The Forum > Article Comments > When 'feminism' becomes sexism > Comments
When 'feminism' becomes sexism : Comments
By Bob Montgomery, published 12/2/2013I don’t doubt that gender differences in psychology reflect gender differences in biology.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- Page 3
- 4
-
- All
Posted by Mollydukes, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 8:03:38 PM
| |
Good on you Mollydukes!
I like your 'aggressive' style of writing. You should know however, that no amount of intelligent discussion will change these guys minds about an apparent ' feminist conspiracy' to bash the natural aggression out of today's 'real' men : ) Posted by Suseonline, Thursday, 14 February 2013 12:44:33 AM
| |
I'm spectacularly unaggressive. Do I have to trade in my old fella for lady parts? Because not being to pee standing up is going to suck.
Cheers, Tony Posted by Tony Lavis, Thursday, 14 February 2013 5:34:48 AM
| |
Mollydukes "Nice try, but no, despite your lecturers having drummed 'it' into you, you clearly do not understand the concept and how to use it appropriately when speaking as a male about females. But whatever, good on you for trying."
Usually, when you say someone is wrong you also state why. My description of the term is generally right. Levinas also added an ethical dimension to it, claiming that a person's first reaction to the 'other's' face ought to demand an ethical response. Well, if that is so, I could ask the feminists to demand they act ethically and respect the masculine 'other.' Mollydukes "Did you know that questions provide an opportunity for people to begin to understand each other and appreciate why we think differently. That seems to be the most efficient way for humans to solve problems. Have you not noticed that this is the go these days?" So does this apply to feminists as well? Should they also appreciate and respect the masculine aspect of men? Mollydukes "It isn't very useful for solving problems to just assert that something is so because you believe it to be so. What makes you an expert on male agression?" 50 years of social engineering has not put an end to aggression at all. 50 years of stocking the education department and the public service with "egalitarians" has not been able to turn men into women. Why is that? Why after 10-16 years of education do men still act aggressively? This is where the "social construction" theory of behaviour falls apart. Postmodern social construction theory cannot account for why unwanted social traits keep appearing even after numerous measures are put in place to eradicate them. There is something about our essential nature that makes us prone to aggressive behaviour. Postmodernists hate any biological interpretations because it stands in the way of their social reformation agenda. Posted by Aristocrat, Thursday, 14 February 2013 11:57:02 AM
| |
I would also point out, again, that unadulterated physical aggression is only one aspect of masculinity. The will to self-responsibility and self-control is also paramount. In fact, these latter two trump the former. The former is only required in war time (yet that too requires controlled aggression). In peace time man sublimates his aggression into his tasks. This is why man tinkers for hours in his shed, plays computer games for hours on end, designs and builds bridges and buildings, understands and masters science and philosophy. His essential nature demands he stamps his will onto something, anything. Those who don't usually become depressed and unfortunately end up suicidal
Posted by Aristocrat, Thursday, 14 February 2013 11:59:52 AM
| |
When feminism becomes sexism...
<Why I won't be taking up the "man prayer" or supporting 1BillionRising this Valentine's Day TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2013 The 1 Billion Rising campaign has created a YouTube video called "Man Prayer," with words by Eve Ensler and film by Tony Stroebel. The video notes read as follows: Violence against women hurts everyone, including men. We invite our brothers to take up this cause, and be free from the limiting strictures of our modern definition of masculinity! #MenRise There are so many things wrong with this video and the 1 Billion Rising movement that it's hard to know where to start. Of course I support initiatives to reduce violence around the world and in our communities. In fact, much of my work for the past 10 years has been doing just that. I don't however support initiatives that do this by stereotyping and stigmatising any group, be it based upon gender, religion, race, age, sexual preference, socioeconomic status or any other demographic category. And I don't support initiatives that aren't based upon the evidence. The message I get from the video is that men, boys and masculinity are bad, wrong, broken, stupid, violent and domineering. A message like this only creates violence, it doesn't reduce it. Imagine a similar hypothetical video featuring girls and women saying "may I be a woman who is more rational and less emotional, who is a better partner who nags less, who pays my own way rather than being a gold digger" - and on and on using the worst stereotypes of women and girls. Now imagine that this hypothetical video was written by a man. How many women would accept it? The fact that the "Man Prayer" video was written by a woman, featuring the made-up 'voices' of men is deeply offensive. The "Man Prayer" takes the worst stereotypes of men and masculinity that are held by a small percentage of men (and also a small percentage of women) and reinforces them, while painting the picture that females are free from the same and other vices. .....> http://www.menshealthaustralia.net/content/why-i-wont-be-taking-up-the-man-prayer-or-supporting-1billio.html Posted by onthebeach, Thursday, 14 February 2013 12:14:41 PM
|
Aristocrat - Aristocrat! Are you serious? Why would anyone call themselves an aristocrat or want to be one? Do you wear a curly wig and lace, like Louis XIV.
Nice try, but no, despite your lecturers having drummed 'it' into you, you clearly do not understand the concept and how to use it appropriately when speaking as a male about females. But whatever, good on you for trying.
Whatever the rest of your comment was about, it was not a response to the questions I asked.
Did you know that questions provide an opportunity for people to begin to understand each other and appreciate why we think differently. That seems to be the most efficient way for humans to solve problems. Have you not noticed that this is the go these days?
It isn't very useful for solving problems to just assert that something is so because you believe it to be so. What makes you an expert on male agression?
Your experience is not enough to provide you with all the relevant facts about this issue. Do you really think you can you speak for all men?