The true nature of the extreme feminist- splintered from thread about urinal games

[seagypsy]

I thought I'd bring this to a new thread since I have a bad habit of unintentionally derailing threads, and I don't want to derail the urinal games thread, its just too funny.

Men used to wear dresses, tights, high heal shoes, girdles, wigs, and make up. Now only women can wear them. If men do they are no longer considered manly. So men started wearing pants with ruffled shirts.... women stole that too. Men started wearing big hats, yep you guessed it. So men started wearing jeans, unhuh, women started wearing jeans. Uberfeminists aren't about women's rights. Not really. They just want to be men.

I like women to be feminine, women are meant to be beautiful so let them be so, feminism is fine in terms of equality but it doesn't mean that some feminists should dictate to all other women what they have to have or how they should behave, I heard some feminists on tv say other women are 'traitors' because they were happy being house wives. I mean I just don't get this mentality, it's the same with strippers if that's what they want to do they why not. Why should they be berated feminists. I think feminists would be far better of spending their time showing other women that they have choice of their lives and to make the most of opportunities rather than being angry at other women for enjoying being women or traditional feminine things. I'm quite happy for both men and women to have equal opportunities, but to me that's what it's about everybody having a chance and not limits. But I think if women are just wanting something because it what they think a man wants then they are doing themselves a diss service. When thinking about you're quite right many things that are perceived as being for women men don't seem to want because they're not seen as manly, so really as women want and are having the things men want then men move to new things but these things are designed for just that purpose to be what men want and as such women are missing out here. The reason is if women want the things men and men don't want things designed for women designers will naturally always design for men, it would be daft not to. Just look at cars, how many are really ever designed for women? 5, 10 percent, maybe not even that. No I think women should enjoy being women, and shouldn't they want things designed for women?, we men enjoy women who are women, not women who look or act like men.

You have a very good point. Having the options to be what you want to be is absolutely important. That is what equality should be. But some extreme feminists, as you say, take it too far and call traditional women traitors. It's funny to me that extreme feminists accuse men of degrading women every chance they get. But the reality is that some feminist degrade women every chance they get. They think the only way a woman is of any worth is if she is behaving like a man. She must not be a mother, she must not take care of the home, she must not cook, she must not accentuate her physical beauty, she must not be soft, she must not be gentle, she must not be nurturing, she must only be harsh, she must only be career oriented, she must only dress in masculine unflattering clothing.

They act like if a woman chooses to stay home and raise her children that she is something that deserves no honor or respect. Men have never as a rule acted as motherhood was a lowly position. Mothers have usually been held in high regard by men. You don't hear men going around telling mothers that they can do the job better or that a monkey can do it. No they acknowledge that women are exceptionally well suited for the job and cower at the idea of having to perform the duties, not because they are despicable but because they fear they are not competent to perform them.

Sure a woman can be a provider. And most women today are confident that they can do that. But that is not all there is to being a father. Anymore than changing diapers is all there is to being a mom. Only the uber feminists seem to think the roles are so damned simple. And only feminists seem to look down on women for being what we are naturally inclined and suited for being. These extreme feminists in my opinion are the worst sexists to ever walk the earth.

It seems to me, that [extreme]feminists are the only ones disgusted by the nature of being feminine.

[adelady]

But feminists as you say take it too far and call traditional women traitors.

They act like if a woman chooses to stay home and raise her children that she is something that deserves no honor or respect.

Well, maybe the comic book character ones do. I've been involved with feminism for so long I now count as a "second wave" feminist. We're the ones who marched down streets in the 1970s and organised refuges for domestic violence and had to argue with every damn man we worked with about our right to a) be there at all b) get the same pay when we were there.

The caricature you paint wasn't true even then. Sure we allowed women who were unconventional in dress and grooming to speak for us. That doesn't mean we all wore overalls and safety pin earrings. I might point out that even those like me in business suit and pearls were derided as 'unfeminine loudmouths' - just because we were saying things people didn't want to hear. Even way back then, most of us were fairly conventional and most of the married ones had children.

If you want to argue about feminism, start with real feminist ideas and real feminists. Not figments of the popular imagination. To someone like me, it comes across as wanting to discuss elephant biology and behaviour based on childhood recollections of 'Dumbo' cartoons.

[seagypsy]

But feminists as you say take it too far and call traditional women traitors.

They act like if a woman chooses to stay home and raise her children that she is something that deserves no honor or respect.

Well, maybe the comic book character ones do. I've been involved with feminism for so long I now count as a "second wave" feminist. We're the ones who marched down streets in the 1970s and organised refuges for domestic violence and had to argue with every damn man we worked with about our right to a) be there at all b) get the same pay when we were there.

The caricature you paint wasn't true even then. Sure we allowed women who were unconventional in dress and grooming to speak for us. That doesn't mean we all wore overalls and safety pin earrings. I might point out that even those like me in business suit and pearls were derided as 'unfeminine loudmouths' - just because we were saying things people didn't want to hear. Even way back then, most of us were fairly conventional and most of the married ones had children.

If you want to argue about feminism, start with real feminist ideas and real feminists. Not figments of the popular imagination. To someone like me, it comes across as wanting to discuss elephant biology and behaviour based on childhood recollections of 'Dumbo' cartoons.

Lol I get what you are saying. But I was referring to extreme feminists. The ones who act like Nazis. Not the ones you are referring to. I tend to think of myself as a feminist as well. But unfortunately the moderate sane minded ones tend to be rather quiet these days having achieved what they were after, equal rights. In today's world the majority of men are supportive of equal rights. The majority of men are not chauvinistic bastards who think we should be denied options.

But there are loud mouthed idiots who claim to be feminists making women look bad. Those who bash men around every corner and call them sexists for acknowledging a woman is a woman. Those who scream "treat us the way you do each other" then get pissed if a man hits a woman back. They are the ones making the rest of us look like idiots. Those of us who really are supporters of what it is to be feminine and have the right to choose should be beating the loud mouthed idiots down so that the rest of the worlds doesn't assume that we all think alike.

basically, the world seems to assume all muslims are terrorists because there doesn't seem to be much of an uproar from muslims in general denouncing the acts of terrorists. You don't see major movements to stifle those who claim islam calls for terrorism. So it leaves the rest of us to assume they are ok with it. Silence is often interpreted as support.

I just think those of us, like yourself, my mother, and grandmother, who do stand for feminism but not at an unfair expense of men should differentiate ourselves from them. They seem to think that to be a feminist you MUST be a misandrist. And they are the loud ones so they are creating the image for us all.

I see in the last line of the OP I accidently left out the word "extreme" I'll edit it in as it what I meant and said earlier in teh post. But I can see where I became unclear at the end.

[adelady]

But I was referring to extreme feminists. ...... They seem to think that to be a feminist you MUST be a misandrist. And they are the loud ones so they are creating the image for us all.

Just who are these people? I hang around feminist type blogs and discussion groups. I've seen people turn up and criticise "misandry" but never got the names or the pronouncements that are, apparently, so objectionable. The only ones I've ever seen (mis)quoted or quoted with an irony bypass are Valerie Solanas and Andrea Dworkin.

(Though there are a lot of "misandry" type comments from people, mostly men, who tell us that most rape claims are made up and /or that women shouldn't vote get or get equal pay and should put up with violence from partners .... because ... men. I see no reason to exert any brain power on responding to those.)

[seagypsy]

But I was referring to extreme feminists. ...... They seem to think that to be a feminist you MUST be a misandrist. And they are the loud ones so they are creating the image for us all.

Just who are these people? I hang around feminist type blogs and discussion groups. I've seen people turn up and criticise "misandry" but never got the names or the pronouncements that are, apparently, so objectionable. The only ones I've ever seen (mis)quoted or quoted with an irony bypass are Valerie Solanas and Andrea Dworkin.

(Though there are a lot of "misandry" type comments from people, mostly men, who tell us that most rape claims are made up and /or that women shouldn't vote get or get equal pay and should put up with violence from partners .... because ... men. I see no reason to exert any brain power on responding to those.)

Our circles are surely different. I hear it mainly from student group leaders on campus and the occasional news anchor, and counselors in battered women shelters that I have stayed in before. I almost never hear anything at all from genuine feminists. I also used to hear it from female leaders in churches I attended. I tend to stay quiet and shake my head. If I make the mistake of standing up for a guy who is wrongly being accused of being a sexist I get threatened, sometimes with violence. Usually just accused of hating women. I don't think the extreme feminists are in positions of power but they shouldn't be ignored. Maybe these women only run in the lower class. (meaning lower economic class). Highly educated people tend to be in higher classes and don't associate with the lower classes. But on college campus you have both the haves and have nots. And the have nots don't seem to know how to control their volume or think before they speak. Unfortunately, we all interact with these ding dongs on a regular basis. and the idiots are the ones men notice the most because people in general tend to notice those who are attacking them more than anyone else. A survival instinct. So too many men get the idea that those women, who they notice, are representative of all of us.

Sadly too many people in general these days watch reality shows. And it's stupid women that manage to get on them. Gotta love Snooky. and sadly young guys who watch that crap get the impression that any woman they see on tv is representative of women in general.

Maybe I over compensate for what I observe in too many women I have encountered. But people tend to over generalize based on a few experiences. For some women, if they get treated badly by a handful of men, they assume it is because all men are jerks. When in reality, she was simply attracting that sort of guy by her own behavior. Or her perceptions of reality are skewed and she was treated fairly, just that she is the one being a demanding little twit.

I have been condemned by women in an abuse shelter for accepting partial responsibility in altercations between myself and the man who beat me. They told me I was conditioned by the man to take the blame. But in reality I was conditioned by my mother to accept responsibility for my own behavior. There were times I baited and taunted my abuser to attack me so that I could prove to him that he was a monster. In the end I even wanted fresh bruises so I could get him arrested. That doesn't mean that I always to blame for my attacks. He should have just left me at times I did those things. And in the beginning I never did those things, he just beat me anyway. So I never said he was innocent. I only acknowledged that I played a hand in my own abuse sometimes.

I have also had men tell me that it would make sense that I hate men now. Only I don't. I respect men as much as I do women. I will never take the side of a woman in a domestic dispute just because she is the weaker sex. I will get the details and decide who is to blame if not both parties. I have had women who call themselves feminists call me a traitor for doing so.

[scheherazade]

It must have been more than 20 years ago that I attended a 'Woman's Convention' in Whitehorse, Yukon. The opening remarks and early part of the evening were both interesting and informative for myself, for I had lived most of my youth in a very small town with limited exposure to feminist activism. In my world, men and women were quite respectful of each other for the most part and women were breaking out of traditional roles and going to work in the mines driving those huge Wabco trucks and the like, without being called unflattering names.

Then came the evening's entertainment and some rather famous female comedian got up and began to lampoon men in the most offensive manner.

I was horrified.

I had come to possibly lend my energy to a cause for sisterhood only to find that the pendulum had swung too far. This was not the path for me.

And so it comes to be that I am allied with no groups or organizations save a lifetime membership to an equine affiliation, since gone dormant as my interest moved to another breed, and it is a condition of my current employment that I pay dues to a union that is well known for it's work in the empowerment of women.

My other memory of radical feminism occured when I was about 16. I had been featured in the local news for some of my non-typical activities, running a trapline and racing sled dogs, and a couple of ladies showed up at our home, thinking that they might interest me in being a role model.

They were extremely liberated, I decided, so much so that they felt that personal grooming was beneath them and they had obviously 'burned the bra' or at least misplaced it. They did not inspire me by word, deed or appearance. I have met a few of the caricatures. They are real.

Fortunately, they are not the majority. The Yukon is well known for it's strong female leaders. Audrey McLaughlin, Judy Gingell and Ione Christensen to name a few.

[adelady]

I don't blame undergraduates who've really only had their parents views and the media's ridiculousness to 'inform' their views. I wouldn't be so pleased if they'd kept such ideas unscathed through a competent academically-based feminism 101 course.

Let's face it, if people base such views on the media and women's magazines, they're absorbing messages like 'women said they could have it all, but they can't' and other such rubbish. I don't call them feminists really, they're the ones who think there's no further 'need' for feminism. They're just parroting what they've heard. Fortunately, this group doesn't ask for less wages than the men around them doing the same job. It never occurs to them to suggest to a landlord or a loan officer that they "need a man" to co-sign their contracts. They just take such rights for granted - which brings a warm glow to my weary heart.

As for women who deal with abuse victims, it might be OK for you personally to have the attitude that you do. But most women who've suffered abuse and taken it for granted do so because, long before the fist met the face, the abusive partner had persuaded them they were worthless and had isolated them from supportive family and friends. (Many of them were also humiliated, dominated or abused by parents or other relatives which set them up nicely as perennial victims for the bloke/s they get involved with as adults.)

I don't blame the counsellors for taking the course of trying to get people to 'see' how they got to where they were. Many such women are defensive and resistant to such ideas. "He really loves me." "No! My parents didn't make me think women are worth less than men." "I am ugly/lazy/incompetent/not good enough/frigid/don't deserve any better." It's quite likely that many such women really need a professional counsellor who can weave PTSD therapy and family/relationship/identity therapy into a coherent package. Seeing as most women in this position are unlikely to have the money or the time or the energy to do any more than keep themselves and their children safe this sort of deeper consideration might best be left for later. The DV people do a reasonable job in desperate circumstances. The fact that anyone and everyone could do a better job is more or less irrelevant. The DV staff are trying to cut down the number of people who leave shelters and finish up dead or in hospital.

[seagypsy]

I don't blame undergraduates who've really only had their parents views and the media's ridiculousness to 'inform' their views. I wouldn't be so pleased if they'd kept such ideas unscathed through a competent academically-based feminism 101 course.

