What constitutes Misogyny?

[Plutonia]

Springsteen also has that monologue about the draft at the beginning of 'The River' which chokes me up if I'm in the right mood.

Yeah. Me too. What is that?

This one too. There is a pathos there that is rare or something, that's really moving. Maybe it's an expression of men's tenderness towards men - this one is the Land too, though. Anyway, see what you think. I think it's beautiful:

[Plutonia]

... I try to be stoical, I don't [show] emotions [in ways that most people recognize], emotions are something best left inside. Still waters run deep, that sort of thing. ...

I don't [aspire to] all that namby-pamby touchy-feely stuff myself, but I don't think less of other people if they do, as long as they don't do it [to] me. ..

That ^^ pretty much describes me, with those few adjustments. I get overwhelmed by emotions easily, so even small displays seem really big to me, and I have the autie trait of not being able to feel and speak at the same time, which really puts me at a disadvantage.

Also, I'd really like it to be acceptable to wear a skirt.

The Utilikilt Man Skirt:



Steven Villegas fancied a man-skirt. Turns out he wasn't the only one.

In the beginning, there was the notion of just a single washable kilt. A loose, comfortable garment that, Steven Villegas says, “I could walk around naked in.”

And because you couldn’t just go out and buy a man-skirt in those days, Villegas made one. And when he saw how nicely it fit him, he wore the kilt to a Seattle nightclub. At the door a bouncer asked, “Where can I get one of those?” And before he even got into the party, it occurred to Villegas: It’s a ballsy step, wearing a dress. Like Braveheart, only more so.

Next, Villegas--who likes to be called Krash--scavenged up $1,500 for an office, sewing machine, computer, internet service and fabric. He named his man-skirt the Utilikilt, and soon enough, there was a Utilikilts store in Seattle’s Fremont Street Market, a Utilikilts website and Utilikilts across the West Coast and around the world. Incredibly, this year, Krash sold his 100,000th man-kilt since he introduced them in 2000.

A fervent constituency has supported the brand’s “Original” kilt (even now priced at $150, “the overlapping apron allows you to unsnap the waistband snaps without exposing any curious bits”). Krash’s kilts win converts through an ingenious network of snaps that offer an adjustable comfort that Utilikilt fans swear has no parallel. ...


http://businesscuriosities.blogspot.com ... teven.html

[wintler2]

I certainly agree that there's a need to discuss how society screws men up, and agree that while the topic is quite relevant to this thread such discussion deserves another thread.

Speaking entirely for myself, I'd rather keep it all in one easily contained place.

So you troll someone elses thread, simply ignoring all evidence and out-boring everyone else. How did you acheive Old Fart at such a young age?

[seemslikeadream]

Fardorbener Yung Finds Hillary Clinton Still Missing
by Abby Zimet


The most pointed response to the issue of sexually suggestive photos.

Citing their "modesty rules," another Brooklyn-based Hasidic publication has photoshopped Sec. of State Hillary Clinton, along with Counterterrorism Director Audrey Tomason, from the now-iconic Situation Room photo. The Failed Messiah blog posted the second photo from the magazine De Voch, following one in the newspaper Der Tzitung - though not without getting savaged as a “a fardorbener yung,” or rotten heretic lowlife. Another (apparently) heretic lowlife posted the best retort to the issue of "sexually suggestive" figures in photos. He or she who laughs loudest...



People are having a fine old time with this photo.

[Joe Hillshoist]

Fardorbener Yung Finds Hillary Clinton Still Missing
by Abby Zimet


The most pointed response to the issue of sexually suggestive photos.

Citing their "modesty rules," another Brooklyn-based Hasidic publication has photoshopped Sec. of State Hillary Clinton, along with Counterterrorism Director Audrey Tomason, from the now-iconic Situation Room photo. The Failed Messiah blog posted the second photo from the magazine De Voch, following one in the newspaper Der Tzitung - though not without getting savaged as a “a fardorbener yung,” or rotten heretic lowlife. Another (apparently) heretic lowlife posted the best retort to the issue of "sexually suggestive" figures in photos. He or she who laughs loudest...



People are having a fine old time with this photo.

Where's the Cthulu version?

