Forums > Social Chat > Women are often more sexist than Men

Login/Join to Participate
Page:
thingeymajigmember
43 posts
Location: London


Posted:
Thought I'd start this contraversial topic off to see what people think!

The thing is, that from a personal view I think that
the biggest obstruction to sex-equal opportunities is women.(Hetero-sexual women in particular, as cannot speak for homo-sexuals as am not one myself)

I beleive that men are in general far wider accepted in all situations, be it performance, work, social situations, aesthetics etc.
I feel that this is because men have a certain comradery that women lack, but also that women are more accepting of men than they are other women.

I would like to be accepted in anything I do as a woman, but still find myself not being accepting to other women anyway. I feel like a total hypocrite.

I think it comes down to, that men accept other men, and women shun other women through competition/jealousy. I think it is all fudamentally biological, but surely as reasoning humans (rather than animals) we can rise above instinctual behaviour.

So what do you reckon? Do think there is a future for feminism when secretly all women judge each other far harsher than they judge men?

TheTinyManicOne
xx

....so does it come with a hat?


danaeeflymember
9 posts
Location: planet eart


Posted:
Hi! what a big fight!!!!!
I'm a woman and I'm equaliste everyboby have to have the same rigth and anyway men and women are make to love each other not to pretend to be superior or better, but whe are also different and we have to see the positive in this difference .
make love not war

all you need is love


Paddyback from the dead...sort of
884 posts
Location: 4341'N 7938'W


Posted:
quote:
Originally posted by NYC:
(from Cambridge International Dictionary of English)

feminism
noun [U]
the belief that women should be allowed the same rights, power and chances as men and be treated in the same way, or the set of activities intended to achieve this state

I wonder why it's called feminism then? Wouldn't "equalitism" make more sense?

Just wondering.

I am *100%* for equality, and I live by it. But I don't consider myself feminist. The dictionary can define feminsm however it wants...any given thing is defined by the popular belief that surrounds it more so than it is defined by some official record of meaning.

And for as good as feminism is, I'm afraid to say that the popular view surrounding feminism has been tainted by radical feminists who are more interested in switching the playing field rather than making it even. Just look at the people in this discussion who have basically said, "I'm all for equality, but I don't like feminism", when feminism is technically about equality.

Personally, I don't care for labelling my beliefs. I just live by them, and, rather than forcing them upon others, trust that good beliefs and will spread by example while bad ones will not. If everyone else did the same (whether that's possible or not ), I think the world would be far happier and simpler place.

NYCNYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA


Posted:
Also, let's keep in mind WHERE we are talking about. Don't forget, most of us live in liberal epicenters. A huge portion of the world DOESN'T have sexual harassment laws. In the US, where litigation rules, it's easy to get hit by the pendulum swinging the other way.

But I still live in a country where the lowest statistics suggest that a women is raped every two minutes.

It's easy to whine when a female gets a job/favor because she's female but it's quite obvious that the opposite happens MUCH more often. Again, I think we're so used to it when a male is given preference that we don't even notice.

Men have to walk that "fine line" in a small minority of situations in life. They have been so spoiled by their innate power that they resent it during those rare moments when it is taken away.

Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]


NYCNYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA


Posted:
{One of the reasons why discussions like this are tricky is because you can't see the level/intinsity at which people are making points. After seeing all of my CAPS I did want to say that I do see both sides of this arguement. It certainly isn't as clear as I'd like it to be. BUT I think that some people are missing the bigger picture because they are dealing with day to day, local issues which are not consistant with the bigger picture.}

Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]


Cherylmember
29 posts
Location: Portland, OR USA


Posted:
One piece that has been alluded to in this discussion, but that I think merits a highlight is that there are many factors besides gender when talking about oppression, prejudice and discrimination.

Pele, I understand your point about women being in positions of power, but I would also note that most of those women have class privilege or race privilege.

I should have been clearer when explaining my definitions...oppression does involve a power differential, while prejudice does not...but it is rarely a cut and dried situation.

For example, a man who is white, poor, not handicapped, thin, and heterosexual might have less power in the job arena than a woman who is white, rich, not handicapped, thin and heterosexual because in the world of work, class has more leverage than gender.

Hope this clarifies further what I was trying to say.

-Cheryl

Astarmember
1,591 posts
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada.


Posted:
NYC very well said.

All in all this thread has majorly changed my viewpoint on the whole issue. That and I heard a speech delivered by alan alda at a feminist rally of some sort in the 70's or 80's (alan alda is my faviroute celebrity and someone I admire very much) which was very persuasive.

AalatheaGOLD Member
member
80 posts
Location: Massachusetts, US, USA


Posted:
i second the "NYC very well said".
but about the jobs etc. thing, i just want to add that this is because people tend to view women as "women" and men as "people".
a (caucasian) man's point of view is considered an objective view, while a women's is seen as gendered. i know that doesn't describe everyone's behaviour, but we're all generalizing here.

Posted:
This thread is meaningless as everyone is using their own implicit definitions of Feminism, Power and Equality.