Let's face it, if people base such views on the media and women's magazines, they're absorbing messages like 'women said they could have it all, but they can't' and other such rubbish. I don't call them feminists really, they're the ones who think there's no further 'need' for feminism. They're just parroting what they've heard. Fortunately, this group doesn't ask for less wages than the men around them doing the same job. It never occurs to them to suggest to a landlord or a loan officer that they "need a man" to co-sign their contracts. They just take such rights for granted - which brings a warm glow to my weary heart.

As for women who deal with abuse victims, it might be OK for you personally to have the attitude that you do. But most women who've suffered abuse and taken it for granted do so because, long before the fist met the face, the abusive partner had persuaded them they were worthless and had isolated them from supportive family and friends. (Many of them were also humiliated, dominated or abused by parents or other relatives which set them up nicely as perennial victims for the bloke/s they get involved with as adults.)

I don't blame the counsellors for taking the course of trying to get people to 'see' how they got to where they were. Many such women are defensive and resistant to such ideas. "He really loves me." "No! My parents didn't make me think women are worth less than men." "I am ugly/lazy/incompetent/not good enough/frigid/don't deserve any better." It's quite likely that many such women really need a professional counsellor who can weave PTSD therapy and family/relationship/identity therapy into a coherent package. Seeing as most women in this position are unlikely to have the money or the time or the energy to do any more than keep themselves and their children safe this sort of deeper consideration might best be left for later. The DV people do a reasonable job in desperate circumstances. The fact that anyone and everyone could do a better job is more or less irrelevant. The DV staff are trying to cut down the number of people who leave shelters and finish up dead or in hospital.

I appreciate where you are coming from and do not disagree with you on any counts. I fully understand and agree with your points but they have little to do with the OP. But it seems that you are arguing against points that I have not made. Maybe you are reading too far into what I have posted. I was only talking about women who have extreme anti man attitudes and pass themselves off as feminists.

I was referring to the ones who get pissed off at a woman who decides to be a stay at home mom. I was referring to the women who verbally abuse women who are happy to be housewives. I was referring to women who criticize women who do not verbally abuse their husbands. It is a small demographic but they exist. And they do cause harm to women. They are in my opinion more harmful than men who have a preference for dating traditional women.


Scheherazade, for some reason your post didn't appear on my screen until after I posted this. I'm glad to see that another woman has seen what it is I am referring to. My mother was one of only 3 women working 3 miles underground at Hamilton 2 plant of the Peabody Coal company in Madisonville Kentucky back in the late 70s early 80s. I remember her coming home covered in black soot. She did have to stand up against sexual harrassment and abuse but she stood up to it well. The other two women and her often would violently defend themselves when it was made necessary and struck fear into the hearts of many of the men, respect into the hearts of the others. But you will never hear my mother degrade a woman who chooses to be more traditional. And she will never be seen without her make up on, hair styled, and bra securely in place. She still takes pride in what she produces in the kitchen and encourages me to dress more femininely than I do. lol. She hates that I tend to wear a bandana a lot. (I hate my hair can't help it).

She also takes notice of the women who tend to behave as I described. She will stand up for men's rights as quickly as she will stand up for women's rights and has been called a traitor for doing so. Usually by women who have never once actually experienced sexism.

[adelady]

They were extremely liberated, I decided, so much so that they felt that personal grooming was beneath them and they had obviously 'burned the bra' or at least misplaced it. They did not inspire me by word, deed or appearance.

Liberated? Or just like the ungroomed, shaggy headed raggedy clothed men who lived the same lifestyle.

female comedian got up and began to lampoon men in the most offensive manner.

I was horrified one afternoon of an International Women's Day. They'd set up a really good self-defence demonstration of wing chun. All good so far. And then the teachers showed what they really meant and had a succession of women using the techniques against some men. The roars of approval from the crowd got louder and louder - at which point I was not pleased. In the space of 20 minutes these women had gone from deploring violence to cheering it. I realise these professionally trained men weren't actually hurt but I didn't like it.

But that was one crowd on one day in the heat of the moment. I got over it.

One thing we need to learn from feminism is that women are just like men in one important respect. We make mistakes. We're human. We don't have to be perfect. We don't have to be perfect wives and mothers. We don't have to be perfect feminists. We don't criticise other women for not being perfect wives, mothers, daughters, feminists, whatever. We find ways to learn, to teach, to guide, to stand up for ourselves and others. We try to do better each time.

We do our best and if we're adult about making mistakes, we move on, hopefully having learned something from it.

[adelady]

I was only talking about women who have extreme anti man attitudes and pass themselves off as feminists.

I still don't know who these people are.
Are they naive youngsters who don't know what they're talking about on any topic, let alone grown-up fully understood feminism?
Are they people who've make a mistake or two despite being pretty good women with good attitudes?
Maybe people who've had so many bad experiences with men that no-one would blame them for being negative or afraid or a bit snarky?
Or are they people who have idiosyncratic views that might or might not have anything to do with feminism?

[sculptor]

“A library is a place where you can lose your innocence without losing your virginity.”

[scheherazade]

I have moved on adelady.

I am a person, not a gender, and that is the message that I have subtly been spreading and it seems to be getting across in these parts.

Good night to you both. In 3 1/2 hours I will be getting back up for work. I need to 'sleep fast', lol. I'll look in on the forum on the morrow. Happy discussions....

[adelady]

But people tend to over generalize based on a few experiences. For some women, if they get treated badly by a handful of men, they assume it is because all men are jerks.

Firstly, a lot of women are mistreated by men.

In most western countries, the lifetime risk for a woman of being physically assaulted by a man is about 1 in 6.
For rape, the lifetime risk is about 1 in 5.
If you're in college the rape risk is about 1 in 4.
If you're in the armed forces it's 1 in 3.
For other kinds of unwelcome sexual behaviour, like groping genitals or grabbing breasts or other body parts, it's more like 2 in 3.

Now that doesn't, statistically, mean that the number of abusive men is all that high. (The great majority of rapes are committed by men who do it repeatedly.) What it does mean for women is that they are entirely justified in being wary of men in general. Because we all know that if anything bad happens it will be her own fault for being dressed wrong or behaving wrongly or in the wrong place or out at the wrong time or something that means it's more her fault than his.

And for many women who seem to 'hate' men, it's because they've had, or a friend or relative has had, bad experiences of one kind or more that has made them angry or resentful rather than meek or fearful.

[seagypsy]

But people tend to over generalize based on a few experiences. For some women, if they get treated badly by a handful of men, they assume it is because all men are jerks.

Firstly, a lot of women are mistreated by men.

In most western countries, the lifetime risk for a woman of being physically assaulted by a man is about 1 in 6.
For rape, the lifetime risk is about 1 in 5.
If you're in college the rape risk is about 1 in 4.
If you're in the armed forces it's 1 in 3.
For other kinds of unwelcome sexual behaviour, like groping genitals or grabbing breasts or other body parts, it's more like 2 in 3.

Now that doesn't, statistically, mean that the number of abusive men is all that high. (The great majority of rapes are committed by men who do it repeatedly.) What it does mean for women is that they are entirely justified in being wary of men in general. Because we all know that if anything bad happens it will be her own fault for being dressed wrong or behaving wrongly or in the wrong place or out at the wrong time or something that means it's more her fault than his.

And for many women who seem to 'hate' men, it's because they've had, or a friend or relative has had, bad experiences of one kind or more that has made them angry or resentful rather than meek or fearful.

Again, you are addressing points that I did not make. I never said that few women are mistreated. Even you stated that you witnessed an entire group of women cheering for violence against men. You have convinced yourself that it is an isolated incident perhaps but it is not. There are plenty of women out there who ooze hatred towards men and any woman who sees them as equals. These are the people I am referring to. You say you still don't know who these women are. You seem to assume they belong to a particular demographic but they do not. They are women from all walks of life. Women who simply have aggressive militant personalities which are targeting men.

A similar personality type may target people who eat meat. Some members of PETA will demonstrate this personality type. Not all of them of course. There is a personality type that gives way to fanaticism. I am referring to the women with that personality type who label themselves feminists and target men and moderate thinking women.


But your arguments do make me curious. If it is ok for a woman to be wary of or hate men because she has been harmed by men before, Does that logic not also justify a white person who hates black people because maybe this white person has been beaten up by a black person or had something stolen by a black person? Justifying generalized hate or prejudice seems like a slippery slope.

[seagypsy]

I have moved on adelady.

I am a person, not a gender, and that is the message that I have subtly been spreading and it seems to be getting across in these parts.

Good night to you both. In 3 1/2 hours I will be getting back up for work. I need to 'sleep fast', lol. I'll look in on the forum on the morrow. Happy discussions....

I always look up to people like you, who do not need to demean others in order to feel self worth. It is sad that too many extreme feminists feel like the only way to elevate themselves in society is by attempting to lower the status of men.

I hope you enjoy your rest. Be sure to let us know when you can see aurora borealis. I wish we lived up where you are.

[Neverfly]

I've been groped by women in nightclubs and it was neither solicited nor welcomed. I've had women make all kinds of commentary, and I can't count how many women have talked very sexual and then declared, "Gosh, I sound like a guy, huh?!" No. You sound like every other woman I know.

How many men have women pick their pockets in bars and nightclubs? It's well known to wear a wallet chain or keep cards and cash in a fifth pocket, instead.

When I was a plumber years ago, I got a lot of calls for bar and nightclub womens rooms that had a clogged commode- Due to wallets being thrown away in them.
They don't flush well.
And what about how often women assault men?
About.com: http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

According to one person who commented...

"This supposed 'abuse' - of men by women - is really a right-wing, anti-feminist distraction from what should be our main goal of eliminating domestic violence which in 99% of cases is men abusing women. Too many women fear to speak out against abuse from their partners as it stands. The promotion of this contrived 'violence on men inflicted by women' is only going to exacerbate that problem."

That is quite a skewed view on the subject. What about all the men who fear speaking out? Men who are embarrased. After-all aren't men supposed to be the stronger sex? Or, how about the fact that men who are abused have fewer outlets to use when trying to escape abusive relaitonships. The country is full of shelters for women who are abused. Good luck finding one for men who are abused.

Women may be on the receiving end of abuse more often than men but that doesn't make abuse toward men by women any less important. As Lain said, "all abuse should be of concern."

One thing made clear by most support groups is this: Abuse is the problem, not the gender. Those that are dismissive of abuse by saying something like, "Well, more women get assaulted than men..." are contributing to allowing the problem to persist.

[adelady]

Oh yes. Women do abuse men. But the rate is less than a quarter of the rate for male on female violence. All you need to do is look at the murder statistics. Women are usually murdered by a male partner/family member, and men are in the majority for non-family murders of women as well. Men also are usually murdered by other men.

Abuse is definitely the core problem. Can't remember which thread I said it before, but my view is that we have to start with anti-bullying policies in schools. In particular, starting from the point that "there is no such thing as a bystander". People who'd been educated like this might not have sent a friend of mine away from their front door when she knocked because her husband had raped her. She'd gone to them rather than others because she "knew" they were good Christians. They told her it was not their place to 'interfere'. Plenty of other people have 'walked past' incidents because they didn't know what to do. If you don't know how to intervene or you're scared to do anything yourself, call the cops or a security guard or a crisis centre or a shelter. There's always someone who can help.

[seagypsy]

Maybe I should just repost the OP. This was not a thread intended to debate who gets abused. I was voicing my opinion on what I believe really motivates those particular individuals who claim to be feminists while acting as if they are disgusted by anything that represents actual traditional feminine behavior. Why is this being completely overlooked?

[Neverfly]

Oh yes. Women do abuse men. But the rate is less than a quarter of the rate for male on female violence.

Point made- I guess you didn't read my post at all...

[seagypsy]

Adelady, with all due respect. I realize I am new here and that you are a mod and all, but you are completely off topic and have been since post number 7. I have tried to explain to you several times what I am talking about and at best you have argued that the people I describe don't exist. Any other points you have brought up, while good points, are off topic and have the potential to create an unnecessary flame war if willing participants join in. This is not a debate abotu whether or not some women are abused by some men or vice versa.

Again, I was simply expressing my opinion on what I believe drives those who are militant and abusive in their feminism to the point that they criticise women who prefer a more traditional role and even go so far as to call them traitors. While at the same time speaking out abusively about men and generalizing them all as chauvanists who hate women. IMO, they are worse or at least equal to than anything femininists have ever stood up against and a detriment to all that femininists of the past have managed to accomplish.

[adelady]

I believe really motivates those particular individuals who claim to be feminists while acting as if they are disgusted by anything that represents actual feminine behavior.

Actual feminine behaviour. OK

Is there anything that women do that isn't actual feminine behaviour?

[Neverfly]

Adelady, could you please get in the habit of showing who you are quoting when you make the quote?

[seagypsy]

I believe really motivates those particular individuals who claim to be feminists while acting as if they are disgusted by anything that represents actual feminine behavior.

Actual feminine behaviour. OK

Is there anything that women do that isn't actual feminine behaviour?

You know, I recognize baiting when I see it. I am not going to get into a cat fight with you over this thread. If you cannot respond to the OP in a manner that suggests that you understand what the OP is about then I will just simply pretend you aren't there. Mod or not, I am not going to dignify your attempts to draw me into a flaming debate just because it is what you want to do. From here on out, I am ignoring your participation in this thread. If any other members or mods would like to discuss the OP without drawing this out into a flame war, I will be happy to discuss.

[adelady]

Oh dear. That wasn't baiting, it was an invitation to be concise.

[Neverfly]

Oh dear. That wasn't baiting, it was an invitation to be concise.

To be concise would be - to the point. It would require examination of all sides of the issue- not the one you most desire to come out on top.
I'm sure that you believe that all negativity must be shunned. Like your mentioning of Anti-Bullying in school... And I think that may be the dicsonnect between you two now.

