This is for all you anti-feminists.

WhatFor

Tue, Mar 14 2017, 12:06 am

Tablepoetry wrote:

You find it hard to imagine a fulfilling family life where no one is able to sew? Oh my.
Meet me, exhibit one. I can sew buttons back on, but that's where my sewing skills pretty much end (and I actually took sewing back in the day....not all women take to this 'feminine' skill).
Most of my friends are similar. Those who can sew barely use it unless they happen to like it.
I think we lead pretty fulfilling family lives.
I could turn the same question to you. How do you lead a fulfilling lifestyle if you purchase all your clothes at the mall? Why don't you sew all your family's clothes like once was done?
Today most people outsource the making of clothes and I don't see how outsourcing the mending is any different.
As for purim costumes, many abound with creativity but maybe one mom in an entire school is actually sewing them. Kids either pull together something on their own or buy and add to it. Yes, maybe it would be more special if mom invested two weeks sewing it, but as I said, that's icing on the cake. I want my dd to be able to support herself as a priority, and to learn to sew costumes only if that's something she enjoys. (I certainly would dislike a world where women felt pressure to sew costumes regardless of whether they like it or not.)

I dont think you can compare not sewing to living on fast food at all. Living on fast food kills your health. Me sending the seamstress my mending doesnt kill anyone. You can compare it to me serving my family simple, tasty, healthy food, rather than gourmet meals set on fine china.

I strongly believe that we each make our house a home in different ways. The fact one woman sews costumes doesnt make her home cozier or happier than the woman who loves home decoration or the woman who loves gardening or even the woman who wants to spend all her free time taking nature walks with her kids.

I, too, was encouraged to engage in a variety of needle and thread activities. ("Sewing" would be generous.) My poor Alice-in-Wonderland doll who never could contain her stuffing. And that needlepoint of...actually, whatever it was supposed to be will forever remain a mystery.

I have a very talented friend who can sew all of her and her children's clothing from scratch. I a world without feminism, she may have been just fine. Me? I'm grateful for all the feminists who fought so I could have a professional degree.

SacN

Tue, Mar 14 2017, 1:51 am

Quote:

Feminism was supposed to elevate women and men. It was supposed to enable all people to embrace facets of themselves that fell outside traditional gender roles. It was supposed to honor different talents and choices... Feminism may have won the battle in making sure that girls could take chemistry and calculus while boys could enroll in home ec and typing. But they snatched defeat from the jaws of victory when they conceded that calculus is more inherently important to society than home ec.

I can't like this enough. It's not about the semantics of specifically sewing and cooking, but rather the expectation that a self respecting person (especially a self respecting man, unfortunately) doesn't need to focus on living outside of the professional development.
My husband needs to know how to be a good father, how to run a home, how to listen thoughtfully, supportively, as much as I do.

We both have professional degrees and both work. But he can't walk into a job interview and as for a flexible schedule so he can spend time with his kids--it would be career suicide. There are professions where this is happening, but for men much much slower than it is for women in every field, and if men can't do it, can't and won't demand to be mulit-faceted people who get leave when their kids are born and who take sick days when their kids have the flu and who come home to tuck their babies into bed, it becomes very very difficult for women to do anything BUT that.

That is, unless we want to deny the importance of family life altogether. I certainly don't.

I think an important step for feminism is to recognize that men can and should also take on the also important roles that are still seen as feminine. That they are important, and that they must be valued and shared.

mommy3b2c

Tue, Mar 14 2017, 4:57 am

Tablepoetry wrote:

I don't support giving girls (or boys) the message that in order to be awesome they need a career.
I do think the message should be that in order to be an independent adult, you need to hone proper skills to support yourself (ie develop a career).
I do think school should devote some time preparing men and women to be parents and manage homes. But time is limited, and I wouldnt want learning how to sew to replace university required courses.

k

Im not talking about sewing. (Ftr, I have no idea how.) im talking about being given the idea that working and raising a family are equally important. I am very pro education. I myself have a masters degree. However, I am a sahm and I dont sit home all day and think about how keeping house and caring for my children is mind numbing drudgery. I think a lot of feminists today feel that to be a good feminist, you do need to think that way. Its actually interesting. Last night I was watching t hat 70s show. Eric told donna that he cant wait for her to have his babies and be a sahm. And she got so offended! In her words, " how dare he think that im not worth more then that!" Thats the message that I get from the femenists of today. The original suffragettes, them I would have been proud to be a part of.

amother

Lime

Tue, Mar 14 2017, 7:06 am

mommy3b2c wrote:

Don't you think being a SAHM would involve more "drudgery" if you didn't have a housekeeper?