[Joe Hillshoist]

I've been away for a while and missed the worst of the shitfight on this thread. Apologies if this has been dealt with before etc etc.

The thing she said that night that has stayed with me is that working class women have more freedom to define themselves and live creatively, than more privileged women professionals, who experience more pressure to conform to standards of appearance, sexuality, lifestyle, values etc. That does seem to be the case, which makes the “lower class” an invaluable site of resistance to the dominant culture, and thus can help make a safer, fairer social order for women- don’t you agree?

- Plut

Same applies to men, thats why so many have worn suits for so long. I suspect womens "professional" clothing has the same function, to reinforce conformity with the economy basically. I read something the other day, a quote by Nina Powell, who was pointing out that the the image of a successful woman these days is one of what capital wants. (The "professional" class is part of the ruling class, and they expect conformity whatever gender/sex of the members cos thats what defines as the ruling class.)

Which fits with the glass ceiling. Its a subtle form of oppression.

Plutonia are you kind of suggesting that in some ways breaking the glass ceiling means moving from the role of oppressed to oppressor?

Cos you have a point. Really who gives a fuck if Gina Rinehart is a successful businesswomen, she is still evil as and the same sort of fascist capitalist scumfuck as Clive Palmer or Andrew Forrester (the 3 of them run mining cos in Australia.)

Welcome back Joe. I’m interested in that thing you said “image of a successful woman = what capital wants.” Have you got the source handy?

About the glass ceiling, I guess I don’t see that as being the lid on our rat cage. The only women who get close to it are the ones serving the moneyed elite, so maybe it’s the ceiling of their rat cage. Besides, as Girard says: “Being is obviously more important than having”, even if that “having” is a high social position.

That would still be a rejection of the feminine. I want the culture to change to adopt the feminine into everything it does. I want the cultural 'take' on femininity to change. I don't see how that can be accomplished by vowing to stay out of the culture.

C_W

I dunno if Plutonia is talking about staying out of culture, or rejecting one aspect of it.

I’m suggesting participating in alternatives to the dominant culture as much as possible. We can’t really get away from it, but we can refuse to take on and propagate its values and ideologies. Think of it as informing and directing a "way of being" in the world. There are other ways than those of the dominant culture.

You all know Poolan Devi right? The "Bandit Queen". Everyone remembers her dacoity but it wasn't till she willingly surrendered, did her time then got elected that she really accomplished stuff that did some good in the world for lots of people. That series of decisions and what she did after is really amazing.

Thats a great example of what you're talking about actually I reckon C_W. Dunno how breaking the glass ceiling fits with that. Corporate success is a different thing from equal pay, rights and protections isn't it? (In practice anyway, I accept the principle that equal access to corporate success is a fundamental right and something that doesn't exist now.)

I didn’t know about Phoolan Devi, so I looked her up. She was an unusually fierce woman, involved in a massacre and whatnot, must have scared the bejessus out of the authorities.

Which puts me in mind of the most recent article that American Dream posted in his Economic Aspects thread, I don't want to change my lifestyle - I want to change my life from 1973 where the author(s) suggest:

If that doesn't work, we can take part in action -- sabotage: my boss was a bastard and his account books will never be the same; erase your company's computer with a handy home magnet; and wildcats: we all got sick of the job - on the same day; the customers were pouring into the restaurant for lunch, when all of us waitresses told the manager we had been working too hard and were all going to take a break.

Fight dirty -- Life is REAL.

viewtopic.php?p=401142#p401142

Shocking to think about doing things like that, isn’t it? Still it seems like it might be tempting for Americans who are opposed to the State’s torture regime.



Here’s some more highlights from that essay:

“The work that we do keeps the whole system going. If it weren't for the rest of us, the Rockefellers would starve.”

“Our common oppression as women just isn't enough. I think that 90% of the people in this country are oppressed and exploited by the ruling class; yet when I walk down the street they don't feel like my sisters and brothers.”

“Congresswomen, advertising executives, businesswomen and college professors are not the kind of slots that are open to most women. So while I don't think that there is anything wrong with an oppressed group trying to get a bigger piece of the pie, I don't think that we're talking about the same pie. They want to get rid of some of the more neanderthal notions which are keeping them out of the executive suite -- I would much rather blow it up.”