The thing is, as long as you view all negativity as destructive (As if to say, it can never be constructive) you can dismiss other arguments to easily, while pressing your own whether it's applicable or not.
You've dismissed many points about mysandist behavior, while declaring that many of the examples given of behavior simply do not exist. You dismissed the point made in my post right after your own words confirmed what I'd said.

That is, indeed, baiting behavior. An invitation to be... "Concise" would be more fair-handed and less dismissive.

[adelady]

Neverfly

Point made- I guess you didn't read my post at all...

Oh I did. I thought I addressed the issue of abuse being the problem.

I just didn't want to get into the personal-oppression-by-the-other-sex olympics.

If you think relating my own experiences would add to the discussion, I'll consider it. I'm happy to talk about some things if you think it's helpful. I'd need to be convinced it's a good idea in this kind of forum to disclose all.

[Neverfly]

I just didn't want to get into the personal-oppression-by-the-other-sex olympics.

I was referring to this:

One thing made clear by most support groups is this: Abuse is the problem, not the gender. Those that are dismissive of abuse by saying something like, "Well, more women get assaulted than men..." are contributing to allowing the problem to persist.

Oh yes. Women do abuse men. But the rate is less than a quarter of the rate for male on female violence. All you need to do is look at the murder statistics. Women are usually murdered by a male partner/family member, and men are in the majority for non-family murders of women as well. Men also are usually murdered by other men.

Note your response...

For trying to avoid the "Olympics," you seem to have missed the mark. What you choose to disclose is your business... But, I think that if you stay on topic, you might have a bit more luck... I think post number 7 is where you went off on a tangent.

[adelady]

It's not dismissing it, it's putting the context straight. The prime issue is the lack of support for abused men. Men need to take up the political and financial cudgels on behalf of abused men (and their children) who need to get away from violent partners.

I know some people have tried to get a start on this, but it's usually women's shelters trying to find others willing to get something going - because, unsurprisingly, they're the ones who get enquiries about the availability of shelter facilities from people other than their usual clients. It'll be a long hard road, but the success of the women's shelters - despite inadequate provision and constant lack of funds - is one model that can be followed.

I'm not sure how close the model would be for public policy or public support, because the issue for men is almost entirely violence driven. There's not the same social recognition of the problems of financial dependence and lack of alternatives as there is for women, so there'd need to be some differences. Getting just one big donor or one government to set the pace would be ideal, but people can't just sit on their hands and wait for that.

The other big(gest) problem is finding suitable groups of men to act as the drivers for the issue. Far too many men are dismissive or downright insulting about other men in such situations. Getting a few to admit that their mothers or grandmothers - or friends / neighbours of them - were pretty uncontrollable might be one way to get them to face the fact that women can be 'like that'. And getting people to recognise that women can just as easily stalk men as the other way around might be helpful. Too many people would be eager to sack a bloke whose partner caused trouble near business premises rather than act protectively as many do for women employees.

The problem will never go away as long as people continue to be susceptible to mental illness and to the consequences of disastrous neglect or abuse when they were children, but we should offer some safety and comfort to the people they affect so badly.

[seagypsy]

Adelady, it is apparent, that you have no respect for the members when they start a thread. You have repeatedly made every effort to make this thread about something other than what I intended. You are severely off topic and I have reported your post. Please, for a mod, you should know better. If you want to discuss the issues you are bringing up, start your own thread and leave mine alone. You clearly have no comprehension, despite several attempts to re-explain them to you, of what the OP is about. Please step out of the discussion if you are not willing to stay on topic. Thank you.

[adelady]

Sorry, I thought it was obvious that was a reply to neverfly's immediately preceding post.

[seagypsy]

Sorry, I thought it was obvious that was a reply to neverfly's immediately preceding post.

Adelady,

His post said little other than to suggest that you get back on topic. So can you please do that.


Neverfly, if she or anyone else responds with off topic rants please do not respond to them. I would like to discuss the OP. If no one responds to it then, fine no one was interested and I can accept that as a possibility. but I do not want people chased away because someone is trying to make the thread about something more controversial than it has to be.

[Neverfly]

Neverfly,I would like to discuss the OP.

Yes, sorry about that. I went off the topic, too.

[marnixR]

Adelady, it is apparent, that you have no respect for the members when they start a thread. You have repeatedly made every effort to make this thread about something other than what I intended. You are severely off topic and I have reported your post. Please, for a mod, you should know better. If you want to discuss the issues you are bringing up, start your own thread and leave mine alone. You clearly have no comprehension, despite several attempts to re-explain them to you, of what the OP is about. Please step out of the discussion if you are not willing to stay on topic. Thank you.

the 2 golden rules of forum life : (1) don't go out of your way to offend (2) don't go out of your way to feel offended

and since a forum is intended for discussion, there is no such thing as "my" thread - it may be your OP, but how the thread develops depends on the forum dynamics, and overly restricting of what is considered on topic is bound to kill what a forum is supposed to stand for

[scheherazade]

A 'radical feminist moment' happened to one of my male co-workers when I was apprenticing as a first year glazier at our local paint and glass shop. He had been sent down to the grocery store where I now work to repair the entranceway doors. When he returned from the job he was a bit distressed and he sought me out wishing to discuss an incident that had transpired. (I have always found that men are comfortable speaking to me because I don't play the usual 'female' games with them. I keep work and 'play' separate. )

"You're a woman. Maybe you can explain this for me. I was working on the door and a woman with both arms full of groceries was approaching so I stepped off the ladder and held the door for her as I had the electronic eye disabled. She stopped and literally snarled at me, "I can hold my own damn door!" "

"She repeated the remark and glared at me as I stood there holding the door. I didn't know what to do or say, so I just stood there until she left." He seemed really hurt by the experience.

"Wow!", I expressed in amazement. "She was either a very radical feminist or maybe she was just having a really bad day."

"What could I have said or done differently?", he asked in a perplexed tone.

"I think I might have just said 'You're welcome' and nothing more. Manners are never in bad form and it should have been obvious that the door was being serviced. Don't stop holding doors because in my experience, most people appreciate the courtesy, male or female. I hold doors for people all the time."


Personally, I appreciate the protocols and conventions of common courtesy between people of all genders and I was as troubled as my male friend by such a hostile reaction to an everyday event.

[Lynx_Fox]

A good clue about the OP's biased views about role of women:

It seems to me, that

[extreme]feminists are the only ones disgusted by the nature of being feminine.

[question for you]

Now now ladies... why don't we all have a nice cup of Tea and maybe a little cake?


My personal opinion is: that masculinity/femininity are man made mental conceptions that cause a psychological division between the sexes. I think a man's nature transcends what we define as masculine or feminine and so does a womans nature.

We have cultural ways of treating girls like sugar and spice and all things nice and treating boys like slugs and snails and puppy dog tails... our personalities and characters develop in accordance with the education we have recieved, and so we accentuate and develop the aspects of our human nature that we feel are deemed appropriate for members of our own sex.

Without the cultural expectations and without the education in genderism... what differences would we see in the natures of men and women?

The only difference that occurs to me is the different biological roles in reproduction, which are vast differences. The point I'm trying to make is that I think that if you put a man through the life experience of a woman, then he would deal with it and cope with it in the same way as a woman would and vice versa. It's not our nature that is different, it's our life experience which is different, specifically woman have the responsibility of child bearing.

It's like the 'soul nature' is the same, but the experience is different for men and women. Therefore if you want to educate women to have the 'masculine' agressive loud qualities, that isn't hard to do. Or if you want soft pansy men, thats easy enough also. Human nature is transcendent of notions of feminine and masculine, but it is very adaptable and will adapt to any environment it is in. Men and Women have a different 'environment' to live in... the female's 'psychological environment' includes the awareness that the function of the body is to bear children. So therefore a females character will adapt to that, and a males adapts to an awareness of his role in reproduction (Typically he becomes quite loud and excitable).

I think most men have huge respect for women and what they go through in life.

[sculptor]

For those who didn't realize that the above quoted phrase was from Germaine Greer
the reason i placed it there is beacuse seagypsy's start to this thread reminded me of Germaine's words and works------
being a feminist means being a woman
nothing of which precludes being an egalitarian
feminin--------------masculin is a continuum,
and the labled ends of that continuum may actually apply to somebody somewhere lost in the winds of time
But certainly not as in exclusivity to anyone I know(unless of course, the constructs are in doubt, or culturally obfuscatory)
I like to cook and do most of that "chore" during the winter when I cannot work 12 hour days outside---
long winter nights are when my body rests and heals
stains get scrubbed out of the carpets, woodwork gets waxed, and I make what might well be the best spinach/cheese crepes in the county, and cook really good venison steaks and roasts.
My mother was a mentally strong and curious woman, and so were all the women I loved, as is my wife, who pursued her doctorate while i ran a small business, and we shared caring for our twin babies, she'd volunteer to teach early classes, and I'd schedule all my work for afternoons and weekends--(we called it tag team parenting)--which worked out great as she is now a well respected (full)professor and the head of the writing center, and I have the freedom to work on our building in between paying gigs.
A partnership with mutual respect denies nobody the time and strength to follow their hearts desires. We are all like flowers who just need a little loving kindness/support and space and freedom to burst forth into blooms.

"remember, we're all in this together"
...................................
on another note
boo hoo hoo for the suffering of women
in olden days during warfare, it was common for conquering armies/tribes/etc... to kill the men and enslave/rape the women-------the upside of which(for women) is that their genetic code survived, while their men's dna met with a dead end.
so, in a Darwinian sense, women won-------------time and time again, war after war
(you'know part of me wishes I hadn't typed that)

[seagypsy]

A good clue about the OP's biased views about role of women:

It seems to me, that

[extreme]feminists are the only ones disgusted by the nature of being feminine.

Oh? and what do you think I believe the roles of women are? And what proof do you have of those said beliefs. It isn't wise to go around trying to paint someone as something they haven't presented themselves to be. Is this the nature of moderator behavior to presume to know so much about a poster?

Whatever negative assumptions you are making about my beliefs will be quickly dispelled by any reasonable person who continues to read the thread and my subsequent posts.

[Neverfly]

the 2 golden rules of forum life : (1) don't go out of your way to offend (2) don't go out of your way to feel offended

and since a forum is intended for discussion, there is no such thing as "my" thread - it may be your OP, but how the thread develops depends on the forum dynamics, and overly restricting of what is considered on topic is bound to kill what a forum is supposed to stand for

No one has the right to go through life "unoffended." Well, that's true.
This is not the same as permitting one person to commit an offense.

Since we live in the same house, I'm probably at the advantage that I know what it is that S.G. is trying to discuss and by swaying heavily at the outset, it misrepresents what S.G. said, something she doesn't take kindly to and I agree- I don't take kindly to it when others do it to me.

All forums and all threads always make the demand of staying reasonably on topic. Digressions and tangents will happen, but mostly, we try to avoid them and to stay focused- Otherwise nothing would ever get discussed in a reasonable manner and again, it would defeat the purpose of a discussion forum, entirely.

[adelady]

Personally, I appreciate the protocols and conventions of common courtesy between people of all genders and I was as troubled as my male friend by such a hostile reaction to an everyday event.

Gender, age, circumstance. I can remember a similar idiotic moment when I paused to hold open a seriously heavy door for a much older woman. She nearly knocked me over while bustling through objecting to me 'standing in her way'.

The big problem with these incidents is that you can never tell who's going to take an innocent, polite gesture as some kind of personal judgement on them as being feeble or frail or incompetent, rather than a fortunate passing encounter with someone considerate. In fact, I don't know about anyone else but I'm not usually considerate about such things because they happen without thinking.

[seagypsy]

Adelady, it is apparent, that you have no respect for the members when they start a thread. You have repeatedly made every effort to make this thread about something other than what I intended. You are severely off topic and I have reported your post. Please, for a mod, you should know better. If you want to discuss the issues you are bringing up, start your own thread and leave mine alone. You clearly have no comprehension, despite several attempts to re-explain them to you, of what the OP is about. Please step out of the discussion if you are not willing to stay on topic. Thank you.

the 2 golden rules of forum life : (1) don't go out of your way to offend (2) don't go out of your way to feel offended

and since a forum is intended for discussion, there is no such thing as "my" thread - it may be your OP, but how the thread develops depends on the forum dynamics, and overly restricting of what is considered on topic is bound to kill what a forum is supposed to stand for

sure there is not "my thread" but you do have in your rules that we are not to be posting off topic posts. And I have seen threads where members were warned to get back on topic or be moderated. I am new here, but I don't take well to being disrespected by moderators when I haven't even been here long enough to be a problem.

[Neverfly]

Manners are never in bad form and it should have been obvious that the door was being serviced. Don't stop holding doors because in my experience, most people appreciate the courtesy, male or female. I hold doors for people all the time."

Personally, I appreciate the protocols and conventions of common courtesy between people of all genders and I was as troubled as my male friend by such a hostile reaction to an everyday event.

I hold doors for anyone approaching a door right after me - coming or going. I've never had anyone snarl that they can handle the door but if it ever happened, I can think of many rude responses I might give:
1.) Just cough and put out my hand for the tip.
2.) Continue to hold the door, glance appraisingly at their biceps and say, "Sorry, it just didn't look like you could from that lacking muscle mass...."
3.) Say, "It's not for you, it's for the person behind you."
4.) Slam the door shut as soon as they try to shoulder their way through it. Always a fun option. Especially if it's a glass door and you can see the faceplant from the other side.

I hold doors for the same reason I hold elevators or help someone with a flat. Because it's part of our nature to help others out. If someone doesn't want that help, that's fine. It makes it more fun if they happen to screw it up right after while you're still watching.

