|
Punching Bag Bitch, cry and whine your way into oblivion. |
|
LinkBack | Topic Tools | Rate Topic |
|
||||
Feminism versus Love
This excerpt is a bit long and requires some upper level reading skills, but I think this guy is onto something :
By Henry Makow Ph.D. Quote:
|
|
|||
I was actually seriously reading the article and trying to get the point, but it's coming from a pretty biased source, for some reason I'd have an easier time taking it seriously if it was on anything but savethemales.ca. That really takes away from its legitimacy.
|
|
|||
No I don't agree. Not only has he made a lot of gross generalizations about feminism without doing any research, but he's falling back on the fallacy that nuclear family has been the norm throughout history, which is entirely untrue.
The whole article seems to be more about his own inability to come to terms with his own identity, really. |
|
||||
Quote:
the name is a play off of "save the whales" but I guess you don't find that too funny. What about the actual points he raises? Like the reciprocal nature of male-female relationships? Quote:
For example, women are taught to not expect love to be connected with sex, and if they do, they suffer from some kind of pathology. Kinda like a man, no? I think he makes a good point when he says that feminism seeks to masculinise women, and making men redundant in the process, throwing a wrench into heterosexuality. Quote:
|
|
||||
And that has to do with her point.... how?
Anybody can get married. That's easy. Maintaining respect for your partner throughout the marriage isn't so much so. This essay reminds me of the chick in Cryptonomicon that wrote the essay about how facial hair is used to mask your personal identity, while dating one of the main characters who had a beard. If I were this guy's wife I'd leave him after reading this. |
|
||||
Quote:
all you've done is gives meaningless labels to this piece, doing nothing to negate or affirm any of the points. maybe all what you're saying is crap. It's all an ebbomega-ism. |
|
||||
Now you're getting it.
First of all, he assumes too much and generalises even more. There's no concrete evidence for anything that he's saying there except quoting from scripture and a bunch of sources no newer than 1975. Hate to break it to you, but the feminist movement has evolved _A LOT_ since 1975. All in all, the entire article reads like Men Are From Mars and Women Are From Venus, basically taking some sound psychological theories and distorting them into absolutes, thus assuming that all male/female relationships are the same (and are therefore implicitly different from male/male or female/female relationships). Any psychologist will tell you that claiming absolutes is almost never a reliable practice when it comes to the way in which humans behave, because we seem to always manage to find exceptions to just about every single psychological rule. Better? |
|
||||
Quote:
Let's stop taking an immediate antagonistic approach to it and trying to figure out 'where he's coming from' and actually look at what he's saying. Here are the points: do you agree that men and women are made differently, generally speaking? In coming together, do they take on identities to make a traditional reciprocal (as opposed to "equal") relationship work? Usually known as a "man" and "woman"? Accepting this premise, what is it that defines a "man" and what defines a "woman" in the context of a hetero-sexual relationship? He's saying that feminism has subverted the gender roles. |
|
|||
I think I understand what the guy is saying and can almost agree with him. Example when he was talking about "the dance". Yet I dont belive its fair to say that a male role is to lead and the female role it to follow only. The part about when a women surends is when she is in love is bloody loopy if you ask me. I can agree that often women like to be controled or guided at time and probly to look for someone that can take care of them... however I think alot of men look for that too and like to be told what to do themselfs at times.
This guy pretty much contredicted himself when syaing an equal relationship is a brother/siter relation ship than turns around to say that its ok when the man and women dance, their equal and can take turns leading. Personaly I would call this an old fashion frame of mind. I think ppl these days are trying a more modern/politicaly correct way of marige were you dont have the old fashion trends this guy seems to be preaching. |
|
|||
Quote:
As most people have mentioned already, Makow makes huge generalizations about the nature of "women and men" and attempts to define the relationship between them as dichotomous. In doing so, he completely ignores the diverse identities that individual men and women assume and have assumed across time and across culture. I believe that women and men are only as different as the the norms of the society within which they are a part, demands that they be. There are physical differences between men and women that can't be denied, but the fact that western society has evolved to be more inclusive of women (thus redefining gender roles and expectations), and the fact that various cultures have different expectations of women and men from that of our own society, is indicative of the notion that there are no "real" differences between men and women (at least behaviourally) that we can point to. It would be a sexist, biased and ethnocentric mistake to assume that we can define men as being one way and women as being another. What bothers me about Makow's writing is the fact that the differences between men and women that he seems to imply is that men naturally seek power and that women are naturally subordinate to them and can only be happy by being dependent on them. I feel sorry for his wife. Last edited by yoko*; Apr 25, 05 at 01:03 AM. |
|
||||
If he really thinks "there are more gay people" I'm curious how he arrived at that conclusion. A more credible conclusion might be "gay people are more open about their sexuality because they won't be drawn and quartered for it anymore."
If he thinks the altered nature of the male/female relationship was the cause of this (supposed) increase, then whooooaaah that's a whole other case of begging the fucking question.. question being, umm... your proof of cause and effect correlation? Quote:
*fingers stuck in ears* "LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU BECAUSE I'M THE MAN SO YOU CAN'T CRITICIZE ME LA LA LA LA" Finally Wum... Quote:
I'm not being dismissive or reactionary... there's something to some of what he says, but a hell of a lot of it sounds like coming up with pat answers through specious reasoning that justify beliefs that he WANTS to arrive at... because it would make things so much simpler for him if it was black and white like that. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
And how would this 'ruffle my feathers'? It's not like he's saying anything new. |
|
|||
Quote:
|