8 ms·

Where I really crossed the threshold into understanding Feminism was in a class I took in college (as trite as it sounds). We were discussing gender-specific or

Where I really crossed the threshold into understanding Feminism was in a class I took in college (as trite as it sounds). We were discussing gender-specific organizations, not unlike the one in this post, when someone asked why it's OK for women to have a conference, but if men did, people would flip. The teacher gave a long-winded answer, but what really stuck with me most was a single statement: "Because every other organization is already a men's organization." YMMV.

obstacle1 13y ago
Sorry, are you saying that statement made you understand as in the statement is an explanation of some essential point of feminism? Or are you saying that statement made you understand that feminism often (not always!) has a tenuous grasp on reality, tends to make baseless or meaningless statements, and is purely ideological much of the time? Because that statement -- which btw is the standard "I don't want to have to argue with you" brush-off used by campus feminists everywhere -- means nothing. Every other organization is already a men's organization? Really? In what sense could they possibly mean that? What assumptions must they be making for that to hold true? By virtue of the fact that they're on a university campus, they're part of an organization consisting of well over 1/2 women [1]. Men are a minority on most campuses in the states. So does the university as a whole qualify as a "men's organization"? If not, why is a "women's organization" necessary on campus? If there's no need to be 'shielded' from a broader, all-encompassing men's organization constituted by the university, it seems that a men's organization is just as justified as a women's organization in that environment. [1] - http://www.forbes.com/sites/ccap/2012/02/16/the-male-female-ratio-in-college/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/ccap/2012/02/16/the-male-female-...
- detcader 13y ago
  It seems you need a bit more than dclowd9901. Perhaps "White Privilege and Male Privilege" by Peggy McIntosh and "Oppression" by Marilyn Frye are good places to start: http://www.iub.edu/~tchsotl/part2/McIntosh%20White%20Privilege.pdf http://www.iub.edu/~tchsotl/part2/McIntosh%20White%20Privile... http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/tbettch/Frye,%20Oppression.pdf http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/tbettch/Frye,%20Oppression...
  - obstacle1 13y ago
    I graduated from a feminist-oriented humanities department where I engaged with these issues critically for a long time. Rather than linking me polemics from 1988 that don't address my point, consider that I disagree with the fundamental positions on a logical basis. If you'd like to engage the points I actually made in my post, feel free.
    - detcader 13y ago
      So what you're saying is, you won't read either essay.
      - obstacle1 13y ago
        What I'm saying is explicitly written down in the posts I've made. If you're willing to engage the points I'm actually making, I'll have a discussion with you. If you're just going to throw broad-reaching polemical feminism 101 articles at very specific points, I'm not going to take you seriously. You didn't even state why you think those articles apply to the (again, very specific) point I made.
        detcader 13y ago
        I thought it would be obvious by just reading the articles. Even in environments where there are a bit more women than men, men still have male privilege (as McIntosh describes it), women are still under oppression (as Frye describes it). Women still fear rape and all other male violence on college campuses, for example. "Majority" makes no difference when it comes to power structures; look at "the 1%" in the US..
    - quinnchr 13y ago
      I highly doubt you engaged these issues critically if you seriously don't believe that most institutional structures are dominated by men. Great, student bodies have slightly more women than men. However the vast majority of professors, researchers, and administrators are men. It's the positions of power being dominated by men that makes the institution for men. Much like the positions of power in politics and business are undeniably dominated by men.
tomp 13y ago
I'd really like to ask your teacher which organizations, exactly, did (s)he mean. My experience is limited, obviously, and I'm not from the US, but I've only rarely seen an organization with only male members, and even most of these have welcomed women who wanted to join.
- mtrimpe 13y ago
  The average board meeting would be a good example of such an organization.
mtrimpe 13y ago
In the end it boils down to the problem that it's very hard to explain the mechanics of culture to people who have little to gain from changing it. When you've pulled the short straw in your culture, whether it's due to race, sex, orientation or something else, you have a lot of incentive to attempt to change culture and you logically end up spending a lot of energy on learning the intricacies of culture and cultural change. If you're in the priviliged group however there's very little incentive to pay attention to these issues at all, since effecting cultural change would have little personal benefit. A byproduct of those systemic forces is that it makes discussions between those two sides very difficult; quite like how discussing technical topics in politics is very hard.

