Feminism | Imamother

amother

Pearl

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 6:55 am

Ruchel wrote:

"I didn't go to the kitchen to help with the other women. Both LDH and I were strong earners. I didn't relate to the women in his family. I didn't have as much in common with a Walmart cashier(f) as I did with a banker(m). I joined the men while the women were prepping in the kitchen. I spoke to the men primarily about politics and the economy which caused the women's eyes to glaze over. "

I have zero interest in going to the kitch and that type of things. I certainly will have more to discuss with an educated man than an uneducated woman (yes, maybe the cashier has a phd). I have great female friends but as a whole don't enjoy discussing what many (not all!) women do. I also don't like many male topics. My husband loves that he can mostly talk to me.

Hey, I'm looking for friends like you! I relate very little to the women's chatter & enjoy the men's conversation so much more. I also skip out the the kitchen whenever I possibly can. I often joke, I should have been born a man.

urban gypsy

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 6:56 am

delicious and FF, amazing stories! there are some wonderful people in the world!

I'm going to copypaste from a recent post a saw on Twitter that sums it up nicely:

"Feminism is a liberatory tool. It analyzes and attempts to dismantle structures that create gender based oppression. We’ve oversimplified it, to its detriment, as a woman being equal to a man."

It's not about opening doors or wearing pants or burning bras. It's about making sure that ALL women have truly equal opportunities to move through the world, to be treated fairly in society and take advantage of everything life has to offer.

amother

Red

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 7:01 am

delicious wrote:

Thanks for my answers. I had been wondering if a feminist is more of a macho woman

No, feminists can wear tiaras and ball gowns too. They can also be girly. It’s absurd that “feminism” and “macho woman” are used in the same breath. It just means believing in equality!!! Imputing any more just weakens the argument.

amother

Red

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 7:04 am

Ruchel wrote:

Yes there can always be exceptions. If the nearest woman is a bodybuilder and the nearest man is 95 I'll ask her. But standing by my idea.

My DH has a weak back and I can lift heavy things but don’t look obviously strong. People ask him over me to lift things at their peril...

amother

Pearl

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 7:07 am

urban gypsy wrote:

It's not about opening doors or wearing pants or burning bras. It's about making sure that ALL women have truly equal opportunities to move through the world, to be treated fairly in society and take advantage of everything life has to offer.

I agree with the above. But as history has demonstrated, the words fairly and equal have been completely manipulated, and the key word opportunity has been completed ignored.

Every person should have equal opportunity based on skills or abilities, gender shouldn't come into play. But what's going on is that women are demanding equal distribution regardless of abilities or skills. Women shouldn't be promoted over men IF their lacking in any of the skills. Strict rules and regulations in the army & firefighting shouldn't be lessened to accommodate women, etc.

If you feminism to serve its true purpose, then lets drop all names and genders from applications, and let the skills & abilities talk for themselves.

amother

Maroon

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 7:11 am

chanatron1000 wrote:

Everyone should just admit that the word "feminism" has basically lost all meaning. If 5 people=6 definitions, it's barely even a word.

If having too many definitions means a word is meaningless, then what about the word Jew? You know how many definitions that has? Is it a culture, a race, an ethnic group or a religion?

mommy3b2c

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 7:13 am

amother [ Maroon ] wrote:

If having too many definitions means a word is meaningless, then what about the word Jew? You know how many definitions that has? Is it a culture, a race, an ethnic group or a religion?

Jews are both a race and a religion. That is the actual definition. It doesn’t matter what people call it. Feminism has pretty much lost all meaning. I would have been a proud suffragette back in the day, but I don’t want to call myself a feminist and associate with people who’s biggest problem is the “free the nipple” campaign.

amother

Maroon

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 7:19 am

mommy3b2c wrote:

Ok. So the word liberal. What does that mean?
So many words have a million meanings.

Also, many ideologies have different streams. Do I stop saying I am an Orthodox Jew just because I don't identify with much of today's Orthodox Jewry? No, I proudly call myself an Orthodox Jew, because I uphold the original basic tenets, but on my own terms.

Same with feminism. I am a proud feminist, even if I dont agree with some of today's most vocal feminists. But I agree with the original basic tenets of feminism.

amother

Olive

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 7:30 am

amother [ Maroon ] wrote:

Yes and no.
Yes, It sustains the kollel system, because without feminism women wouldn't be out working and earning viable wages.
No, because the whole kollel system isnt a very feminist value - the men there are doing the superior work (learning), the women are forever stuck in the supporting role , and the women are way overworked.

Agree 100 percent. It's called biting the hand that feeds you.

ora_43

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 8:29 am

amother [ Red ] wrote:

Nearly all people have the ability to be good at cooking too with a little effort. However, if you have a household where the man is a chef and the woman burns spaghetti, then it makes sense for the man to be in charge of the kitchen.