[seagypsy]

A 'radical feminist moment' happened to one of my male co-workers when I was apprenticing as a first year glazier at our local paint and glass shop. He had been sent down to the grocery store where I now work to repair the entranceway doors. When he returned from the job he was a bit distressed and he sought me out wishing to discuss an incident that had transpired. (I have always found that men are comfortable speaking to me because I don't play the usual 'female' games with them. I keep work and 'play' separate. )

"You're a woman. Maybe you can explain this for me. I was working on the door and a woman with both arms full of groceries was approaching so I stepped off the ladder and held the door for her as I had the electronic eye disabled. She stopped and literally snarled at me, "I can hold my own damn door!" "

"She repeated the remark and glared at me as I stood there holding the door. I didn't know what to do or say, so I just stood there until she left." He seemed really hurt by the experience.

"Wow!", I expressed in amazement. "She was either a very radical feminist or maybe she was just having a really bad day."

"What could I have said or done differently?", he asked in a perplexed tone.

"I think I might have just said 'You're welcome' and nothing more. Manners are never in bad form and it should have been obvious that the door was being serviced. Don't stop holding doors because in my experience, most people appreciate the courtesy, male or female. I hold doors for people all the time."


Personally, I appreciate the protocols and conventions of common courtesy between people of all genders and I was as troubled as my male friend by such a hostile reaction to an everyday event.

It seems you are the one with the strongest grasp of what I was talking about in the OP. I also hold doors for people. Once my son was holding a door for a girl (they were both teens)who was very heavily loaded down with books and a backpack and some loose articles in her hand, and she made a similar remark to my son that your coworker got. So I stepped in her way, told my son to let the door close then stepped out of her way and we stood by watching her struggle for about 5 minutes trying to open the door without dropping anything. She finally broke down and asked me for help. I refused because I also had my hands full but told her my son was free to do so. But I didn't allow him to open the door for her until she apologized. She never smarted off to him again when he opened a door for her.

My mother, a coal miner when I was little, taught me that if a person thinks they are too good to receive your kindness, don't give it to them. There are plenty of people more deserving of your time and effort.

[Neverfly]

Gender, age, circumstance. I can remember a similar idiotic moment when I paused to hold open a seriously heavy door for a much older woman. She nearly knocked me over while bustling through objecting to me 'standing in her way'.

The big problem with these incidents is that you can never tell who's going to take an innocent, polite gesture as some kind of personal judgement on them as being feeble or frail or incompetent, rather than a fortunate passing encounter with someone considerate. In fact, I don't know about anyone else but I'm not usually considerate about such things because they happen without thinking.

Exactly, and saying it's a form of extremist thinking isn't out of hand. When groups of people get together, re-affirming and confirming for eachother that their extremist views are "correct," you will find a group of people engaging in this behavior.

Fortunately, most of us get tempered into a more moderate position from experience in life. But like Valley Girls hanging out in one clique, it's not difficult to get caught up in the heat of the movement and forget who you are or can be, either.
It's not that feminists act so self defensive, they don't. The Feminist movement is about equality, not unfair judgment. It's that a few get caught up under that movement and make the actual feminists look bad.

[sculptor]

Big Bopper - Chantilly Lace - YouTube
(the big bopper, chantilly lace)
..............
I too was once attacked for an act of kindness (probably late '70s)
I was sitting on a bench with my briefcase in the elevated train(el) in chicago headed for the university, when a woman with packages came in, all the seats were full,(packages in both hands, no hands left to hang onto a strap or pole) so I offered her mine, and she started verbally attacking me. At the next stop, an old man got on, and I offered him my seat, "thank you" he said as I got up and he sat down. I moved toward the doors, and the woman followed me still berating me. I said, "blame it on my mother as she is the one who taught me to be polite" which seemed to enrage this young woman even more. So, i got off at the next stop, and waited for the next train.........

not everyone in this world is totally freaking insane
and, not everybody ain't insane

[seagypsy]

Big Bopper - Chantilly Lace - YouTube
(the big bopper, chantilly lace)
..............
I too was once attacked for an act of kindness (probably late '70s)
I was sitting on a bench with my briefcase in the elevated train(el) in chicago headed for the university, when a woman with packages came in, all the seats were full,(packages in both hands, no hands left to hang onto a strap or pole) so I offered her mine, and she started verbally attacking me. At the next stop, an old man got on, and I offered him my seat, "thank you" he said as I got up and he sat down. I moved toward the doors, and the woman followed me still berating me. I said, "blame it on my mother as she is the one who taught me to be polite" which seemed to enrage this young woman even more. So, i got off at the next stop, and waited for the next train.........

not everyone in this world is totally freaking insane
and, not everybody ain't insane

Now it seems my point is getting across. There are radical idealists of all types out there who get so caught up, as Neverfly said, and they get so focused on attacking what they see as the enemy that they forget what the battle was about. The feminist movement, in my opinion, is much like a religious movement. A noble movement but religious in the sense that the feminists are holding to an idealistic concept of social conduct. Religion is for the most part, once you get past the diety issue, a set of idealistic rules for how society should conduct itself. Feminists hold a strong, (honorable and accurate imo) belief that women are equal to men. This would be the original intent of the feminist movement. But some followers take it a step further and distort the original intent to mean that men are somehow evil bastards out to rule over women with an iron fist. And some may have been and some may still be, but I don't think that personality has been the average mentality of men for a long time, at least not in the USA. When a person who claims to be a feminist takes that route they are no longer supporting equality of the sexes. They are pushing a dogma that men are less than women, that men are mindless aggressors, that men are nothing more than overbearing apes out to use us as tools for their pleasure. This is a mindset as detrimental to equality as the mentality it supposes to fight. It makes women appear as vengeful spiteful emotional nutjobs.And for those men out there who are of the mentality that women are too weak minded or bodied to be equal, it confirms their beliefs and perpetuates the sexist mentality on both sides.

[sculptor]

Feminists hold a strong, (honorable and accurate imo) belief that women are equal to men. This would be the original intent of the feminist movement.

And, of that part, I thought, "just about time" I was raised by (most of the time) a single mother who was paid a rediculously low wage considering her abilities and work ethic, and treated like a second class citizen by most of her "bosses" save for Rolly Ford who gave her the respect and responsibilities which she earned--'twas grand for a few years there, but then he transfered himself to europe to run abbot international, and she was stuck with one arogant ignorant bastard after another, till finally, she quit to be with her last husband who had cancer---after he died, she applied for her old job back, and abbot lab, offered to place her in the steno pool---------and she thought "I've had just about enough of this crap" and quit for good.

As I grew in wisdom, I remembered just how painful it was to watch this wonderfully intelligent and hard working woman constantly beat down by chauvinistic jerks with ego problems. They damned near broke her spirit, and left psychic scars that would never heal.

To a certain extent we are all prejudiced sexist, raceist, ethnocentrist, etc. cliquish and clannish. But that doesn't mean that we cannot fly over that abyss.

[arKane]

Oh yes. Women do abuse men. But the rate is less than a quarter of the rate for male on female violence.

Point made- I guess you didn't read my post at all...

I did and it was a very good point. Men are a lot less likely to report being abused by a woman. So the statistics are probably not very accurate on this subject.

One thing that might happen a lot more than one would think is the man finally can't take the abuse anymore and looses it and smacks the woman and she reports him. She was the abuser, but he got the credit for it.

[seagypsy]

Feminists hold a strong, (honorable and accurate imo) belief that women are equal to men. This would be the original intent of the feminist movement.

And, of that part, I thought, "just about time" I was raised by (most of the time) a single mother who was paid a rediculously low wage considering her abilities and work ethic, and treated like a second class citizen by most of her "bosses" save for Rolly Ford who gave her the respect and responsibilities which she earned--'twas grand for a few years there, but then he transfered himself to europe to run abbot international, and she was stuck with one arogant ignorant bastard after another, till finally, she quit to be with her last husband who had cancer---after he died, she applied for her old job back, and abbot lab, offered to place her in the steno pool---------and she thought "I've had just about enough of this crap" and quit for good.

As I grew in wisdom, I remembered just how painful it was to watch this wonderfully intelligent and hard working woman constantly beat down by chauvinistic jerks with ego problems. They damned near broke her spirit, and left psychic scars that would never heal.

To a certain extent we are all prejudiced sexist, raceist, ethnocentrist, etc. cliquish and clannish. But that doesn't mean that we cannot fly over that abyss.

I agree with you. And it is for reasons of what your mom went through, what my mom went through, that we should not allow those who skew the vision for gender equality to go unchallenged because they set back the efforts of those who are doing what they can to prevent a relapse into the past. Extremism never accomplishes anything and only creates more resistance.

[seagypsy]

Oh yes. Women do abuse men. But the rate is less than a quarter of the rate for male on female violence.

Point made- I guess you didn't read my post at all...

I did and it was a very good point. Men are a lot less likely to report being abused by a woman. So the statistics are probably not very accurate on this subject.

One thing that might happen a lot more than one would think is the man finally can't take the abuse anymore and looses it and smacks the woman and she reports him. She was the abuser, but he got the credit for it.

I know this guy up in Indiana who sadly gets involved with one abusive woman after another. I have actually seen him assaulted by 3 different women. And when the cops get called, once by me, the cops arrest him. He can be covered in bloody scratches and bruises and she would have no marks at all, as well as witnesses telling the cops that he was minding his own business when she came home and attacked him over the trash not being taken out or something. And still the cops take him in because she CLAIMS he pushed her. It makes no difference that the supposed pushing was him putting his arms up to block blows from her. He now has a long rap sheet of domestic violence when he has never hit a woman even once.

[sculptor]

sexism rears it's ugly head yet once again

[arKane]

I know this guy up in Indiana who sadly gets involved with one abusive woman after another. I have actually seen him assaulted by 3 different women. And when the cops get called, once by me, the cops arrest him. He can be covered in bloody scratches and bruises and she would have no marks at all, as well as witnesses telling the cops that he was minding his own business when she came home and attacked him over the trash not being taken out or something. And still the cops take him in because she CLAIMS he pushed her. It makes no difference that the supposed pushing was him putting his arms up to block blows from her. He now has a long rap sheet of domestic violence when he has never hit a woman even once.

I think most abusive women are not true feminist. I like to think of feminist as women trying to be treated fairly in both the workplace and at home. That doesn't mean they hate men but if they do the same job as a man they want to be paid the same wage. However that doesn't mean abusive women won't claim to be feminist if they can get away with it.

[Neverfly]

I think most abusive women are not true feminist.
However that doesn't mean abusive women won't claim to be feminist if they can get away with it.

Bingo.

Edit: I need to get used to that "Like" button. Feels like I'm neglecting people.

[adelady]

And still the cops take him in because she CLAIMS he pushed her. It makes no difference that the supposed pushing was him putting his arms up to block blows from her. He now has a long rap sheet of domestic violence when he has never hit a woman even once.

I really think that's it's going to take a lot more training and a lot more time for men to be heard on this issue than it did for women. It took decades for the penny to drop that all those nuisance 'domestics' that police often refused to bother themselves with had a close statistical relationship with hospitalisations and murders of women. And that started out in the days when there was no such thing as an AVO or whatever it might be called in different jurisdictions to have an official acknowledgement that a particular person was dangerous. Considering how rarely women escalate to murdering partners, men don't even have those sorts of statistics to back them up.

Maybe a different tactic - which people would have to adopt as a standardised sort of thing - would be for friends, neighbours or other witnesses to attend police stations and ask for advice about violent women. Ask about how a man would go about getting an Apprehended Violence Order or whatever it might be called. Ask about refuges or other safe places for a man and his children. This would take the heat out of on-the-spot knee-jerk responses that it's always men who instigate violent incidents. Getting police and others to think about the issue when they're not dealing with agitated or injured people might lead to some improvements. In some places, at some times, with some forces.

Considering how unsympathetic many men (and women for that matter) are about men being assaulted by women I'm not terribly hopeful about police doing a good job on this. Refuges might be a more fruitful first avenue.

[seagypsy]

And still the cops take him in because she CLAIMS he pushed her. It makes no difference that the supposed pushing was him putting his arms up to block blows from her. He now has a long rap sheet of domestic violence when he has never hit a woman even once.

I really think that's it's going to take a lot more training and a lot more time for men to be heard on this issue than it did for women. It took decades for the penny to drop that all those nuisance 'domestics' that police often refused to bother themselves with had a close statistical relationship with hospitalisations and murders of women. And that started out in the days when there was no such thing as an AVO or whatever it might be called in different jurisdictions to have an official acknowledgement that a particular person was dangerous. Considering how rarely women escalate to murdering partners, men don't even have those sorts of statistics to back them up.

Maybe a different tactic - which people would have to adopt as a standardised sort of thing - would be for friends, neighbours or other witnesses to attend police stations and ask for advice about violent women. Ask about how a man would go about getting an Apprehended Violence Order or whatever it might be called. Ask about refuges or other safe places for a man and his children. This would take the heat out of on-the-spot knee-jerk responses that it's always men who instigate violent incidents. Getting police and others to think about the issue when they're not dealing with agitated or injured people might lead to some improvements. In some places, at some times, with some forces.

Considering how unsympathetic many men (and women for that matter) are about men being assaulted by women I'm not terribly hopeful about police doing a good job on this. Refuges might be a more fruitful first avenue.

In my friend's case the police didn't even deny that she was the the wrong one but what they would do was tell him, "Come on guy, do you really wanna be the guy who calls the police cuz he gets his ass kicked by a girl? If we take her in then you will be a laughing stock. We are doing you a favor by taking you to jail rather than her." I only wish I could have gotten that conversation on video so I could take it to the press. But without proof of it the press won't touch it out of fear of being held libel. Maybe a big newspaper would go for it but in a small town with less than 5000 population they just don't bother. Things happen in small towns that never seem to get the public attention, including corruption motivated arrests of news paper reporters.

