

    No one ought question statistics by reputable polling circuits precisely because they, more or less, point to some critical facts or observations.

    It is a good thing Petunia could readily lay down the facts, as largely based on statistics gathered by varous polling outfits.

    It would appear to me as even more clear that in the whole what those statistical facts and figures point to is the reality that rape as a crime is by nature, human nature call it that, man-initiated act. It is remotely a woman-initiated act. So because of this given reality, all statistics would logically have to point to this kind of reality.

    Now, if there is a class of acts or a specific type of crime that can be said to be largely of the kind of a woman-initiated act, by some facts of human nature, then one can always expect that statistics would point to such reality, that all such acts are women-iniated acts.

    Nature has made it natural even logical for the man to initiate sexual intercourse with a woman. Had there been serious questions against this view? Rape is within the real of sexual intercourse and no such woman could initiate the sexual act more naturally or more aggressively than a man will. I think that is part of the natural ‘law’ or state of things.

    Except that I can’t quickly think of crimes that may, by classification, be labelled as that of woman-initiated acts but that does not mean no empirical data could be given. It has become my limitated given the passing moment to have to respond to the enlightening statistics given by Petunia. For that matter, it is not only location-driven, it happens in every part of the world other than USA.

  49. hemmet said,

    “no such woman could initiate the sexual act more naturally than a man will.”(?)

    What the fuck? What is that? It just sounds diagnostic.

  50. olivier cocteau said,

    these are statistics that need to be gathered and then the appropriate action met. For example raping children under 6 the person ought to have their balls cut-off. Its simple. If you do it, this is what happens. Perhaps the laws are too liberal in Canada and this is why a third of people are under 6- however, i’ll have to check that out for myself.

    Likewise with Rape- i don’t know if locking people away into crime education facilities is the right thing to do- perhaps physical punishment might be the key. Im not too sure- what do you think?

  51. rusky said,

    Amen to that.

    Some statistics are simply unacceptable. These are an example.

    Looking at the figures I cannot help but think of the people around me and the very real possibility that this is an issue for some of them. That helps to put this into perspective.

  52. hemmet said,

    Hey, one question. Could you actually cut a mans balls off? Or would you pay taxes to have a guy in a black hood do it. I think if you couldn’t personally stomach doing it- that might be a good indication of your true feelings on the mater.

  53. rusky said,

    I couldnt cut a mans balls off…although the way of dealing with the problem that I am most in favor of is shooting the perpetrator in the head. That I could do without a doubt.

  54. petunia said,

    I have interacted with three child molesters that I know of. At the time I didn’t know what they were. The second one was my best friend’s father when I was 12. She used to have slumber parties and he would sit in his chair and watch us. It never occurred to me what he was about, but when she was older she told me about the years of abuse. They ran a babysitting service, and he ended up being sued for braking a child’s arm. When I think of such people, it is like peering into a black hole. Unfathomably controlling, incomprehensibly small, destroying all light. If I reach out to destroy it, I fear becoming a part of the cruelty. I just wish they didn’t exist in the first place.

  55. reformed nihilist said,

    Whoa horsies! Yes, rape is reprehensible. Who wants to live in a society that includes rape and incest? But who want’s to live in a society that condones corpral punishment?

    It should be noted that although the rape statistics are an extremely disturbing example of inequality in the treatment of women, this inequality isn’t limited to sex crime. Wage inequality exists between the genders in the western world. I think it might be dangerous to focus on the small picture of sex crime and ignore the larger issue at hand. There is a subtle and insiduous attitude that women are not equal to men, and do not merit equal treatment.

  56. sven said,

    Actually Reformed Nihilist, I find that often women are treated better then men. The criminal justice systems are lighter on them. Divorce courts are more giving to them. The work-place is more sensitve to them. The culture is more accommodating to them (opening doors, carrying bags, etc).

    I know for one that I treat women better then men. I am nicer (or less mean ) to them. I’m more sensitive to their fragile feelings (I hate when they cry. ). I try to swear less and use less offensive language around them (except in situations where they like it ).