Fox

Tue, Mar 14 2017, 7:47 am

marina wrote:

The only reason you even associate treating women respectfully with being a good human being is BECAUSE OF FEMINISM. A hundred years ago being a good person had nothing to do with treating women respectfully because women were like children, you could treat them as you wished, depending on how they behaved for you. But now, thanks to feminism you read that sentence and shudder and cannot even imagine that world.

You believe that the link between treating women respectfully and being a good human being started with the feminist movement?

Sorry, but there is ample evidence to the contrary.

The Torah, for example. While there are all kinds of things that grate on our modern sensibilities, Roman women Messed to convert to Judaism in large part because of its treatment of women. Rabbi Akiva's second wife was a Roman matron who converted.

Or the chivalric code, which evolved in Christian Europe. Again, far from perfect, but clearly a positive development in how women were regarded in the feudal era.

Even your example of 100 years ago is incomplete. Yes, it is true that women were treated woefully from legal, economic, and often social standpoints. But men and women were also far more interdependent than they are today and were forced to acknowledge their need for one another and their reliance on one another.

Unfortunately, as contemporary feminism has evolved, we increasingly throw out the baby with the bathwater. When I was growing up, the popular slogan was, "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle." It was printed on t-shirts and tote bags and stickers, which we attached to our school binders.

At first glance, it was a positive message: be your own person; don't rely on a man to define you, etc. But the deeper message was both troubling and inaccurate. First of all, the majority of women want husbands and families. They may be able to survive with other arrangements, but they are statistically less happy.

Most important, though, the slogan (and the philosophy behind it) didn't address the importance of women to the world; it only made the point that they didn't need men. And that is why feminism hasn't resulted in a revolution of better day-to-day treatment of women.

The real message should have been, "A man without a woman is like a fish in a too-small tank." I realize that might not fit on a t-shirt. Society is better, more moral, more comfortable, and more successful when nurturing, empathy, and beauty -- feminine characteristics -- are part of it. Regardless of who is exhibiting those behaviors, they are predominately feminine characteristics, and women should own them. Feminism should be reminding men just how lousy the world would be without women -- and not because we can carry our economic weight.

marina wrote:

And as for who gets to define feminism? Me. I do. And the rest of us feminists we get to define it too. Not just whatever kooks are the scholars of the day. Will there be various definitions? Sure. So what? This video is about mine.

That's great. All of us are inspired by different things. But if all definitions are valid, why are you (and the video producer, by extension) trying to persuade us to adopt yours?

It strikes me that many self-described feminists care less about what women actually believe or do than that they call themselves feminists. But I guess that makes sense -- if you can definie feminism any way you want, then everyone can and should be a feminist. That seems kind of ridiculous to me, but okay, poof! We're all feminists!

amother

Jetblack

Tue, Mar 14 2017, 8:00 am

mommy3b2c wrote:

You know, it's possible to think managing a household is drudgery because you find it to be drudgery and not because feminism told you to feel that way. I started out as a sahm because I had it drummed into me that raising a family is the highest calling of a good Jewish woman and who needs a career and it's so special to be a mother that even changing a diaper is a spiritual act and blah blah blah. It was a huge let down to find that in fact taking care of my household was very much drudgery and none of the fulfillment or specialness it was supposed to offer. I was miserable and ever since I started working, I'm so much happier. I enjoy every minute I spend with my kids instead of counting down the minutes till bedtime. I enjoy the more creative aspects of things- cooking something interesting, doing interesting things with the kids, and I can afford to never have to clean my house myself. This is jist how I am, nothing to do with society or feminists.

amother

Lilac

Tue, Mar 14 2017, 8:04 am

amother wrote:

Right. But it's feminism that gave you the option of working out of the home. Otherwise you'd still be miserable.

amother

Saddlebrown

Tue, Mar 14 2017, 8:05 am

DrMom wrote:

Intersectionality, as applied in modern academia, usually translates into: If you support one left-wing causes (such as third wave feminism), then you must support other left-wing causes (like BLM or the BDS movement) because all "isms" and "phobias" are related and we are all oppressed by the cis-normative white patriarchy and we oppressed non-privileged groups must stick together.

It's all the rage (quite literally sometimes) on college campuses.