In a small town, going to the police for help will only get the good ole boys laughin at you.

[Neverfly]

Considering how rarely women escalate to murdering partners, men don't even have those sorts of statistics to back them up.

Wives Also Kill Husbands--Quite Often -- Alan M. Dershowitz

Maybe a different tactic - which people would have to adopt as a standardised sort of thing - would be for friends, neighbours or other witnesses to attend police stations and ask for advice about violent women. Ask about how a man would go about getting an Apprehended Violence Order or whatever it might be called. Ask about refuges or other safe places for a man and his children. This would take the heat out of on-the-spot knee-jerk responses that it's always men who instigate violent incidents. Getting police and others to think about the issue when they're not dealing with agitated or injured people might lead to some improvements. In some places, at some times, with some forces.

Considering how unsympathetic many men (and women for that matter) are about men being assaulted by women I'm not terribly hopeful about police doing a good job on this. Refuges might be a more fruitful first avenue.

Exactly, yes, it's like it did a 180.
Women were ignored and when we stopped ignoring them, we started ignoring the men. Yet, it's been well established in tales from the middle ages that men have been abused by women in a variety of ways.
Until our society stops looking at gender entirely, it may not change. Perhaps gay equality and intersex recognition and equality will, in the long run, help recondition the thinking about gender roles.

Me, I'm a bit old fashioned. I am a man. I like to do what men like to do- work with power tools and on cars, I like to be held accountable if the lawn is too high, but don't tell me I need to get the clothes washed and hung up. If I do it- it's a loving favor.
Old fashioned...
Just because there are gender roles does not mean that it's sexist- anymore than qualifications on a job resume. If my wife is better at working on a car, I'll step aside and let her have at it (And have even done so when I got stumped or she was more capable than I was at getting something done.) It's more a matter of seeing a gender role as less than another role because of gender and that's just foolish.

[adelady]

Come on guy, do you really wanna be the guy who calls the police cuz he gets his ass kicked by a girl?

Groan.

And if he didn't want to get his ass kicked and really used his fists? He'd not "be a laughing stock" but he would be a violent criminal, rather than just accused of being one. Good option. Not.

(You'd think these blokes got their scripts written for them by a comic strip meant for 11 year-olds. It''s a wonder they didn't mention girl cooties.)

[arKane]

And still the cops take him in because she CLAIMS he pushed her. It makes no difference that the supposed pushing was him putting his arms up to block blows from her. He now has a long rap sheet of domestic violence when he has never hit a woman even once.

I really think that's it's going to take a lot more training and a lot more time for men to be heard on this issue than it did for women. It took decades for the penny to drop that all those nuisance 'domestics' that police often refused to bother themselves with had a close statistical relationship with hospitalisations and murders of women. And that started out in the days when there was no such thing as an AVO or whatever it might be called in different jurisdictions to have an official acknowledgement that a particular person was dangerous. Considering how rarely women escalate to murdering partners, men don't even have those sorts of statistics to back them up.

Maybe a different tactic - which people would have to adopt as a standardised sort of thing - would be for friends, neighbours or other witnesses to attend police stations and ask for advice about violent women. Ask about how a man would go about getting an Apprehended Violence Order or whatever it might be called. Ask about refuges or other safe places for a man and his children. This would take the heat out of on-the-spot knee-jerk responses that it's always men who instigate violent incidents. Getting police and others to think about the issue when they're not dealing with agitated or injured people might lead to some improvements. In some places, at some times, with some forces.

Considering how unsympathetic many men (and women for that matter) are about men being assaulted by women I'm not terribly hopeful about police doing a good job on this. Refuges might be a more fruitful first avenue.

Most female abusers are not all that physical, but mental abuse is not given enough attention. I have to tell you it's really a sad relationship when a good man starts thinking he might have to kill a woman to save his life. As much as most people will think it's just to easy for a man to just dump the woman and move on, they have no clue at all as to what's really going on. Once an abusing woman considers you to be her property, you had better believe she's not going to let you go easily.

[adelady]

mental abuse is not given enough attention

True. But these matters are not for police, they're for therapists, counsellors, refuges and lawyers - leading to separation and divorce if necessary.

The other thing to remember is that physical abuse by men is usually preceded by, and always accompanied by, mental abuse of women. It's much easier to get a women to believe she 'deserved it' if she's already been demoralised. If you dislike the public demeaning or humiliation (or teasing) a bloke subjects his female partner to, recheck what you know of them. Either he's already abused her or he's willing to harm her if the inclination ever strikes him.

One thing I'd really like to see for everyone and that's to eliminate the idea of teasing as harmless fun. It's not. It's a form of bullying. We know it goes on among children and sometimes between family members. It's never pretty, it's often extremely unfunny and it's just as harmful a form of bullying as most others. We should stop it ourselves. We should step in and stop it when we see others doing it. "Just joking" is neither an excuse nor a justification. Woman, man, parent, child. Just stop it.

[Neverfly]

The other thing to remember is that physical abuse by men is usually preceded by, and always accompanied by, mental abuse of women. It's much easier to get a women to believe she 'deserved it' if she's already been demoralised. If you dislike the public demeaning or humiliation (or teasing) a bloke subjects his female partner to, recheck what you know of them. Either he's already abused her or he's willing to harm her if the inclination ever strikes him.

Adelady, you're really going to need to back this up.
Because this comes across as claiming that men that are abused by women actually abused the women first. ArCane referred to the mental abuse imposed on men by women. It's as if you didn't really read his post at all or misunderstood it. It's as if you are saying that he was referring to men mentally abusing women. He siad the opposite.
Now, this isn't an attack so take it in stride, but think about how you're coming across here. Are you honestly claiming that abused men are just abusers? I'm sorry, but this insults our intelligence.

Abuse of all kinds happens from people of all shapes, sizes and genders or ages.
It does not good to blame any age, size or gender, or to ignore abuse dealt by one in order to victimize the other.

[adelady]

No. Does it read like that? I was merely doing the same for mental abuse as for physical. Showing that both sexes do both things.

Yes, women abuse men physically. Yes, men abuse women mentally.

I didn't say anything about abused men being abusers - unless there's a hell of a typo. Whoops. I deleted something between the 1st and 2nd paragraph which I now entirely forget. I thought it was superfluous but clearly not. Brevity did not enhance clarity just this once. (I have a real horror of letting my normally verbose writing run away with me. Should have let it go this time.)

[seagypsy]

Considering how rarely women escalate to murdering partners, men don't even have those sorts of statistics to back them up.

Wives Also Kill Husbands--Quite Often -- Alan M. Dershowitz

Maybe a different tactic - which people would have to adopt as a standardised sort of thing - would be for friends, neighbours or other witnesses to attend police stations and ask for advice about violent women. Ask about how a man would go about getting an Apprehended Violence Order or whatever it might be called. Ask about refuges or other safe places for a man and his children. This would take the heat out of on-the-spot knee-jerk responses that it's always men who instigate violent incidents. Getting police and others to think about the issue when they're not dealing with agitated or injured people might lead to some improvements. In some places, at some times, with some forces.

Considering how unsympathetic many men (and women for that matter) are about men being assaulted by women I'm not terribly hopeful about police doing a good job on this. Refuges might be a more fruitful first avenue.

Exactly, yes, it's like it did a 180.
Women were ignored and when we stopped ignoring them, we started ignoring the men. Yet, it's been well established in tales from the middle ages that men have been abused by women in a variety of ways.
Until our society stops looking at gender entirely, it may not change. Perhaps gay equality and intersex recognition and equality will, in the long run, help recondition the thinking about gender roles.

Me, I'm a bit old fashioned. I am a man. I like to do what men like to do- work with power tools and on cars, I like to be held accountable if the lawn is too high, but don't tell me I need to get the clothes washed and hung up. If I do it- it's a loving favor.
Old fashioned...
Just because there are gender roles does not mean that it's sexist- anymore than qualifications on a job resume. If my wife is better at working on a car, I'll step aside and let her have at it (And have even done so when I got stumped or she was more capable than I was at getting something done.) It's more a matter of seeing a gender role as less than another role because of gender and that's just foolish.

LOL. Neverfly you are painting yourself poorly here. It should be known to everyone here that Neverfly, my husband, regularly does domestic chores around the house. He does it without complaint and without beign asked. And he never orders me around either. And it is true, that he will sometimes get stumped on some problem with a car and ask for my input. Sometimes I think of something from a different angle that he hadn't considered that works and sometimes all my useless groaning is simply added to his own. But he never acts as if he feels castrated by my skills in jobs traditonally held by men. And will often brag to his male customers about how lucky he feels to have a woman who also isn't so traditional in the sense that getting dirty doesn't bother me and I love getting under a car and helping him drop a transmission. Neverfly and I don't explicitely state who's role it is to do any particular household duty. Every duty is on both of us equally. Obviously there are some duties he is better suited for due to his strength but it doesn't mean that I won't try to do the things he is better at. Nor does it mean he won't do the duties I am physicaly better suited for. We both just do what needs to be done.

Oh, can you clarify the part of your post that I bolded above. I can't for the life of me make out the meaning of that sentence.

Most female abusers are not all that physical, but mental abuse is not given enough attention. I have to tell you it's really a sad relationship when a good man starts thinking he might have to kill a woman to save his life. As much as most people will think it's just to easy for a man to just dump the woman and move on, they have no clue at all as to what's really going on. Once an abusing woman considers you to be her property, you had better believe she's not going to let you go easily.

This is true. Female abusers are usually more cunning and manipulative. And often use the law against a man like the girl in my example. There are those who will threaten to accuse a guy of rape or assault when it suits them simply because escaping a charge of rape or assault against a woman is a charge that even if acquitted will follow them around socially forever. In our culture, the accusation of a crime is almost all it takes to be proven guilty in the eyes of peers. Look what happened to Michael Jackson. He was convicted in the newspapers before he ever went to trial. Was acquitted but still today people here label him as a child molester.

Then there are the people that use childrens as pawns to punish former spouses.

In regards to a man feeling the need to kill a woman to spare his own life or because she has mentally abused him and made him less than sane, I don't doubt that many of the cases of men killing their wife is a result of that very thing. But those cases are used in statistics to prove how abusive men are towards women. Women have the battered wife syndrome defense that htey can fall back on in order to justify them killingtheir husband. And woman can claim that defense and gain the sympathy of the jury even if the guy never really abused her. But he is dead and not present to defend himself against her claims. And the default setting is to feel sorry for the woman. But if a man shows up in court with the defense that she was mentally or physically abusing him the default setting among the jury is to mock a man who claims a woman would hurt him. The default belief is that women CANNOT abuse men. And so the man in court is assumed to be a lying abusive prick that killed a poor helpless woman in a fit of macho rage.

These extreme ideas are hurtful to our society. Too many laws have a gender bias. We need to start looking at cases with a blindness towards gender. If one person abuses another, it should be acknowledged and dealt with regardless of what gender the victim of the abuse is.

[Neverfly]

LOL. Neverfly you are painting yourself poorly here. It should be known to everyone here that Neverfly, my husband, regularly does domestic chores around the house. He does it without complaint and without beign asked. And he never orders me around either. And it is true, that he will sometimes get stumped on some problem with a car and ask for my input. Sometimes I think of something from a different angle that he hadn't considered that works and sometimes all my useless groaning is simply added to his own. But he never acts as if he feels castrated by my skills in jobs traditonally held by men. And will often brag to his male customers about how lucky he feels to have a woman who also isn't so traditional in the sense that getting dirty doesn't bother me and I love getting under a car and helping him drop a transmission. Neverfly and I don't explicitely state who's role it is to do any particular household duty. Every duty is on both of us equally. Obviously there are some duties he is better suited for due to his strength but it doesn't mean that I won't try to do the things he is better at. Nor does it mean he won't do the duties I am physicaly better suited for. We both just do what needs to be done.

Well spoke. Now, git in the kitchen and makes me a sammich.

Oh, can you clarify the part of your post that I bolded above. I can't for the life of me make out the meaning of that sentence.

A curse upon my fat typing fingers.
Try this again:
I think some people see gender roles as demeaning somehow and I think this stems from bigots declaring that a woman should not have a job in science, for example, "because she belongs in the kitchen." It's foolish. What gender roles any of us may take in our domestic life has no bearing in our careers. What if Helen Fisher had to stay in the kitchen? Hypatia?

[seagypsy]

LOL. Neverfly you are painting yourself poorly here. It should be known to everyone here that Neverfly, my husband, regularly does domestic chores around the house. He does it without complaint and without beign asked. And he never orders me around either. And it is true, that he will sometimes get stumped on some problem with a car and ask for my input. Sometimes I think of something from a different angle that he hadn't considered that works and sometimes all my useless groaning is simply added to his own. But he never acts as if he feels castrated by my skills in jobs traditonally held by men. And will often brag to his male customers about how lucky he feels to have a woman who also isn't so traditional in the sense that getting dirty doesn't bother me and I love getting under a car and helping him drop a transmission. Neverfly and I don't explicitely state who's role it is to do any particular household duty. Every duty is on both of us equally. Obviously there are some duties he is better suited for due to his strength but it doesn't mean that I won't try to do the things he is better at. Nor does it mean he won't do the duties I am physicaly better suited for. We both just do what needs to be done.

Well spoke. Now, git in the kitchen and makes me a sammich.

Oh, can you clarify the part of your post that I bolded above. I can't for the life of me make out the meaning of that sentence.