“This system has a lot of leeway in it for making reforms -- but not for making real changes.”
“We never sufficiently realized that this is a capitalist system -- that we and the other students were going to get out of school and go to work for wages (if we could get jobs); we didn't directly fight the purpose of school, which is to make sure that we would have all the requisite technical skills and no more, that we would follow orders, that we would never refuse an assignment, even if it involved murder, and to throw enough academic fog in our minds so that we could never understand what was going on. The point of our classes was to make us believe in the Keynsian reformed version of capitalist exploitation, the B.F. Skinner updated version of psychology, the new relevant version of religion, the inviolability of ART, the Walt Rostow humanist version of imperialism and our own innate superiority over all those beneath us and our innate inferiority with regard to all those above us. The university made sure that we would carry those ideas around in our heads and never trust our own feelings.”

“The movement is that group of people who say, Your (our) discontent has a more general cause than just that particular boss, husband, school.”

You lot have been talking all night!!! What a night too, I got up at 5 and watched the planetary conjunction rise over Blue Knob (a mountain in NSW, not my condition on a freezing frosty morning.)

Poolan Devi is worth investigating if you've never come across her cos she is, well was, a tough intelligent human who happens to have rebelled against the worst aspects of Hindu misogyny and the economic control systems that afflict poor people in India, especially women.

The most important part of her life came after she surrendered, gave up her resistence and began to work within the system, cos it was there that she had the most success wrt to making other peoples lives better.

To me she is a great example of what you are talking about wrt "feminism" in the west and how success by the wstandards of our society isn't necessarily a good thing.

I came across a website that referenced someone called Nina Powell:

http://thesaturnsociety.wordpress.com/2 ... mens-work/

Thats where I got the quotes etc from.

It seems from that site that Powell thinks images of women today are used as forms of control that pretend to allow liberation while setting a particular agenda which basically serves capital first. It allows the impression of liberation so long as that impression fits the desires/needs of capital.

i think that fits with what you were saying about 10 or so pages back. Unless I misread it or something.

It does fit with the ideas in the essay you quoted too imo.

[IanEye]

Not sure if that's good or bad. Although I do like that song.

Stephen, perhaps you'd like this song:



Close your legs, open your mind
Leave those compliments well behind
Dig a little deeper into yourself
And you may find

Come over here just sit right down
Needn't comb your hair, needn't pout or frown
I hear you've turned our young men
Into dribbling clowns

36d so what (d) so what
Is that all that you've got?
36d so what (d) so what
Is that all that you've got?

Make their day and go ahead
Remove your clothes lie on their bed
Just a last gasp chance or an outside bet
To the easily led

And before you do just what you do
Here one thought for you to chew
The men who run the business that you sell
They screw you too

36d so what (d) so what
Is that all that you've got?
36d so what (d) so what
Is that all that you've got?

You're just another 365 night stand
But you're so handy, you're so andy
You cheapen and you nasty every woman in this land
But you're so handy, you're so andy

Your pictures hanging pretty on the squaddies walls
You're stephens, you're andys, you're ians, you're pauls
Your bodies thought of fondly in the rugby mauls
But you want more

36d so what (d) so what
Is that all that you've got?

36d so what (d) so what
Is that all that you've got?

36d so what (d) so what
Is that all that you've got?

36d so what (d) so what
Is that all that you've got?

He was trying to save his job
He was trying to save his job.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/36D


apologies if this song has been mentioned, i am a little behind on this thread....

viewtopic.php?p=219820#p219820
october the second, two thousand and eight

V is for Vagina : eye HEART vagina
viewtopic.php?p=220754#p220754
october the sixth, two thousand and eight

time keeps on tickin' - into the future...

[wallflower]

From my experience it's easy for men to wear kilts and sarongs, at least it is in the western Pennsylvania backwater. I have a UtiliKilt. When I first got it I was concerned about how people would react especially in the suburban part near where I live. Nobody notices, actually I think it's deliberate not-noticing, in any case I've never gotten cat calls or strange looks. I find the UtiliKilt a bit too heavy to be really comfortable. A wool kilt is nicer to wear--lol but I'm a wimp when it comes to cold legs.