They support all the "isms" except for Anti-Semitism. Sure, they raised money when Jewish cemeteries were desecrated but that was just a PR stunt to make it seem like they really care about Jews. Now they are openly saying not to support Israel so we are back to square one, Jews are the white oppressors who are denying Muslims their freedom to take back their country. Whatever, I'm tired of identity politics and group think and hope that the liberal left will wake up one day and realize that they are a hateful, oppressive group of people who have no interest in protecting anyone other than themselves and their money.

http://jewishstandard.timesofi.....rael/

Fox

Tue, Mar 14 2017, 8:09 am

Tablepoetry wrote:

I strongly believe that we each make our house a home in different ways. The fact one woman sews costumes doesnt make her home cozier or happier than the woman who loves home decoration or the woman who loves gardening or even the woman who wants to spend all her free time taking nature walks with her kids.

This is all very nice, but it's a bit like people who used to claim they spent "qualilty time" with their kids instead of spending a lot of time with them. Yes . . . but, no.

Obviously, we all have different talents, interests, and skills. Obviously, we have different priorities.

But, yes, I consider it a kind of poverty to have to rely extensively on mass-produced goods.

Of course, it would be ridiculous to take that idea to an extreme. Nevertheless, there is a reason that handcrafted items are more valuable and carry more prestige than mass-produced ones.

I am acutely aware of the lifestyle compromises I make because of time and talent considerations:

* I use a lot of disposables during the week. In no way are foam plates "just as good" as china. Will it irreparably harm my family? Probably not, but it's an impoverishment of our lifestyle.

* I hate cooking -- almost to a pathological degree. So while I do it, I rely on mixes and shortcuts. Again, no one starves or is poisoned, but someone making more innovative, attractive dinners is richer than I am.

* As you note, few of us make our own clothes today. It's actually more expensive to do so, in my calculations. So instead I rely on the colors, cuts, patterns, and sizes that manufacturers deem profitable. For all practical purposes, I must wear a uniform -- I just get a huge selection of uniforms to choose from.

These compromises are all made because I lack the time or talent. It doesn't mean I'm a bad person, but I'm certainly not going to indulge in the hallucination that my choices and priorities don't diminish my family's lifestyle.

marina

Tue, Mar 14 2017, 9:40 am

Quote:

Sure, there were some cultures who treated women better than others. Judaism also treated slaves better than other cultures, I'm sure. So what? It doesn't mean that women were treated with the respect they are treated today. Women were in the same category as children or slaves. The rambam had a whole list of what women were not allowed to do, such as be idle so they don't turn into sluts. And if you didn't follow that rule, you risked malkos or other physical punishment.

The shulchan aruch specifically says- as I've cited a million times - that men are saved over women if both are drowning.

You want to say, oh, Judaism treated women respectfully because of Onah or generally frowning on beating your wife for fun? Okay, if that's your standard of respect I guess you'll have that point of view.

I don't know that Roman women "Messed to convert" and I'd like to see some evidence for that.

Quote:

Unfortunately, as contemporary feminism has evolved, we increasingly throw out the baby with the bathwater. When I was growing up, the popular slogan was, "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle." It was printed on t-shirts and tote bags and stickers, which we attached to our school binders.

At first glance, it was a positive message: be your own person; don't rely on a man to define you, etc. But the deeper message was both troubling and inaccurate. First of all, the majority of women want husbands and families. They may be able to survive with other arrangements, but they are statistically less happy.

Most important, though, the slogan (and the philosophy behind it) didn't address the importance of women to the world; it only made the point that they didn't need men. And that is why feminism hasn't resulted in a revolution of better day-to-day treatment of women.

The real message should have been, "A man without a woman is like a fish in a too-small tank." I realize that might not fit on a t-shirt. Society is better, more moral, more comfortable, and more successful when nurturing, empathy, and beauty -- feminine characteristics -- are part of it. Regardless of who is exhibiting those behaviors, they are predominately feminine characteristics, and women should own them. Feminism should be reminding men just how lousy the world would be without women -- and not because we can carry our economic weight.

So many women, in society as a whole and on this website in particular, stay with horrible men because they are afraid of being alone or don't see themselves as self-reliant or they just want a husband and family. I don't see a problem with empowering those people a bit and teaching them that no, you don't actually need a man to be happy.

Feminism is reminding society about how lousy the world would be about women- hence the failed attempt at A Day Without Women recently.

Quote:

You always try to convince us of what feminism REALLY is, so I don't see why I shouldn't persuade people to adopt a wider view. Everyone tries to persuade people to see things their way.

And, again, Rabbi Mizrachi or the Eida Chareidis or the Lev Tahor cult do not get to define Judaism. I don't care what the so-called leaders say. I'd rather look at what the children are taught and what people generally adopt. Hence the video.