A curse upon my fat typing fingers.
Try this again:
I think some people see gender roles as demeaning somehow and I think this stems from bigots declaring that a woman should not have a job in science, for example, "because she belongs in the kitchen." It's foolish. What gender roles any of us may take in our domestic life has no bearing in our careers. What if Helen Fisher had to stay in the kitchen? Hypatia?

I'll paraphrase to be sure I understand you. Are you saying:

That applying limitations on acceptable activities based on gender is ridiculous. But some people believe that if they partake in a role that is attributed, traditionally, to one gender or another, that they acquire a particular rank or status among others based on the gender role they choose and that traditionally women were and sometimes still are seen as second class and so to participate in traditionally female activities is to voluntarily accept a lower position in society. And you are stating that this mentality of associating gender role with rank in society is harmful and detrimental to society and individuals.

[scheherazade]

From my own experience, a brief snapshot of how quick our society is to assume that men are abusive and that women will often deny abuse for their own reasons.

I was working with a horse and the black flies were just wicked, the bug dope doing nothing to dissuade the vicious insects. My mare tossed her head in vexation and caught me full in the face, driving my bottom lip between my lower front teeth, causing a nasty gash which swole up and became very unsightly just before we were due to drive from Whitehorse to Ontario to visit family. I doctored my wound several times daily and found it quite challenging to eat so usually ordered soup at each place we stopped along the journey.

Without exception, every where we stopped, I was greeted with sympathy and concern, while my devoted husband was treated to the worst service he has ever received. The serving staff were predominently women and they just assumed that he was a wife beater and that my story of having been struck by a horse flinging it's head in frustration was merely a better 'cover story' than the usual "I hit my head on the kitchen cupboard door."

It was very disconcerting that so many people happily assumed that they were being 'kind' to me and 'giving that jerk what he deserved'. It certainly gave us both cause to wonder why this seemed to be the prevailing attitude.

[seagypsy]

From my own experience, a brief snapshot of how quick our society is to assume that men are abusive and that women will often deny abuse for their own reasons.

I was working with a horse and the black flies were just wicked, the bug dope doing nothing to dissuade the vicious insects. My mare tossed her head in vexation and caught me full in the face, driving my bottom lip between my lower front teeth, causing a nasty gash which swole up and became very unsightly just before we were due to drive from Whitehorse to Ontario to visit family. I doctored my wound several times daily and found it quite challenging to eat so usually ordered soup at each place we stopped along the journey.

Without exception, every where we stopped, I was greeted with sympathy and concern, while my devoted husband was treated to the worst service he has ever received. The serving staff were predominently women and they just assumed that he was a wife beater and that my story of having been struck by a horse flinging it's head in frustration was merely a better 'cover story' than the usual "I hit my head on the kitchen cupboard door."

It was very disconcerting that so many people happily assumed that they were being 'kind' to me and 'giving that jerk what he deserved'. It certainly gave us both cause to wonder why this seemed to be the prevailing attitude.

Neverfly and I run into that a lot especially when I help him work on cars. I bruise very easily and more often than not, in helping him I will be covered in bruises around my wrists from getting them into tight places between engine components that his hands are too big to fit. So I actually avoid washing up if we go out during a day while working ona car. I will keep the grease on my arms to conceal the marks and to show that I am not some weak waif of a woman who can't handle herself. Sometimes, I will even act bossy towards him so that people will see I have no fear of him, if I am unable to hide the bruises. And he never retaliates against my bossiness. I have never told him that's why I do that. I guess he knows now. But I do what I can to protect him from unspoken accusations of abuse. I prefer they think he is married to a bitch than to think I am married to an abuser.

[adelady]

It certainly gave us both cause to wonder why this seemed to be the prevailing attitude.

Doesn't surprise me. Having worked in an office of over a thousand people, the word usually got around fairly smartly when a woman who was wearing heavier make-up than usual on a particular day also had flowers sent to the office from her partner that same day. Everybody knew that the makeup was covering a black eye and the flowers were sent to the office so they couldn't be thrown back in the bloke's face. Though they often went into the bin at the end of the day.

Other "uncoveruppable" injuries were more often nursed at home for a day or two, so the mark was less and the cover story was better rehearsed by the time she got back to work.

[seagypsy]

It certainly gave us both cause to wonder why this seemed to be the prevailing attitude.

Doesn't surprise me. Having worked in an office of over a thousand people, the word usually got around fairly smartly when a woman who was wearing heavier make-up than usual on a particular day also had flowers sent to the office from her partner that same day. Everybody knew that the makeup was covering a black eye and the flowers were sent to the office so they couldn't be thrown back in the bloke's face. Though they often went into the bin at the end of the day.

Other "uncoveruppable" injuries were more often nursed at home for a day or two, so the mark was less and the cover story was better rehearsed by the time she got back to work.

This is the point that was being made. Is it not possible that he sent flowers because she took more time to look pretty. And maybe he feared that other men would be checking her out so made it a point to send flowers so other men would see she had someone. I know when I make myself up more than usual, Neverfly gets exceedingly affectionate before I go out. Maybe I am just more attractive or maybe he wants me to remember how much he loves me when other guys are flirting with me. But men display jealousy in different ways. There are constructive ways adn there are destructive ways.

In this case, she may have even made herself up more to make him jealous because of a disagreement the night before and he is just worried he will lose her and so is taking any step he can to show he loves her.

But your first assumption was that she was hiding a black eye and he was kissing ass with the flowers. The assumption is made on too few available facts. Now if you knew more intimate details about the situation that is different but no other details than heavy make up and a bouquet of flowers is all you shared with us.

edit: It may be good to know, that from my experience having been beaten by my first husband, that there is no amount of make up that can hide a black eye. a black eye is never just color. it is also swelling and often blood in the sclera of the eye itself.

[Neverfly]

And he never retaliates against my bossiness. I have never told him that's why I do that. I guess he knows now.

I kinda figured that out.

Doesn't surprise me. Having worked in an office of over a thousand people, the word usually got around fairly smartly when a woman who was wearing heavier make-up than usual on a particular day also had flowers sent to the office from her partner that same day. Everybody knew that the makeup was covering a black eye and the flowers were sent to the office so they couldn't be thrown back in the bloke's face. Though they often went into the bin at the end of the day.

Other "uncoveruppable" injuries were more often nursed at home for a day or two, so the mark was less and the cover story was better rehearsed by the time she got back to work.

I'm a little annoyed, here. You took what she said and then used it to confirm the bias. How, exactly does that work?

Yes, there are jerks out there that beat on women. It's true. It's also true that women beat on men, at times. It's true that women will manipulate and mentally abuse a male partner.

Yet, you've been dismissive of the other side and take each post as an opportunity to show that women are victims of men. You have done it with every single post in this thread this far, including misrepresenting what arKane had said by presenting the opposite.

Why?

[adelady]

he sent flowers because she took more time to look pretty.

Nuh uh. "Look pretty" doesn't go with heavier make-up. It doesn't account for young attractive women who normally need no more than mascara and lipstick suddenly turning up ready to perform in plastered on pancake stage makeup. And, for most of them, it was a good performance. Never said anything. The real giveaway is the not-as-happy-as-you'd-expect reception of the flowers.

This scenario is a cliche. The reason it's a cliche is because it's familiar to anyone who's spent more than a couple of years in large workplaces with lots of women. Heavy makeup plus flowers plus it's not a habit, not a birthday, not an anniversary?

[seagypsy]

he sent flowers because she took more time to look pretty.

Nuh uh. "Look pretty" doesn't go with heavier make-up. It doesn't account for young attractive women who normally need no more than mascara and lipstick suddenly turning up ready to perform in plastered on pancake stage makeup. And, for most of them, it was a good performance. Never said anything. The real giveaway is the not-as-happy-as-you'd-expect reception of the flowers.

This scenario is a cliche. The reason it's a cliche is because it's familiar to anyone who's spent more than a couple of years in large workplaces with lots of women. Heavy makeup plus flowers plus it's not a habit, not a birthday, not an anniversary?

These are details you didn't previously disclose. I mean in regards to her usually not needing much make up or the fact that she wasn't happy to get the flowers. Sure that may give you more reason to suspect something sinister but it is still speculation. But that is not justification for assuming any woman with a mark and an explanation of how she got it is lying to cover up abuse. This is as dangerous an assumption as automatically deducing that a little boy with a bruise on his forhead is being abused. Some kids are just clumsy and some play rough. My boys were always covered in cuts, bruises, and scrapes. No one was abusing them, they just played rough with other kids and got hurt. My oldest son had a blue birth mark on his butt when he was born and the day care center called cps on me accusing me of spanking a new born baby. Luckily the cps lady recognized the VERY COMMON type of birth mark and disregarded the call and apologized for the annoyance.

People are way to willing to jump to conclusions of villainous behavior. I am not saying we should ignore warning signs but we certainly should consider all possible interpretations of what what see rather than assuming the worst.

edit: sometimes looking pretty does mean heavier make up. It depends on what one considers pretty. I think I look better with more make up on. Neverfly doesn't . but he knows if I put more on, I feel prettier and when I feel prettier, guys respond.

[Neverfly]

My new make up makes me oh so pretty!

[adelady]

We have to be realistic about violence. Given that the lifetime risk for women for partner violence is as high as it is, and that we know for a fact that younger men are more violent than older men, when you have a group of a few hundred women aged 30 or less, you know that at least 70 and maybe over a hundred of them will have had some violent incident. And a couple of dozen may be experiencing repeated violence. We also know that a few of them will be in partnerships where both parties are violent at times. And another group will be violent towards their male partners.

Violence may not affect anything like half the population - because most of these people repeat their offences with others. So there are far more abused women than there are violent men, because they've been like that with several partners. I've not seen any numbers for violent women, but there's no good reason to presume they're very much different from their male counterparts. There's a research topic for some lucky PhD candidate.

It's not pretty but we shouldn't look away. What's the saying?

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

The more people stand up and say something about female on male violence, and continue saying what needs to be said about male on female, the better. The other issue is couples who seem to enjoy fighting - that's all very well for them, but as soon as children are involved, the rest of us should step up. It's our children who might become friends or partners of people who've been raised in violent homes and we don't want them to finish up in that situation.

[Neverfly]

We have to be realistic about violence. Given that the lifetime risk for women for partner violence is as high as it is, and that we know for a fact that younger men are more violent than older men, when you have a group of a few hundred women aged 30 or less, you know that at least 70 and maybe over a hundred of them will have had some violent incident. And a couple of dozen may be experiencing repeated violence. We also know that a few of them will be in partnerships where both parties are violent at times. And another group will be violent towards their male partners.

Violence may not affect anything like half the population - because most of these people repeat their offences with others. So there are far more abused women than there are violent men, because they've been like that with several partners. I've not seen any numbers for violent women, but there's no good reason to presume they're very much different from their male counterparts. There's a research topic for some lucky PhD candidate.

It's not pretty but we shouldn't look away. What's the saying?

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

The more people stand up and say something about female on male violence, and continue saying what needs to be said about male on female, the better. The other issue is couples who seem to enjoy fighting - that's all very well for them, but as soon as children are involved, the rest of us should step up. It's our children who might become friends or partners of people who've been raised in violent homes and we don't want them to finish up in that situation.

Now, you're talking.

I find it interesting that so many people will repetitively engage themselves with a violent partner- I'm sure there are psychological studies on it.
To be blunt- it makes me wonder just how much effect education can really have.

I think, on topic, that witnessing these realities can lead to a certain bias. When the bias is unrealistic, people may blame a group or a gender or accept an extremist position to the point of directing hostility toward anyone that they speculate or presume is a member of the Violent or Inclined to be Violent group.

Before long, we may have to discuss male on male violence. I dunno, maybe more people in general, when violently abused or assaulted simply need to slug the holy living crap out of anyone that initiates violence on them.

On average, most bully's don't like it when they get a bloody nose and stop picking on the victim.

Awareness? Education? I say, make Kung Fu classes mandatory for abuse victims.

[adelady]

I find it interesting that so many people will repetitively engage themselves with a violent partner

There's a lot of work been done on women with violent partners. (All my precious references died with my last computer, so I'm not sure whether I could dig anything worthwhile up on a moment's notice.) Basically, a majority of women who believe they 'deserve' it or that they have no other option but to stay with him have been brainwashed into those beliefs - not necessarily by their partner entirely. A lot of parents bring their daughters up to be victims or, at least, to think that their own opinions are worth less than a man's.

And then there's the fear. Far too many people suggest that 'she should just leave him'. A lot of women know instinctively what researchers can tell you from statistics. A woman is in most danger of being killed by a violent partner when she's in the process of leaving. Which is where refuges come in. Getting away secretly and being inaccessible during that first period is a genuine life-saver. If you can't get away safely, it really is best not to leave at all. That goes double if you've already been threatened with being killed if you leave.

[arKane]

My new make up makes me oh so pretty!

A few tats would improve your look a great deal. I've got a few pictures you could look at.

[Neverfly]

A few tats would improve your look a great deal. I've got a few pictures you could look at.

I doesn't need no durned tats I'z ded sexy.

[seagypsy]

A few tats would improve your look a great deal. I've got a few pictures you could look at.

I doesn't need no durned tats I'z ded sexy.

Tis true so true````````````````````````````````````````````

[scheherazade]

I find it interesting that so many people will repetitively engage themselves with a violent partner

There's a lot of work been done on women with violent partners. (All my precious references died with my last computer, so I'm not sure whether I could dig anything worthwhile up on a moment's notice.) Basically, a majority of women who believe they 'deserve' it or that they have no other option but to stay with him have been brainwashed into those beliefs - not necessarily by their partner entirely. A lot of parents bring their daughters up to be victims or, at least, to think that their own opinions are worth less than a man's.