In one of my high school year books one of the women teachers is mentioned as having been the first to wear pants suits. So women wearing pants in a professional setting is something which happened in my memory. And my memory of it is that nobody really cared. Pants are practical in lots of situations and for almost everyone the adjustment to seeing women in pants was easy. It seems the same thing fro men wearing skirts. The bigger hump to get over is men feeling comfortable in doing so. Look at the pictures at UtiliKilt, guys still look like guys when wearing skirts. http://www.utilikilts.com/customer/photo-gallery/?page=1

At the last moment I got invited out to a nice birthday dinner at a restaurant. In my notoriously slovenly ways all my pants were too dirty. So I wore my Sarong with a sport coat. My sarong is longer than the one pictured. Women complimented me about my outfit, but really it doesn't seem that most people notice stuff like that. So if you're inclined to wear skirts, go for it.

Opps, just realized this has nothing to do with the subject at hand, sorry.

[compared2what?]

Since masculinity/femininity are cultural concepts that hinge on one another I would welcome the exploration of both here.

This reminds me: Some to much was made many pages back about aggressive male reaction to effeminate/androgynous males as evidence of misogyny. Not necessarily so. Just as negative male or female reaction to masculine/androgynous females is not evidence of misandry--or even misogyny.



It may be instead a negative (homophobic?) reaction to gender confusion or androgyny itself. As in, men should be men and women should be women.

what is homophobia if it isn't a rejection of the feminine within men?

It's the fear and hatred of homosexuality within men.

Men and (especially) boys whose behavior is perceived as effeminate (or sometimes even just not manly enough, ftm) are also frequently mocked and/or scorned and/or bullied and/or ostracized for being queer, whether they happen to be or not, true enough. (Too true, really.)

But, you know. The world is full of gay men who aren't effeminate. And they certainly don't have to be in order for homophobes to hate and fear them. They just have to be gay.

So I'd say that you've actually got two classes of men who are culturally oppressed for violating culturally sanctioned gender norms there, not just the one.
_______________

(To be scrupulous: There's some evidence that it may be one thing for a subset of the men who are members of both classes, which seems to be good as far as it goes, but NB: It doesn't go very far. Human nature is not all that well understooded by Teh Scientists, really. That's just human nature.)

[charlie meadows]

Something like that.



Sometimes even more twisted and poignant: Secret attraction and revulsion.

In any case, not necessarily misogyny.

[compared2what?]

They have them already. Interested and/or qualified women can even participate in them, too, if they want to.

Men do have places of gathering. Every thursday (except for the first thursday of the month which is mixed), my father goes to a stag meeting for a 12 step program. I think the major difference though is not the venue or the participants, but the material that is discussed. I personally don't feel there are many places for males to discuss their oppression (which is mainly emotional), or at least there are not as many as there are for women to discuss their oppression (which is both emotional and physical). I don't know the statistics, but I can imagine that some of this is due to the fact that women are more often put in these situations of oppression, so naturally more peer help has become available.

There seems to have been a little bit of a misunderstanding. My bad, and my apologies. It's no very big thing, but for the sake of clarification:

The point I sought to make was not:

"Hell, yeah, men sure do have places to discuss their oppression (or even just their thoughts and feelings about being men), look HERE and HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WOMYN POWER FOREVER!!!!"

Rather, it was:

(The following message is a re-enactment.)

And one more thing:

I have a theory that is coming to me ...

It seems that men badly want a space in which to speak about the cultural pressures on them

I agree that it seems that way. I've always thought it was a crying shame that they don't. And all the more so because I've never been able to understand why they don't.

Because it also seems (to me) that if there was only one thing on earth that everybody (who wasn't deaf, dumb, blind, and/or in a coma) would have to concede that the culture provides with profligate abundance to virtually all men who choose to avail themselves of it, surely that thing would be: Space for speaking to and with other men. There are literally -- and figuratively -- spaces bursting with speaking men, everywhere, in every walk of life, and stretching out in every direction as far as the eye can see. You practically can't go anywhere without passing through one after another for the entire length of the trip.

In fact, it's really only been a few decades since a casual observer from outer space might easily have been forgiven for failing to see any very hard-and-fast distinction between "culture" and "spaces full of men, speaking."