No, it really doesn't. It makes sense for the woman to learn not to burn spaghetti, because every adult should know how to cook at least 3 or 4 basic foods.

Do you actually, in reality, know any even mildly functional adult who is truly incapable of cooking?

Also, cooking was a metaphor for how you don't always have to be spectacularly skilled at something in order to do it. It's not a good metaphor for budgeting in other respects. Because ultimately, it doesn't matter at all who cooks the food you eat, but it matters a whole lot who decides how your money gets spent. There's no comparison.

amother

Orange

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 8:30 am

amother [ Red ] wrote:

Except that if you don't agree any mother can kill her baby up to the moment of birth, you're not a true feminist.

ora_43

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 8:31 am

amother [ Red ] wrote:

Just because we can handle the discomfort of the chores, it doesn’t mean we should be resigned to doing them just to fulfil notions of traditional gender roles. This is especially true if we have a spouse who is better at [insert chore of choice] than ourselves.

That's a good argument that has nothing to do with what I've been saying.

I have not once said that women shouldn't be involved in the family budget. I've literally been saying the opposite of that, that both partners should be involved.

What we disagree on is the idea that 1. the partner who is better with math will be better at budgeting, 2. budgeting is complicated, and if the wrong person does it they'll make a complete mess of it, 3. it's fine for one partner to not be involved in the budget at all.

Fox

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 8:32 am

amother [ Pearl ] wrote:

I relate very little to the women's chatter & enjoy the men's conversation so much more.

This one sentence explains why I will never, ever identify as a feminist -- at least as long as this kind of thing is acceptable to say in polite company.

See what you did here? The women "chatter" but the men have "conversation."

This is about as misogynistic as it comes.

I hate to cook, and my eyes glaze over when people are discussing recipes. But talking about homemaking isn't "chatter" while talking about the role of the Federal Reserve in controlling inflation is "conversation." If anything, the talk about cooking is likely to be better informed than the chit-chat about centralized banking.

As a political and cultural movement, feminism has gotten stuck trying to show that women who have or at least imitate traditionally masculine traits can be just as successful as men. Mazel tov!

I might be more convinced if we regularly saw job descriptions that read, "This position requires the ability to manage fluxuating resources while balancing the well-being of employees with the needs of the organization. 5 years experience as a mother/homemaker or the equivalent required."

ora_43

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 8:40 am

chanatron1000 wrote:

Everyone should just admit that the word "feminism" has basically lost all meaning. If 5 people=6 definitions, it's barely even a word.

"Democracy."

"Terrorism."

"Activism."

"Racism."

"Love."

"Family."

Are all these words meaningless too?

Here is why "feminism" still has meaning: because nearly everyone who self-describes as "feminist" can agree on certain core issues. Feminists might disagree over whether gender differences are biological, sociological or both; over whether the root of sexism lies in history or politics or capitalism or biology; over whether parading topless in the street is a proud protest of the patriarchy or a sad sign of brainwashing by the patriarchy.

But we can all agree that women are not worse than men, that women deserve equal opportunities (at work, in politics, equal access to education and healthcare, etc), that women should be protected from gender-based abuse and exploitation, and that people who don't agree with the above are not feminists.

FranticFrummie

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 8:42 am

amother [ Pearl ] wrote:

What you are talking about is pure meritocracy, and I agree 100%. This goes for all college admissions, too. No special quotas anywhere, for anyone.

amother

Ginger

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 8:47 am

amother [ Red ] wrote:

The bolded is what feminism is. Everything else you mention is just man hating. Man hating does not equal feminism. I personally don’t see how the two get muddled up. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Who is saying that they don’t need a man? And what has that got to do with feminism? I am a feminist with a man I need. Where is the contradiction?

It probably got muddled up when anti-feminism blended into misogyny. I don't need a man like that, but exceptions are hard to find (where I'm from).

amother

Ginger

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 8:50 am

ora_43 wrote:

But people - especially women - who call themselves anti-feminist don't necessarily disagree with anything you listed. They really belong in the "mildest" feminist group, but have been scared off by what the label has become. Which is why language is so tricky.

And yes, we spent a lesson in family psychology defining family, and it isn't really all that simple. One man's terrorism is another man's activism, and we know too well from the mess in the Middle East. And so on...

amother

Pearl

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 8:52 am

Fox wrote:

You're projecting your own views onto my words. When people talk about things I have no interest in, then to me it's chatter. With things that I have interest in, then it becomes a conversation to me. So if the women would be discussing something I have interest in, and the men would be discussing the latest football game, my words would be reversed. I'd totally relate to the women's conversation & have no interest in the men's chatter.

It's all relative to me & my interests, without any regard to gender.