(IMHO)

Josh

NYCNYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA


Posted:
I think the rest of us were getting something out of it. Several of us were re-examining our own defitions of Feminism, Power, and Equality. I know that was certainly learning quite a bit, as usual, about how others think and define very relevant issues.

It's always lovely to have my words be called "meaningless".

This thread was one of the more meaningful threads to me.

Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]


Jomember
517 posts
Location: Sheffield, England


Posted:
In 10 years time, the group of people that find life most difficult will be white, hetrosexual, able-bodied males.

I'm sure of this.

I've no idea what combination of factors are influencing the west in this way, but a large part of it could be:

The aforementioned are the only group of people that are given no real protection from discrimination.

If an employer, just as an example, has to make one of his two staff (of equal ability) redundant would he/she:
a) sack the black lesbian woman in a wheelchair, or
b) sack the straight white male?

the answer would be b) of course. Less hassel.

just my thoughts...

Jo.

Educate yourself in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!


NYCNYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA


Posted:
Jo, the same could be said for hiring. Employers can more easily find an excuse to hire the white guy knowing that they'll never be able to fire the minority. I've seen that happen. An employer will find ANY excuse to make the white guy seem more desireable which they can easily do. This way, they can fire him if need be.

I certainly disagee that the millions of years streak of white male dominance will end any time soon. I still think we're all living in such a minority-liberal world, it could seem that way. Look at the % of minorites completing college and the % of money made by white males. It's astoundingly in favor of the white males.

In a small, liberal world in which Jo and I live, perhaps that's true, but in if you look at the overwhelming majority of people in my country and yours, I think you'd get a much different view of who's got power.

As of Census 2000 America is 75% white. That's a pretty big majority. In Brooklyn, where I grew up, that # is 43% so it certainly can feel like we're a minority.

There are some US states like Montana and Minnesota that are 92% white! This is the "America" that I've never been to. I still think many of us are bias because of the diverse, liberal urban metropolises in which we live.

OK, enough time reading my country's census 2000 data (though it is pretty damn interesting.)

Anyone interested in US demographics should check out: Census 2000 data

To better understand your enemy.

Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]


Jomember
517 posts
Location: Sheffield, England


Posted:
NYC,

Interesting debate... could go on for ages but knowone can really predict the future I guess.

Having re-read my post I think some of the wording could have been a little better.

First I should have mentioned that my opinion goes only for the world I know, being the UK & US. I stand by it and also think it could apply to other countries but only a negligable amount of the world's population.

I also don't have enough work experience to assume that it will all work in the minorities' favour. You make a good example of how it could be reversed, NYC.

I don't think statistics are all that useful when applied here because you could very easily find a statictic to back up any point of view here, or apply many different reasons to a specific statistic.

I guess we'll just have to see. Or maybe we won't be able to see. Too many factors involved. Brain hurts.

Jo.

Educate yourself in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!


KaliBRONZE Member
member
577 posts
Location: Berlin, Germany


Posted:
Hmm....Couple of thought on this issue.

First off, I think that its really sad that feminism is actually defined as working for equal rights for women because by doing that there's already an implication that we don't have them already. I also think that that is something people should really keep in mind when they're discussing women and power in society.

I have had a lot of issues with defining myself as a feminist based on this and on the fact that my sister is a bit of a femi-nazi. Basically, after reading some really good books on feminist and queer theory (they cross over for me) one of the conclusions I came to is this:

I think in a lot of ways the feminist revolution to the extent that it has had a lasting impact on the world and women has only been partial. I think that women in the radical feminist movement have fallen short in finding themselves a new identity. Instead they hae tried (sometimes, not always) to fit into the already well-trodden (sp) steps of men.

Women aren't men. I think that too often our differences are considered weaknesses instead of strengths. We see things differently and think in different ways than men. The corpus collosum(sp) which joins the two hemispheres of the brain is usually much stronger in women, resulting in women seeing "the full picture" when looking at the world, while men are a lot more linear. One isn't better than the other. If you only look, think, and do in circles, you never progress. At the same time, if you only move forward, you miss such a big part of the world. The trick is to find a balance point between the two. Its likd yin/yang, neither exists without the other and each has a small amount of the other in side of it.

So basically, I think the problem is that women really need to work on finding their own paths to empowerment. When I was younger I thought of "girl" as a four letter word, something I didn't want to be. It took me a long time to find the parts of myself that were strong and powerful because they were feminine and also to make peace with the parts of my personality that were masculine. A lot of women I know haven't done this. They are stuck in a kind of a role conflict where they still (whether they admit it or not) think strong woman is an oxymoron. It makes me really sad everytime another woman says to me,"oh, I don't trust girls" or "I can't deal with their shit" because it really makes me wonder what they consider themselves to be and how women are ever really going to gain equality if no one really considers themself to be one.

So there's my thoughts on the subject, even though I'm not sure I stayed on it too well. At any rate, I think the sexism that was referred shouldn't be seen as the voice of feminism worldwide, but a select few insecure, confused women that are trying to figure out what the fuck they should be doing in this world.

Beauty is the conscious sum of all our perversions.-Salvador DaliHope without action is hopeless.


Page:
HOP Newsletter
Sign up to get the latest on sales, new releases and more...