Since I forgot to include the "This is not a feminist tirade, I'm not angry at men, I don't feel oppressed by men, I love men, but I will never understand men if I live to be eternal" disclaimer last time, I guess I should add, explicitly:

I really do agree that it seems that men badly want a space in which to speak about the cultural pressures on them. And I also have really always thought it was a crying shame that they don't have any (or very, very few) dedicated to that purpose. But I don't understand why they don't. I find it baffling.
_____________

Men, let me ask you something:

Are you aware that a space in which to speak about the cultural pressures on you is in the things-you-badly-want-and-can-easily-have-if-you-wish-no-one-will-punish-you-for-it-it's-perfectly-okay-and-natural category, not the other one?

Because it is. Some things are. Lots of things, really. You might have a few others misfiled, too, come to think of it.


^^ That's just a shot in the dark on my part, wrt what in the male psyche prevents men from speaking of stuff like that even when they badly want to. And it may well be (IOW, probably is) totally wrong. However, it's kindly meant, fwiw.

[Plutonia]

What she said ----> "I really do agree that it seems that men badly want a space in which to speak about the cultural pressures on them. And I also have really always thought it was a crying shame that they don't have any (or very, very few) dedicated to that purpose. But I don't understand why they don't. I find it baffling."

We are baffled. You are silent. How's that for stereotypical roles?

I'm going to bring this down from up thread, because I'm wondering how widespread the feelings Kevin Powell are and if/how the menfolk feel it's effected them and their relationships with women or other men:

Not surprisingly the "savior" I wanted in my life was my father. ….. The one remotely tangible image of maleness in my life was gone for good. Both my mother and I were devastated, .... I longed for my father's affections. .... Silently I began to blame my mother for my father's disappearance.

Do you fellas relate to what he says there at all?


_____________

I am feeling badly for getting my back up so high with Plutonia (sorry, friend Plu!) I promise to try my best to reverse that.

No worries C_W. I really appreciate your efforts here. Much more than I'm effected by the height of your back. But thanks.

[Joe Hillshoist]

Men, let me ask you something:

Are you aware that a space in which to speak about the cultural pressures on you is in the things-you-badly-want-and-can-easily-have-if-you-wish-no-one-will-punish-you-for-it-it's-perfectly-okay-and-natural category, not the other one?

Because it is. Some things are. Lots of things, really. You might have a few others misfiled, too, come to think of it.


^^ That's just a shot in the dark on my part, wrt what in the male psyche prevents men from speaking of stuff like that even when they badly want to. And it may well be (IOW, probably is) totally wrong. However, it's kindly meant, fwiw.

If you're asking me that question directly my answer would be, well yes obviously. It should be fucking obvious to everyone.

But I can only speak for myself ... one thing I will say is that if there is a form of punishment for that it comes from other men. But they're being dickheads so it doesn't really count in this discussion cos its not what you were getting at is it?

Its easy for people to take for granted how unoppressed they actually are when confronted by some inconveniences.

Take the gray family for example.

Poor buggers. (Yes that example is way OT. Maybe the penny will drop.)

[compared2what?]

Something like that.



Sometimes even more twisted and poignant: Secret attraction and revulsion.

Dammit! After a moment or two of ruthless soul-searching, I decided that since the "within men" in "It's the fear and hatred of homosexuality within men" is capable of that interpretation, I should just force myself to regard the territory as covered and move on, in the interests of brevity.

I swear, I just can't do anything right, ever. And what's worse is that it's not like I don't know that. So there's just no excuse for me, really.

I wish....I don't know what, exactly. I wish I could be like David Watts, I guess. That's close enough, it'll just have to do.
____________

Thanks so much for the smiley emoticon, Charlie Meadows. It made my day, believe it or not.

[compared2what?]

You're still wrong. I may do a youtube video to try to convince you, perhaps I am more verbally convincing than literally.

Wait. Now I'm confused. Have you been using extra-verbal media of some sort to persuade me of the merit of your convictions thus far? Because that might explain a lot. I've just been receiving the words.

Fucking internet. Give me my pictograms and glyphs, already! Stephen gave them to me and they're mine.

I want them.