  57. hemmet said,

    Yuck

  58. reformed nihilist said,

    Ok, I was suggesting looking at the big picture. I am sure that you feel this way, and have observed other men treat women this way. I didn’t know of any studies on sentencing variations bteween men and women, but if there are inequalities then they should be fixed too. By assuming that women’s feelings are ‘more fragile’ than men’s, you are actually perpetuatiing a derogatory stereotype. Both men and women deserve equal courtesy and equal opportunity to display emotional toughness.

    It astonishes me that people don’t recognise a problem that can be clearly empirically demonstrated.

  59. hemmet said,

    The resentmant. O.K well you stated that this woman was preventing you from seeking knowledge and that she was stiffling progress(?) All this from one little quip she blurted out? I can’t even take from what she said that she dosn’t like you. If she does like you, you wouldn’t notice cause you’re busy playing ‘captin save-a-hoe’- taking fukin feminest courses. I’m not buying it. P.S On the behalf of “as a male maybe I owe It to shut the hell…” don’t say that on my account brother. You and me in a boat? Nuh, uhh!

  60. sharan said,

    I am going to throw the cat among the pigeons, and offer two quotes from Nietzsche (not necessarily my own views at all, he adds hastily, not wishing to come under the knife), and they may or may not shed some light on the situation.

    ” Has my definition been heard? It is the only one worthy of a philosopher. Love – in its means, war; at bottom, the deadly hatred of the sexes.”

    “Emancipation of women” = that is the instinctive hatred of the abortive woman, who is incapable of giving birth, against the woman who is turned out well……….they want to lower the general rank of woman; and there is no surer means for that than higher education, slacks, and political voting-cattle rights. At bottom, the emancipated are anarchists in the world of the ‘eternally feminine,’ the underprivileged whose most fundamental instinct is revenge.”

  61. reformed nihilist said,

    Gaia_Guerrilla wrote:
    I agree we need the big picture. But how small is the issue of sex crime?

    When it elicits emotionally reactionary responses involving corporal punishment and castration from people who claim to be engaging in rational philosophical discourse, it is apparently too limited a scope for the discussion. I explicitly said that the issue was serious. So what is the purpose of this rhetorical one-up-manship (or one-up-womanship)? It could be interpreted as quite an offensive implication (that I am so uncompassionate and cold as to feel that sex crimes are trivial). Instead, I will assume that it is either a desire to keep the discussion based on emotional rather than rational appeals, or a desire to obtain social prestige by one-upping someone.

  62. joan said,

    What is the big picture though with regards to sex crime? If the small picture is all that has been looked at, then why is the bigger picture so different?

    Gender equality? What does that entail and why is it universally desirable? As long as man needs woman and woman needs man, there will be inequality to some degree. Inequality in the workplace and such is an unneccessary inequality, one that serves no purpose and can be eradicated. Pay, employment oppertunities, etc should be based on ability not gender.

    Floyds attitude towards women can be taken two ways: that he believes women to be emotionally inferior, or that he is being polite. I subscribe to the latter.

  63. doitintheroad said,

    Gaia-

    I don’t think i follow you. How can a crime be committed against someone who has already broken God’s commands? If someone rapes a child then that person loses all privileges/rights. The question is how does one deal with such a person? send them to crime education? It’s a difficult issue, because on the one hand we don’t want to be too harsh (because we fear we might become harsh) and on the other road we don’t want to be too lenient i.e., lock someone away for a short period of time knowing they might re-offend.

  64. SALIMIS said,

    Would now be a proper time for one of my quips about men acting like men so women will be free to act like women??

    we have sexual roles to fill here people, lets not fight over who has to be bottom…because both of sexes are on top at one point during the only act that really matters (evolutionarily speaking)

    there, I hope somebody found that offensive.

    love…I mean…desire for copulation

  65. hemmet said,

    The role you play out is yet to be named and is not yet determined.
    “If you want to live high, live high and it you want to live low live low, cause theres a million ways to go ohhh oo oh. You know that there are…. you can make it all true, and you can make it undo, you’ll see ah ah ah, it’s easy ah ah ah you won’t need me to know.”

  66. the boss said,

    The object of studying philosophy is to know one’s own mind, not other people’s. You guys are missing all the points.

  67. SALIMIS said,

    forgive me…I was talking about sex

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: