Do You Consider Yourself a Feminist?

[Moliphino]

Excuse me but smaller items that you mention are just against women and not smaller men or Asians or Peruvians or Indians or Mexicans or younger males.

The fact that facial recognition software doesn’t recognize Chinese women should be added to your list of indignities against women and just ignore the fact that it also doesn’t recognize Chinese men also.

That's also a problem, but since the thread is about feminism I focused on that. The default for most things is the average white male.

 

[luvsJack]

Couple of interesting comparisons: goods and services which cost women more than men https://www.rd.com/culture/things-that-cost-more-for-women/ and things which affect men and women differently https://www.rd.com/health/wellness/everyday-things-affect-men-and-women-differently///#card-1/

I didn't know shampoo and conditioner had genders. I mean I know there is some that matches certain men's cologne but those are very few. The rest of it is just shampoo.

I think the hair cut thing has been fussed about for years. When you go to a salon, you aren't paying for how much hair they cut off. You are paying for their skills and education. Most women that go to a salon, do not get just a cut. They get at least a bit of styling or their hair dried or something extra. If a woman goes to a barber for a basic cut then yes, she should be charged the same. If the same hair dresser or same barber charges two different prices, then they should be reported to the BBB and whoever else.

The mechanic, that is true for any customer that they may get that knows nothing about cars. But that is why I don't go to "Jim Bob's Car Shop" but to our dealership. If a woman or a man catches a mechanic doing this, she needs to report him to the BBB and whoever else she can.

Here is the thing, a lot of the stuff that has been mentioned in this thread are not about gender. They may be inequalities that exist but many are unfair to more than just women.

 

[luvsJack]

That's also a problem, but since the thread is about feminism I focused on that. The default for most things is the average white male.

Well actually, take the tools for example. LOTS of women's basic tool sets but most come in pink. So reckon how the man on the petite side feels using a pink hammer? I would think HE would feel more discriminated against than women who CAN get usable tools for them.

ALL of that stuff comes in sizes for women/small men.

 

[pahoben]

Goodness, seatbelts were just one example of things that are designed for the average man with no consideration of women. The entire car was designed and safety tested for men. They've only been using "female" (really just a scaled down male) crash test dummies in drivers seat tests since 2011 in the US!

From the previously linked article, studies have shown that:
"But when a woman is involved in a car crash, she is 47% more likely to be seriously injured, and 71% more likely to be moderately injured, even when researchers control for factors such as height, weight, seatbelt usage, and crash intensity. She is also 17% more likely to die."

This article is behind a firewall (or I am unable to access from my geographic location) so unable to read. Shorter men are more likely to die from a similar trauma than larger men. The emergency room death rates from all cause trauma are far higher for shorter than taller men. If you want to argue the inequities of being shorter rather than taller you need to appeal to a higher authority than can be reached on Disboards.

 

[Nancyg56]

I am a practicing nothing, and I am pro-choice. Not my body? Not my decision.

?

The point I was making is that many of us who have specific beliefs still will not intrude on another’s decision. I think abortion is complicated and neither I nor anyone else has the right to make that decision for another woman.

 

[pahoben]

There are two sexes and a multitude of differences between those sexes. For me these differences make life interesting and are to be celebrated but for many they seem to think these differences are some kind of male plot.

I believe everyone should be equal under the law but equal under the law doesn’t guarantee the same outcome for everyone but some seem to think that it should and if it doesn’t then again it is some kind of male plot.

 

[Moliphino]

This article is behind a firewall (or I am unable to access from my geographic location) so unable to read. Shorter men are more likely to die from a similar trauma than larger men. The emergency room death rates from all cause trauma are far higher for shorter than taller men. If you want to argue the inequities of being shorter rather than taller you need to appeal to a higher authority than can be reached on Disboards.

This is the article I was quoting, the links in the quote came from in here.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/feb/23/truth-world-built-for-men-car-crashes

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

Sorry, cannot agree on the abortion laws and that is one of the things that keeps me from truly being "a feminist". I believe the new laws are protecting the rights of the unborn. And rather than the laws pushing women to second class status, it pushes the child to human status. Just my belief.

I want to know what you say to a 34 year old woman who is married and has been trying unsuccessfully to have a child for 7 years. She has finally become pregnant. Anyone who has struggled with infertility should know just how incredible this feels to finally believe they will become a parent after so many months and years of increasing desperation every time you realize conception has not occurred. At the 18 week ultrasound, massive abnormalities are discovered. Baby has no limbs. Organs are located on the exterior of the body. Brain is abnormally small. Multiple opinions agree there is no chance for survival post birth, but while in the womb, the heart is beating. Now the mother and father, after receiving this devastating news (which any of you who have lost a pregnancy should understand how that feels) face the terrible decision of what to do. Should they carry the baby to term knowing this baby will die as soon as it is born, which also takes away 5+ months of time where they could be trying once again for a chance to become parents, plus adds the risk that something awful could happen during delivery that would render the mother definitively unable to carry further pregnancies? Or should they abort, grieve their loss, and resume attempting to have a child?

What do you tell that woman (and her husband) to explain why that choice should be made by you, and not by them?

I realize some of you will say "oh but I really believe in an exception in this case, I really believe in an exception for rape cases, etc." But that is not what these current laws say. These new laws say that woman will carry that baby knowing full well it will die in five months, and she will sacrifice 5 months of potential fertility, plus risks and the significant expense for the delivery of said child-not-to-be. And honestly, even if the laws are written in such a way that exceptions can be provided, that means this poor woman and her husband will have to go in front of some random judge that is a stranger to them and spell out their private, intimate, devastating, medical struggle, and beg to be allowed to do what they and their doctors feel is best.

I think there is a severe lack of understanding that many abortions (and especially the later abortions) are situations just like this, and no one has any business having any say whatsoever other than the parents and the doctors.

The way to eliminate abortions of convenience is education, great access to healthcare from (all the way from prevention to prenatal care to pediatric care), family friendly work place policies, and low poverty rates. Not by taking the choice away from the woman described above.

 

[Wishing on a star]

This all only makes me more glad, and certain, that I am NOT a feminist.

 

[disykat]

Many people here have said they agree with the dictionary definition of feminism, but are not feminists because they disagree with many of them.

I honestly feel bad for anyone who is unwilling to be part of a demographic of which they disagree with some of it's members. How extremely limiting that must be.

 

[Wishing on a star]

If that was directed towards me, then maybe I need some clarity.
Being a woman might be a demographic. Being a feminist, IMHO, is not.

Any assumption that all women must believe in the activist views of one group, or they are 'sad'...
Well... I don't think I need say more.

Making such broad judgements about any gender, race, etc... is one thing... and that is prejudiced.

 

[luvsJack]

I want to know what you say to a 34 year old woman who is married and has been trying unsuccessfully to have a child for 7 years. She has finally become pregnant. Anyone who has struggled with infertility should know just how incredible this feels to finally believe they will become a parent after so many months and years of increasing desperation every time you realize conception has not occurred. At the 18 week ultrasound, massive abnormalities are discovered. Baby has no limbs. Organs are located on the exterior of the body. Brain is abnormally small. Multiple opinions agree there is no chance for survival post birth, but while in the womb, the heart is beating. Now the mother and father, after receiving this devastating news (which any of you who have lost a pregnancy should understand how that feels) face the terrible decision of what to do. Should they carry the baby to term knowing this baby will die as soon as it is born, which also takes away 5+ months of time where they could be trying once again for a chance to become parents, plus adds the risk that something awful could happen during delivery that would render the mother definitively unable to carry further pregnancies? Or should they abort, grieve their loss, and resume attempting to have a child?

What do you tell that woman (and her husband) to explain why that choice should be made by you, and not by them?

I realize some of you will say "oh but I really believe in an exception in this case, I really believe in an exception for rape cases, etc." But that is not what these current laws say. These new laws say that woman will carry that baby knowing full well it will die in five months, and she will sacrifice 5 months of potential fertility, plus risks and the significant expense for the delivery of said child-not-to-be. And honestly, even if the laws are written in such a way that exceptions can be provided, that means this poor woman and her husband will have to go in front of some random judge that is a stranger to them and spell out their private, intimate, devastating, medical struggle, and beg to be allowed to do what they and their doctors feel is best.

I think there is a severe lack of understanding that many abortions (and especially the later abortions) are situations just like this, and no one has any business having any say whatsoever other than the parents and the doctors.

The way to eliminate abortions of convenience is education, great access to healthcare from (all the way from prevention to prenatal care to pediatric care), family friendly work place policies, and low poverty rates. Not by taking the choice away from the woman described above.

I have a very good friend that lived through a terrifying pregnancy.

She was told that she could very well die and the baby would die at worst and at best be severely handicapped. She was told she should abort but she refused. She was hospitalized and it was again stressed to her that both she and her child would likely die. On the 24 and 25 of December she went home from the hospital to spend what she honestly believed would be her last Christmas with her older child. She went back to the hospital after Christmas and in a month or so delivered the child. The baby lived and is now a happy 5 year old. She also lived and is graduating from nursing school in a couple of months. So, tell me, should she have listened and gotten that abortion and killed that child who is now as healthy and as normal as can be?

We can go back and forth all day long with stories of children who should have been aborted , weren't and are normal. Or stores of pregnancies gone wrong so abortion seems necessary. But there is more to the debate than these stories.

https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/ This site has a table showing reasons for abortions. 3% are for POSSIBLE situations like you describe. Less than .5% are the rape victims that everyone goes on and on about. From another site, 92% are just unwanted pregnancies.

The larger percentages? Not ready for a baby, can't afford a baby and finished having children. Why does one take birth control? Hmmmm--same exact three answers. Coincidence?

I believe that the baby has rights. I do now, I will tomorrow and I will next week. Period.

 

[Prince_Hawkins]

So you think portrayals on reality television are real? Is that really a valid benchmark upon which to judge, well anything? Mundane day to day life isn't going to create compelling programming, it's gotta sizzle to bring viewers and advertisers.

Ever heard of the term shock jock? Worked incredibly well to crown someone the "King of All Media". Follow the $$$$ -- because that's what every media company has done. Of course television talk shows, radio talk shows, etc. are extreme -- it creates a stir, it attracts eyeballs, ears and publicity, and therefore it makes $$$$. Media companies worked to develop their own "brand" of shock jock, because the King had sewn up that corner of the market. It's the same idea of superheroes being developed with different superpowers, kinda boring if they're all Batman.

As far as calling out girls/women for "vapidly absorbing such dogma" A) the response of mansplaining doesn't even fit the context, but it does allow pulling in a Twitter worthy buzzword. B) who exactly is "vapidly absorbing such dogma" -- does one take in dogma from TV shows, social media, etc?

Something that's not often talked about in mainstream media until tragedy occurs is the fact that young females today are increasingly confronted with extremists of a very disturbing and potentially dangerous stripe, the incel. I had no idea this was a thing beyond tragic news stories until I heard from my daughters, their friends and eventually my own friends about such an ugly cesspool that is bubbling in corners of an awful lot of our universities and colleges. It's disturbing to say the least when someone blithely comments that they are referred to by some people as a misogynist as if it doesn't carry ugly and repugnant meaning.

I've run into many Incels, and they are drinking a very toxic kool-aid that is repugnant and exacerbates a scourge on society. It's scary in how cult-like it can become.

But there are two sides to every coin. There are those neofeminists (and the "White Knights" who love them) insisting that an "overcorrection" is necessary in order to "level the playing field," "teach empathy," and "educate men" on a remedial level. The mainstreaming of such philosophies is every bit as dangerous as the perpetuation of misogyny.

A doctor wouldn't treat somebody's broken arm by proceeding to break SOMEONE ELSE'S leg, would they?

Nope? Nope. Didn't think so...

 

[Wendy31]

Like I said, previously, I am for equal rights for men & women. And I think we do have equal rights... on paper. However, that doesn't mean that women aren't at a disadvantage in some areas & that, often in the business & STEM fields, women have to overcome more to get to that equal footing.

Historically, it's women & children that suffer the most in times of war, military/government/political unrest, & economic downturns.

Historically, the church (the church - not Jesus!) have demeaned women & their places in society & have not done an adequate job in protecting women from abuse.

(As an aside, I think the "rule of thumb" thing came along from the church - years & years ago, a man wasn't allowed to beat his wife w/ anything larger in circumference than his thumb.)

When I'm walking out to my car after dark or walking alone in the park, there are things I have to consider & think about that men don't.

After the mess-up w/ the all-women space walk - it being cancelled due there not being enough smaller sized space walk suits, I read an article similar to the ones linked above. The gist of the article was that the world is made for men, & women have had to adapt - from seat belts to different tools to medicine to even chair height at conference tables in professional settings.

Vehicles were made for men's bodies - even shorter men's bodies fit better & more safely in vehicles than do women's bodies. Crash test dummies are made to male specifications. As a short, petite woman, it is more dangerous for me to drive our mini-van than it is for my husband to drive it.

Why weren't there enough smaller spacesuits for the women? (Before anyone starts listing the reason, I said that sarcastically - I've read the different articles & the reasons listed as to why there weren't enough suits.)

"You throw like a girl" - used to be seen as an insult, & women just now are beginning to claim "like a girl" w/ pride. If a little boy fell down & skinned his knee & started crying, many times he'd be made fun of & scolded, "You're crying like a little girl!"

It's things like this being said over & over that begin to affect people's attitudes & perceptions.

Just about every time a woman gets upset about something & voices her upset, concern, or whatever, she is often dismissed as being "crazy" or "too emotional" or "it must be that time of the month". When we raise our voice, we're mad & angry. When a man raises his voice, he is authoritative & commanding.

An example - One year, on our kids' swim team, we had 2 male coaches & 1 female coach. The female coach was more organized & could put together a much better heat sheet than the 2 male coaches. The male coaches liked to joke around w/ each other & w/ the swimmers & just really were kind of disorganized at meets. Swim meets are crazy & hectic. The female coach carried the burden of making sure the swimmers where they needed to be & would stand behind the starting blocks & yell out the swimmers' names in a loud, carrying voice. We had many parents complain that she yelled too much & that she acted too angry. I was on the board at the time, &, when the complaint reached the board, only I & 2 other people defended her (one of them being DH). She was not angry. She did not yell too much. Had she been a male coach, she would have been perceived much differently.

Another example - One day I was driving in our van w/ my kids & my sister's kids. I was talking about a book I had read to my sister, & my nephew popped up from the back & asked, "Is it one of those girly books that makes you cry?" and then proceeded to act out crying in a "girly" fashion.

He learned that kind of attitude from his dad. And I informed him that, "No, I don't read 'girly' books. And having emotion & being moved by something doesn't make one 'girly' any more than getting excited while watching things blow up in a movie makes one 'manly'."

Again, there are differences between men & women, & I like & appreciate our differences. I do think we have equal rights. However, while a society can have laws that make men & women equal that doesn't mean that women are always treated & respected as equals, & it doesn't mean we have the same advantages as men. It's not victim-hood. I don't think of myself as a victim. It's just the way it is. But, as a woman, if you don't see that there really ARE differences in how men & women are treated & perceived, I think you're doing a disservice both to you & other women & girls around you.

 

[pahoben]

This is the article I was quoting, the links in the quote came from in here.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/feb/23/truth-world-built-for-men-car-crashes

An interesting article. My wife is 5 ft 5 inches and has a new large IPhone (which she prefers). I asked if she can take photos one handed and she can and did. That is the only thing I can test that was included in the article and it turned out differently than portrayed. It sounds as though the safety standards will change for cars to be based more on female statistics but likely in the end there will be higher death rates for smaller women in car accidents than larger males just because of biological differences.

I am at the other end of the distribution being much taller than the average male. Small cars and economy class seats are already a nightmare for me but nothing will ever be done because I am an outlier and it will only get worse.

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

I have a very good friend that lived through a terrifying pregnancy.

She was told that she could very well die and the baby would die at worst and at best be severely handicapped. She was told she should abort but she refused. She was hospitalized and it was again stressed to her that both she and her child would likely die. On the 24 and 25 of December she went home from the hospital to spend what she honestly believed would be her last Christmas with her older child. She went back to the hospital after Christmas and in a month or so delivered the child. The baby lived and is now a happy 5 year old. She also lived and is graduating from nursing school in a couple of months. So, tell me, should she have listened and gotten that abortion and killed that child who is now as healthy and as normal as can be?

We can go back and forth all day long with stories of children who should have been aborted , weren't and are normal. Or stores of pregnancies gone wrong so abortion seems necessary. But there is more to the debate than these stories.

https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/ This site has a table showing reasons for abortions. 3% are for POSSIBLE situations like you describe. Less than .5% are the rape victims that everyone goes on and on about. From another site, 92% are just unwanted pregnancies.

The larger percentages? Not ready for a baby, can't afford a baby and finished having children. Why does one take birth control? Hmmmm--same exact three answers. Coincidence?

I believe that the baby has rights. I do now, I will tomorrow and I will next week. Period.

This situation your friend had sounds quite different from the situation I described (which by the way is not just a hypothetical made up story). In your friend's case, it sounds like baby was healthy but due to issues with the mother, both the mother and baby's life were at risk. No, I don't presume to tell your friend she should have aborted. But I do think that decision was hers to make, and not mine. Do you think you should have made the decision for your friend? Or do you think it was okay that she made her own medical decision? And I still want to know what you will tell my non-hypothetical example why you deserve to make her medical decision?

 

[YCCS]

I have a very good friend that lived through a terrifying pregnancy.

She was told that she could very well die and the baby would die at worst and at best be severely handicapped. She was told she should abort but she refused. She was hospitalized and it was again stressed to her that both she and her child would likely die. On the 24 and 25 of December she went home from the hospital to spend what she honestly believed would be her last Christmas with her older child. She went back to the hospital after Christmas and in a month or so delivered the child. The baby lived and is now a happy 5 year old. She also lived and is graduating from nursing school in a couple of months. So, tell me, should she have listened and gotten that abortion and killed that child who is now as healthy and as normal as can be?

We can go back and forth all day long with stories of children who should have been aborted , weren't and are normal. Or stores of pregnancies gone wrong so abortion seems necessary. But there is more to the debate than these stories.

https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/ This site has a table showing reasons for abortions. 3% are for POSSIBLE situations like you describe. Less than .5% are the rape victims that everyone goes on and on about. From another site, 92% are just unwanted pregnancies.

The larger percentages? Not ready for a baby, can't afford a baby and finished having children. Why does one take birth control? Hmmmm--same exact three answers. Coincidence?

I believe that the baby has rights. I do now, I will tomorrow and I will next week. Period.

You do realize that what you described is the exact definition of pro-choice? Your "friend" was able to chose what do do with her own body based on her own personal beliefs and situation. No one legislated what she must do based on their personal beliefs, situation, or desire to be re-elected. No one threatened to imprison her based on her choices as they relate to her personal beliefs and situation.

 

[L&Lfan]

If that was directed towards me, then maybe I need some clarity.
Being a woman might be a demographic. Being a feminist, IMHO, is not.

Any assumption that all women must believe in the activist views of one group, or they are 'sad'...
Well... I don't think I need say more.

Making such broad judgements about any gender, race, etc... is one thing... and that is prejudiced.

YES!

 

[Hrhpd]

Disagree. If you were talking about a single woman, yes, her continued fertility is her own business; however, if a couple has made a lifetime commitment to one another, they BOTH should have a say in all details of their lives ... and whether more children are a possibility (a very big lifetime decision) affects both spouses /should be a decision made together.

Personally, I was young when I had my second child, and the doctor asked about whether I wanted a tubal. His rule -- which was totally about covering his own butt, and I have no problem with that -- was that both spouses had to sign /notarize something MONTHS in advance, if the surgery was to be done immediately after the birth. He wanted both spouses to have a say in it, and he wanted both spouses to consider it well in advance -- not in the emotional moments after birth.

Disagree completely. A woman's body is her own body and she alone should make ALL decisions.

If a husband and wife have a good marriage, they will naturally discuss it between themselves. They will have made the decision together.

If a woman is getting a tubal or a hysterectomy without her husband's knowledge, then there are already problems in the marriage and the woman might have a reason to do what she is doing without her husband's knowledge. And a woman giving birth is not the only way to add to a family. If either spouse has a problem with someone doing a medical procedure without their consent, they have many options from counseling to divorce. It is no different than a spouse hiding money in a separate account of so many other ways a dysfunctional marriage operates.

I would love to see the stats on how many doctors require a husband's permission for a tubal vs how many doctors require a wife's permission for a vasectomy.

 

[Hrhpd]

The women I know that have had abortions have had lifelong emotional problems stemming from it. They thought it was the answer at the time but years later, they are still mourning that child or the choice they made. I don't know anyone with a child that regrets having the baby. All three had different reasons for doing it. All three had children shortly after the abortion. Now of course that is only three in a sea of women who have had them but when the only people you know that have had abortions all have the same emotional problems from it, its tends to make one think that its pretty common.

My mother had an abortion almost 60 years ago. There was a 98% chance she would die if she carried the baby to term. She never regretted her decision to be there for her two living children.

I am grateful to her too that I had a wonderful upbringing by TWO loving parents.