obstacle1 13y ago

Sorry, are you saying that statement made you understand as in the statement is an explanation of some essential point of feminism? Or are you saying that statement made you understand that feminism often (not always!) has a tenuous grasp on reality, tends to make baseless or meaningless statements, and is purely ideological much of the time? Because that statement -- which btw is the standard "I don't want to have to argue with you" brush-off used by campus feminists everywhere -- means nothing. Every other organization is already a men's organization? Really? In what sense could they possibly mean that? What assumptions must they be making for that to hold true? By virtue of the fact that they're on a university campus, they're part of an organization consisting of well over 1/2 women [1]. Men are a minority on most campuses in the states. So does the university as a whole qualify as a "men's organization"? If not, why is a "women's organization" necessary on campus? If there's no need to be 'shielded' from a broader, all-encompassing men's organization constituted by the university, it seems that a men's organization is just as justified as a women's organization in that environment. [1] - http://www.forbes.com/sites/ccap/2012/02/16/the-male-female-ratio-in-college/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/ccap/2012/02/16/the-male-female-...

detcader 13y ago
It seems you need a bit more than dclowd9901. Perhaps "White Privilege and Male Privilege" by Peggy McIntosh and "Oppression" by Marilyn Frye are good places to start: http://www.iub.edu/~tchsotl/part2/McIntosh%20White%20Privilege.pdf http://www.iub.edu/~tchsotl/part2/McIntosh%20White%20Privile... http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/tbettch/Frye,%20Oppression.pdf http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/tbettch/Frye,%20Oppression...
- obstacle1 13y ago
  I graduated from a feminist-oriented humanities department where I engaged with these issues critically for a long time. Rather than linking me polemics from 1988 that don't address my point, consider that I disagree with the fundamental positions on a logical basis. If you'd like to engage the points I actually made in my post, feel free.
  - detcader 13y ago
    So what you're saying is, you won't read either essay.
    - obstacle1 13y ago
      What I'm saying is explicitly written down in the posts I've made. If you're willing to engage the points I'm actually making, I'll have a discussion with you. If you're just going to throw broad-reaching polemical feminism 101 articles at very specific points, I'm not going to take you seriously. You didn't even state why you think those articles apply to the (again, very specific) point I made.
      - detcader 13y ago
        I thought it would be obvious by just reading the articles. Even in environments where there are a bit more women than men, men still have male privilege (as McIntosh describes it), women are still under oppression (as Frye describes it). Women still fear rape and all other male violence on college campuses, for example. "Majority" makes no difference when it comes to power structures; look at "the 1%" in the US..
  - quinnchr 13y ago
    I highly doubt you engaged these issues critically if you seriously don't believe that most institutional structures are dominated by men. Great, student bodies have slightly more women than men. However the vast majority of professors, researchers, and administrators are men. It's the positions of power being dominated by men that makes the institution for men. Much like the positions of power in politics and business are undeniably dominated by men.

tomp 13y ago

I'd really like to ask your teacher which organizations, exactly, did (s)he mean. My experience is limited, obviously, and I'm not from the US, but I've only rarely seen an organization with only male members, and even most of these have welcomed women who wanted to join.

mtrimpe 13y ago
The average board meeting would be a good example of such an organization.

mtrimpe 13y ago

In the end it boils down to the problem that it's very hard to explain the mechanics of culture to people who have little to gain from changing it. When you've pulled the short straw in your culture, whether it's due to race, sex, orientation or something else, you have a lot of incentive to attempt to change culture and you logically end up spending a lot of energy on learning the intricacies of culture and cultural change. If you're in the priviliged group however there's very little incentive to pay attention to these issues at all, since effecting cultural change would have little personal benefit. A byproduct of those systemic forces is that it makes discussions between those two sides very difficult; quite like how discussing technical topics in politics is very hard.