And then there's the fear. Far too many people suggest that 'she should just leave him'. A lot of women know instinctively what researchers can tell you from statistics. A woman is in most danger of being killed by a violent partner when she's in the process of leaving. Which is where refuges come in. Getting away secretly and being inaccessible during that first period is a genuine life-saver. If you can't get away safely, it really is best not to leave at all. That goes double if you've already been threatened with being killed if you leave.

This one resonates with me.

My mother (with three children) tried leaving numerous times before she succeeded. I recall the police coming to our home one time and telling mother that unless she was willing to press charges against her husband, there was nothing they could do.

We were all 'smuggled' out of town one night on the floor of an innocuous van to a town 60 miles away where we had to stay indoors for several days at an obscure motel while other arrangements were being made. For two years we were on the move because my father had threatened to kill my mother and the man who had taken us on. They had reason to be concerned because he was a trained east German special forces fighter. At one point, we were getting off a ferry while he was getting on, unawares that we had been tipped off of his pending arrival.

Turns out that our 'rescuer' was also an abuser, but one of a different sort. He was a sexual predator and while he did not rape me, I endured sexual interference which really affected my attitude toward men and sex
and made puberty exceptionally challenging to me with being sent to a school one thousand miles away from the family and being a couple of years older than my peer group because of the time lost during the experience mentioned above.

For that reason, I believe that I abhor contentious discussions and personal attacks against myself or others and will usually just take myself somewhere that my sharing is appreciated. I certainly welcome opposing viewpoints but if they are not proffered respectfully, I move on.

Life is too short and precious to be wasted in winning an internet argument for in the end all of our perspectives are absolutely correct to the one to whom they belong.

The golden rule, broadly interpreted, is do no intentional harm to another and go your own way respectful of the rights of others to do likewise. Unfortunately for many, our population is becoming such that it can be most difficult to do just that but here in the virtual world, there is plenty of space for all of us.

I shall endeavor to keep my 'virtual dog' from relieving itself on your 'virtual lawn'.

[Ascended]

Wow have not posted for a day and I seem to have missed this entire thread. To go back to seagypsy's opening post, because I think that and adelady's response was interesting. It was about "extreme feminists", now I really do think this is interesting because many women claim to be feminists. But as adelady asked who are these people? Well very good point because how do we know who is who? How do we really know what feminism stands for or how far it would go.

Should someone who claims to be a feminist have the right to tell other women what to do with their lives? or what they should want?
Who sets the goals for feminism? I mean is there discussion on what is right or what is fair?
As a man I hear this term all the time feminism, what does it really mean to me? Well I rightly, or wrongly, think of feminism of being about freedom and equality for women to live their lives as they choose without being discriminated on on the basis of their gender and they have made great strides forward in achieving equal pay and recognition in the work place.

What I don't really recognise or understand is why now with this new spirit of understanding, both men and women can't get together and sit down and work out all the issues about fairness, equality and opportunities for all. I don't agree with 'all women shortilists' or 'quota systems' in the workplace they don't work and are discriminitory, yet people like Harriet Harman, who describes herself as feminist, want all these things that I consider is heading towards radical feminism if not quite yet extreme.

The reality is that the minute you introduce a quota system in the work place it creates resentment, other women feel they have got there on merit and then someone just comes along that everyone considers there equal leeds to problems, also once you allow any form of discrimination you're are opening pandora's box and setting a precedent that discrimination is accepable, which in my book it never is.

I guess the point is that there are certain things that some women who claim to be feminists want that I just don't agree with and support, the problem is I now find it difficult to tell one woman who claims to be a feminist from another. I mean in one respect someone might have sensible veiws on somethings and extreme irrational views on others, which makes it hard to agree or support anyone, if you don't really know what you are supporting.

[Neverfly]

This one resonates with me.

Same...
I think you know S.G.'s story. My own story is... sometimes good for making a movie about.
Me... my parents were addicts and abusers. At a very early age, I knew I had a problem and set about correcting that. I've been asked many times by close associates how I managed to not only survive my childhood, but do so without going absolutely insane. Yet, I never really understood the question and still don't- not really.
I've had people who knew my situations growing up express sorrow for the terrors they said I'd seen.
I wasn't mean to their sentiments. But I don't see it that way. Yeah, there were terrors, I won't deny that. But I battled my way through 'em. But I also got to do things the other kids didn't get to do- I got out of school for years. I got to romp in the trees, hunt and fish and make every day an adventure. Ok, my parents were jerks. Big whoop, most parents are or are even just perceived to be anyway. Yeah my dad was heavy handed (Especially when drunk) but bring it on, I ain't made of glass. Yeah, my mom had perv men over, more than one eyed me as he shouldn't. I had feet and knew how to use them- they never got me.
I've had a couple relationships with abusive women and they ended quickly. I did not allow it as a child and I wasn't about to allow it as an adult.

So, when I said that statement, it's made from a very personal lack of understanding on my part. Yes, I know that for some people, it's not so easy. I know that some people are conditioned into it. I know that some people are ruled by fear and ruled over by a tormentor.
But my own brain rejects the notion. I know that other brains aren't like mine (The world be grateful...) but... I guess it's just how it is.
I hope this post doesn't come across as condescending. I mean, here you relate the horrors you have seen, don't feel like I'm brushing that off- I fear that because it's not my intention for it to- it's just my honest stand because even though I've experienced a great deal of these things... I've not really been the victim. So I will likely never understand. So, I passed an offhand comment that I find it interesting how some people will continue to engage in abusers.

[seagypsy]

Chrisgorlitz, It's about time you chimed in. After all this entire thread was inspired by remarks you made in another thread. lol.

Your point about not knowing exactly what or who it is that you support because the lines are unclear is a real problem. The one I was trying to draw out. The genuine feminist movement needs to b e better at defining what it currently stands for. Otherwise anyone can claim to be a feminist as many females do and give the entire concept a bad name. Very much the way radical Christians make the average Christian look bad or radical Muslims make the average Muslim look bad. The moderates need to stand up loudly and denounce these extreme counterproductive demands that the radical feminists make and let people know what the genuine movement really stands for.

In my experience, the ones expressing the extreme man hating attitudes are usually women who are viciously scorned some how or young women who have never really been discriminated against at all. The younger ones just want to appear strong so they take a overly aggressive stance in a cause that they know little about.

[question for you]

I'm sorry to all you lovely folks... But:

"The Feminist movement"... what does this mean? is this about preganancy or gender related bowel problems? or what?

It all seems a bit sexist to me... Why doesn't anybody ever mention a masculine movement?

It's utter rubbish... females are stuck with giving birth and no amount of campaigning is going to change that, just accept it, anything else is futile.

if this feminist movement does quieten down then I fear some may start a masculine movement and then we'll all be at war. I don't get why any female would think there is anything wrong with being female in general. most societies seem to already be extremely feminist in their thinking and practices.

This extreme feminism rubbish just sounds like a load of haters with a chip on their shoulder joining together to take it out on the only mutually accessible enemigo... men.

The sooner we ignore the 'extremists', the sooner they will go away and stop causing trouble.

[Neverfly]

No. Does it read like that? I was merely doing the same for mental abuse as for physical. Showing that both sexes do both things.

Yes, women abuse men physically. Yes, men abuse women mentally.

I didn't say anything about abused men being abusers - unless there's a hell of a typo. Whoops. I deleted something between the 1st and 2nd paragraph which I now entirely forget. I thought it was superfluous but clearly not. Brevity did not enhance clarity just this once. (I have a real horror of letting my normally verbose writing run away with me. Should have let it go this time.)

I did not see this post until just now, (S.G. mentioned it causing me to get confused).

Trust me... deal with my posts for a while and you'll see real examples of how a person can screw up a post.

I'm sorry to all you lovely folks... But:

"The Feminist movement"... what does this mean? is this about preganancy or gender related bowel problems? or what?

It all seems a bit sexist to me... Why doesn't anybody ever mention a masculine movement?

It's utter rubbish... females are stuck with giving birth and no amount of campaigning is going to change that, just accept it, anything else is futile.

if this feminist movement does quieten down then I fear some may start a masculine movement and then we'll all be at war. I don't get why any female would think there is anything wrong with being female in general. most societies seem to already be extremely feminist in their thinking and practices.

This extreme feminism rubbish just sounds like a load of haters with a chip on their shoulder joining together to take it out on the only mutually accessible enemigo... men.

It's not really about the babies, dude. It's about how women have been treated poorly. They don't have a problem with being female, they have a problem with being treated badly for being female. The same as civil rights leaders for black americans didn't take too kindly to black people being treated badly for not being white.

The argument you made is made out of ignorance. Check out how equally qualified women get paid less than male counterparts. Why? Is there a logical reason? No, there's a sexist reason.

[scheherazade]

This one resonates with me.

Same...
I think you know S.G.'s story. My own story is... sometimes good for making a movie about.
Me... my parents were addicts and abusers. At a very early age, I knew I had a problem and set about correcting that. I've been asked many times by close associates how I managed to not only survive my childhood, but do so without going absolutely insane. Yet, I never really understood the question and still don't- not really.
I've had people who knew my situations growing up express sorrow for the terrors they said I'd seen.
I wasn't mean to their sentiments. But I don't see it that way. Yeah, there were terrors, I won't deny that. But I battled my way through 'em. But I also got to do things the other kids didn't get to do- I got out of school for years. I got to romp in the trees, hunt and fish and make every day an adventure. Ok, my parents were jerks. Big whoop, most parents are or are even just perceived to be anyway. Yeah my dad was heavy handed (Especially when drunk) but bring it on, I ain't made of glass. Yeah, my mom had perv men over, more than one eyed me as he shouldn't. I had feet and knew how to use them- they never got me.
I've had a couple relationships with abusive women and they ended quickly. I did not allow it as a child and I wasn't about to allow it as an adult.

So, when I said that statement, it's made from a very personal lack of understanding on my part. Yes, I know that for some people, it's not so easy. I know that some people are conditioned into it. I know that some people are ruled by fear and ruled over by a tormentor.
But my own brain rejects the notion. I know that other brains aren't like mine (The world be grateful...) but... I guess it's just how it is.
I hope this post doesn't come across as condescending. I mean, here you relate the horrors you have seen, don't feel like I'm brushing that off- I fear that because it's not my intention for it to- it's just my honest stand because even though I've experienced a great deal of these things... I've not really been the victim. So I will likely never understand. So, I passed an offhand comment that I find it interesting how some people will continue to engage in abusers.

I do not find your post to come across as condescending, neverfly, and I hope I did not convey the sense that I have a 'victim mentality' for nothing could be farther from the truth.

I will always walk away from trouble given a choice, but it trouble chooses not to allow me this option....let's just say that I do not engage to finish second.



In the trust that no one viewing this thread construes an anime brandishing a sword to be anything more than an image which I use for the purpose of discussing the psychology of childhood experienced abuse, an experience which is shared by many and which society has long denied the extent of. Societal awareness and acknowledgement has been on the increase for some time now and it remains to be seen how we choose to deal with the skeletons in our closets.

[question for you]

The argument you made is made out of ignorance. Check out how equally qualified women get paid less than male counterparts. Why? Is there a logical reason? No, there's a sexist reason.

Well ofcourse I am aware that some cultures or subcultures in recent history have given men more value in some roles, and women more value in others.
Sometimes this is 'too far' and un acceptable to some. I don't agree with prejudging anybody on their sex, ethnicity, religion, class, family background, choice of clothing, or anything else... but it's what people do, everything seems to have to be placed into a compartment in our minds and grouped together as the same thing. It's seems to be difficult to judge something new without associating it with things we have already experienced that in some way seem similar.

I heard something about the pay gap recently... my initial thought was 'women are accepting less pay, they'r letting the team down...' undercutting the market is not something an honourable tradesman does. I'd be interested to know what the female to male employee ratios are in the various different sectors, along with the pay gaps.

If women are prepared to earn less, they will get more jobs. There are risks that an employer takes into consideration when taking on a female of a certain age and this might play a part in the wage structure and m/f employee ratios. As a boss, it's not efficient to lose and employee and have to pay them maternity pay, and possibly hiring a temp, who might need training, from an angency that charge a commission. I expect governments have to step in to cover the cost of this, which shows how society has been going out of it's way to accomodate or nuture 'equality' between the sexes.

What does science have to say about differences of abilities of men and women? Are there things women are better than men at (in general) and vice versa?

If so, what is it that causes these differences?
Is it cultural? genetic? both? which came first?
Or are there fundamental differences in ability that are cuased purely by the biological differences related to reproductive roles?

Getting a bit away from the point of extreme feminism but very much related I would say.

Judging by the female body builders and athletes I've seen, I'd say that we should definitely be aspiring to get more equality into the manual labouring positions... that would cheer the lads up on the building sites and the road works across the globe.

Judging by what i've seen I'd say the main differences in abilities between the sexes are cultural, women can be body builders or what ever if they are bought up to be.

IMO the healthiest and most noble thing that a woman can do is doveote herself to her young's development. It is nature that a woman has the role of creating, bonding with and nurturing her child and nothing is more instinctive than that... except the sex that got her into that situation maybe, and eating (and cloths shopping, storing shoes, jewellry? ). I also think it's nature for men to want to play their own part as well as possible, doing all they can for there kids.

Back to the thing about extreme feminists... It's a pathological culture I think. Pathe means suffering in latin, extreme feminists have been subjected to suffering in some way due to their sex, and have grown to be very offensive towards any person or act they deem to cuase this suffering.
When people have been hurt I think it's best to treat them with kid gloves, listen to there grievances, show them that you understand, show them some love, give em a big hug and also do everything you can to help make them safe from the thing which caused them suffering in the first place.

What else can be done? when things go wrong all you can do is try to put it right. Which is a complete change of tune from my last post where I joked about ignoring extremists. I'll get my coat.

[Neverfly]

I hope I did not convey the sense that I have a 'victim mentality' for nothing could be farther from the truth.

You really don't, but that doesn't mean you may not feel as though valid painful experiences were treated dismissivley. I kinda had to trust you to take that one in stride because I couldn't figure out how to say what I meant to say without it coming out a little... off.
Besides, I know what scope you use on your rifle.

I heard something about the pay gap recently... my initial thought was 'women are accepting less pay, they'r letting the team down...' undercutting the market is not something an honourable tradesman does.

The same reason many men end up taking reduced pay- little choice.
You need the money- you need the money. Welcome to Hard Times.

What does science have to say about differences of abilities of men and women? Are there things women are better than men at (in general) and vice versa?

From what I gather, yes. I've heard that women are better at piloting fighter jets than men, for example, though I'd need to support it. I'm kinda multi-tasking so I may come back to this one.

Judging by the female body builders and athletes I've seen, I'd say that we should definitely be aspiring to get more equality into the manual labouring positions... that would cheer the lads up on the building sites and the road works across the globe.

(Wouldn't cheer me up. Bulging muscles like that are not attractive).

Pathe means suffering in latin, extreme feminists have been subjected to suffering in some way due to their sex, and have grown to be very offensive towards any person or act they deem to cuase this suffering.
When people have been hurt I think it's best to treat them with kid gloves, listen to there grievances, show them that you understand, show them some love, give em a big hug and also do everything you can to help make them safe from the thing which caused them suffering in the first place.

What else can be done? when things go wrong all you can do is try to put it right. Which is a complete change of tune from my last post where I joked about ignoring extremists. I'll get my coat.

The fur coat?

[adelady]

There are risks that an employer takes into consideration when taking on a female of a certain age and this might play a part in the wage structure and m/f employee ratios. As a boss, it's not efficient to lose and employee and have to pay them maternity pay, and possibly hiring a temp, who might need training, from an angency that charge a commission.

So why is it that in workplaces where women are regarded as unreliable or 'won't stay once she's been trained' or any number of other things do we find that men are treated differently. Men who have to have a day off for their sports related injuries are often treated with sympathy or even as brave where women who need a day off for a health matter are unreliable. Men who find a better job and leave after only a few years with an employer are congratulated - "always knew you'd do well". Women who don't leave after the same number of years but need a few months off when they have a baby are treated as a burden. She's not taking her training and experience elsewhere, she's made a commitment to the employer but she's the one the employer identifies as expensive or a drain on training and organisation.

[Ascended]

Chrisgorlitz, It's about time you chimed in. After all this entire thread was inspired by remarks you made in another thread. lol.

Your point about not knowing exactly what or who it is that you support because the lines are unclear is a real problem. The one I was trying to draw out. The genuine feminist movement needs to b e better at defining what it currently stands for. Otherwise anyone can claim to be a feminist as many females do and give the entire concept a bad name. Very much the way radical Christians make the average Christian look bad or radical Muslims make the average Muslim look bad. The moderates need to stand up loudly and denounce these extreme counterproductive demands that the radical feminists make and let people know what the genuine movement really stands for.

In my experience, the ones expressing the extreme man hating attitudes are usually women who are viciously scorned some how or young women who have never really been discriminated against at all. The younger ones just want to appear strong so they take a overly aggressive stance in a cause that they know little about.

Apologies again for my tardiness. Listening to some of the comments here I'm quite impressed to see the level of understanding around the debate. What I also for really positive is women who (in my book at least) are true feminists that are not interested in male bashing or take things away from men at all, they are interested in fairness and equality for both sexes, they don't want to women discriminated against but they don't wont that for men either they want to create a fairer society where everybody is happier. Yes sure men have some issues today, like dad's campaigning for the right to see their children ect.. and their is still some way to go to see women at the top of business be seen and treated as equals. But many of us normal reasonable people realise this and want a sensible sane voice that we can all hear above the nutters so we can all work towards creating a fairer society.

I know some men get annoyed about it and feel that it's just all aimed at getting at them and taking their rights away, but really this is just a lack of understanding caused by extrtemist propaganda. The reality is both men and women need each other whether that is at home or in the work place. There is nor has ever been anything wrong with or theatening to men about equality between the sexes just sometimes unwarranted fear.

One of the biggest strides that the womens movement have made recently is to help raise awareness of men's health, us guys can be a bit shy about talking about our problems, just want to put on the tough macho image in front of you galls, so this really is a kick up the backside we need.

Examples like the one above go to show that really things arn't and certainly don't have to ever be about a war of the sexes, afterall anyway us guys are someone's son or boyfriend or brother or husband so why would our ladies wish to hurt us?
The truth most wouldn't, it's just a few nuts that don't really understand the concepts of fairness and equality who have given the rest a bad name.

Most of the real acheivements in society come from everybody working together whether be men or women.

[arKane]

There are risks that an employer takes into consideration when taking on a female of a certain age and this might play a part in the wage structure and m/f employee ratios. As a boss, it's not efficient to lose and employee and have to pay them maternity pay, and possibly hiring a temp, who might need training, from an angency that charge a commission.

So why is it that in workplaces where women are regarded as unreliable or 'won't stay once she's been trained' or any number of other things do we find that men are treated differently. Men who have to have a day off for their sports related injuries are often treated with sympathy or even as brave where women who need a day off for a health matter are unreliable. Men who find a better job and leave after only a few years with an employer are congratulated - "always knew you'd do well". Women who don't leave after the same number of years but need a few months off when they have a baby are treated as a burden. She's not taking her training and experience elsewhere, she's made a commitment to the employer but she's the one the employer identifies as expensive or a drain on training and organisation.

I can only say that wasn't true at the phone co.

[Ascended]

There are risks that an employer takes into consideration when taking on a female of a certain age and this might play a part in the wage structure and m/f employee ratios. As a boss, it's not efficient to lose and employee and have to pay them maternity pay, and possibly hiring a temp, who might need training, from an angency that charge a commission.

So why is it that in workplaces where women are regarded as unreliable or 'won't stay once she's been trained' or any number of other things do we find that men are treated differently. Men who have to have a day off for their sports related injuries are often treated with sympathy or even as brave where women who need a day off for a health matter are unreliable. Men who find a better job and leave after only a few years with an employer are congratulated - "always knew you'd do well". Women who don't leave after the same number of years but need a few months off when they have a baby are treated as a burden. She's not taking her training and experience elsewhere, she's made a commitment to the employer but she's the one the employer identifies as expensive or a drain on training and organisation.

I'm not saying things are perfect and if I'm honest I don't think they ever will be, the truth is in todays modern work places discrimination still goes on, not fair but it happens, but this being said it also happens to men there are many times when men discriminated against. The fact is this is wrong regardless of sex, but to change attitudes men and women need to work together. You can't just dismiss a male opinion because you don't agree with it, it has just as much worth as yours. The way you change attitudes is by having the same rules for everyone, if everyone is bound by the same rules it's much harder for disrimination to take place.

Also in order to make changes you need the support of everyone involved, you can't alienate half the population and still have the support need as you are not going to get that if they think you want discrimination or are being extremist.

[adelady]

the healthiest and most noble thing that a woman can do is doveote herself to her young's development. It is nature that a woman has the role of creating, bonding with and nurturing her child and nothing is more instinctive than that... except the sex that got her into that situation maybe, and eating (and cloths shopping, storing shoes, jewellry?

Healthiest. Oh, really? There are quite a few women who are injured by pregnancy and childbirth, sometimes seriously enough to interfere with nurturing children. When I had my second child I had originally planned to stay home with the littlies for a longish while. Seeing as I had to have a health worker come to the house a few times a week to bath the baby because I couldn't do it and I couldn't play with, or even pick up, the toddler I went back to the much easier on my health office job when the bub was only six months old and got someone better able than me to care for the kids.

And there are plenty of other reasons why women don't or can't care for children. Far better to make it easy for parents to share the burden rather than women with problems having to plead for special treatment because they can't fulfil their instinctive role. All dads together: my new life among Sweden's latte pappas | Money | The Observer

[Neverfly]

The greatest thing I've ever been is a Dad.

[chad]

This thread made me think of Annie Oakley.

Annie Oakley - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


She was very feminine, and no man would have been dumb enough, to try to hurt her.
She tried very hard to get other woman, to be like her. So women could protect themselves from men. But she was unsuccessful.


When I think about women I know, it seems Annie's Oakley's early childhood, was responsible for her behavior. She was forced to grow up like a boy.

In her early childhood, she lived hunting/gathering, like a girl would have done 100,000 years ago, the way humans were meant to live. Humans were made to be hunter/gathers, and live in groups of 8-12. And back then girls would have experienced, a similar upbringing as boys.

But girls and boys today experience very different childhoods. And your childhood decides who you will be.


I know a few women who grew up like Annie Oakley. And they are like Annie Oakley, and still (highly) feminine. If every woman was like them, men would have a very different place in society.

The following link has pictures of Annie Oakley.

annie oakley biography - Google Search

[seagypsy]

This thread made me think of Annie Oakley.

Annie Oakley - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


She was very feminine, and no man would have been dumb enough, to try to hurt her.
She tried very hard to get other woman, to be like her. So women could protect themselves from men. But she was unsuccessful.


When I think about women I know, it seems Annie's Oakley's early childhood, was responsible for her behavior. She was forced to grow up like a boy.

In her early childhood, she lived hunting/gathering, like a girl would have done 100,000 years ago, the way humans were meant to live. Humans were made to be hunter/gathers, and live in groups of 8-12. And back then girls would have experienced, a similar upbringing as boys.

But today girls and boys experience very different childhoods. And your childhood decides who you will be.


I know a few women who grew up like Annie Oakley. And they are like Annie Oakley, and still (highly) feminine. If every woman was like them, men would have a very different place in society.

The following link has pictures of Annie Oakley.

annie oakley biography - Google Search

I won't say I was like annie oakley but I might have been compared to Tom Sawyer at times. I ran around in the woods barefoot a lot, played with wild animals, and was always into trouble. I don't identify with the way popular media defines what is feminine today. I don't get a rush out of shopping or fashion. I have killed my own food on many occasions and don't get freaked out by the sight of blood. And I think spiders are freaking awesome. I'm not very social and generally don't like people very much. I hope, some day, Neverfly and I can afford to run away to the mountains of Montana live a more natural lifestyle.

[arKane]

I won't say I was like Annie Oakley but I might have been compared to Tom Sawyer at times. I ran around in the woods barefoot a lot, played with wild animals, and was always into trouble. I don't identify with the way popular media defines what is feminine today. I don't get a rush out of shopping or fashion. I have killed my own food on many occasions and don't get freaked out by the sight of blood. And I think spiders are freaking awesome. I'm not very social and generally don't like people very much. I hope, some day, Neverfly and I can afford to run away to the mountains of Montana live a more natural lifestyle.

That's one way to make sure you don't live to a ripe old age. Might be harder to live without your computer and an Internet connection than you now believe.

[scheherazade]

This thread made me think of Annie Oakley.

Annie Oakley - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


She was very feminine, and no man would have been dumb enough, to try to hurt her.
She tried very hard to get other woman, to be like her. So women could protect themselves from men. But she was unsuccessful.


When I think about women I know, it seems Annie's Oakley's early childhood, was responsible for her behavior. She was forced to grow up like a boy.

In her early childhood, she lived hunting/gathering, like a girl would have done 100,000 years ago, the way humans were meant to live. Humans were made to be hunter/gathers, and live in groups of 8-12. And back then girls would have experienced, a similar upbringing as boys.

But girls and boys today experience very different childhoods. And your childhood decides who you will be.


I know a few women who grew up like Annie Oakley. And they are like Annie Oakley, and still (highly) feminine. If every woman was like them, men would have a very different place in society.

The following link has pictures of Annie Oakley.

annie oakley biography - Google Search

Among my traditional female lifeskills I number cooking (the way to a man's heart), gentling and teaching horses, and care of the domicile.

I can also use a chainsaw (men have asked me to troubleshoot their machines, lol), build fencing and small outbuildings, and hunt and dress small game.

Rabbit snares hang in my kitchen (for emergency use), and this year's rhubarb wine is in the primary fermenting vessel, a long term project which will not be ready for presentation until this time next year.

[scheherazade]

I won't say I was like Annie Oakley but I might have been compared to Tom Sawyer at times. I ran around in the woods barefoot a lot, played with wild animals, and was always into trouble. I don't identify with the way popular media defines what is feminine today. I don't get a rush out of shopping or fashion. I have killed my own food on many occasions and don't get freaked out by the sight of blood. And I think spiders are freaking awesome. I'm not very social and generally don't like people very much. I hope, some day, Neverfly and I can afford to run away to the mountains of Montana live a more natural lifestyle.

That's one way to make sure you don't live to a ripe old age. Might be harder to live without your computer and an Internet connection than you now believe.

LOL....ArKane, you are such a wuss, dear fellow. When one is fully engaged living in the present with nature, one does not miss these distractions as much as you might think.

[arKane]

LOL....ArKane, you are such a wuss, dear fellow. When one is fully engaged living in the present with nature, one does not miss these distractions as much as you might think.

That's the point, as much as I like nature, I don't want much distance from the convenience of society.

[question for you]

Among my traditional female lifeskills I number cooking (the way to a man's heart), gentling and teaching horses, and care of the domicile.

I can also use a chainsaw (men have asked me to troubleshoot their machines, lol), build fencing and small outbuildings, and hunt and dress small game.

Rabbit snares hang in my kitchen (for emergency use), and this year's rhubarb wine is in the primary fermenting vessel, a long term project which will not be ready for presentation until this time next year.

That's a real woman!