Feminism - more of it

[emberling]

I should point out that there are languages that do not use pronouns this way. (some that doesen't period, and some only do so in certain registers)

I'd be interested in how these differ in the precise shaping of cultural patriarchies. I was wondering earlier - maybe even having vast arbitrary genders for every noun might make uncoding genders a bit easier since he/she equivalents lack the literal connotation they have in english? I don't know very much about the subject at all, either the linguistic side or the cultural. I don't even want to make any statements because my knowledge is so basic and stereotype-laden. Have vague impression that languages where everything is either 'he' or 'she' may actually coincide with greater dichotomy in expectations between genders.

[karaddin]

I alt-tabbed and came back and forgot in what thread I was, and read this sentence ENTIRELY wrong therefor a second.

:rofl:

I stand by the statement regardlessThe choice is easy in that case...same sex all the way! Recent studies have shown lesbians statistically get off more than straight women in sex!

ETA: Because I was forgetting what my statement actually was.

[Shryke]

I'd be interested in how these differ in the precise shaping of cultural patriarchies. I was wondering earlier - maybe even having vast arbitrary genders for every noun might make uncoding genders a bit easier since he/she equivalents lack the literal connotation they have in english? I don't know very much about the subject at all, either the linguistic side or the cultural. I don't even want to make any statements because my knowledge is so basic and stereotype-laden. Have vague impression that languages where everything is either 'he' or 'she' may actually coincide with greater dichotomy in expectations between genders.

There's some studies showing that languages that apply genders to inanimate objects change how people tend to describe and view those objects, but I've never seen anything linking it generally to gender dichotomies.

[Darzin]

Well Tajik doesn't have gendered pronouns and the society in Tajikistan is still very sexist and macho. I honestly wondered how this would affect gender relations and my conclusion was not very much because you use a pronoun when the other parties know who you are referring to already.

[Alarich]

Re: single-sex education;

Some of my friends and aquaintances have been to single-sex schools, and although I never went to one, I spent two years in a boarding School that only very recently transformed from a boy school to mixed education.

My opinion is: as always, it depends on the school. And there it depends largely on how open or reclusive the schooling concept is. The people I know who went to "closed" single sex boarding schools, were - in retrospect not very fond of the concept. Others, who had for example mixed activities in the afternoon (Music/choir/arts etc etc), were quite positive about it. There are also schools, where only certain subjects are "segregated" - like science and sports activities - to allow a more nuanced teaching approach.

The school I went to, used to be very closed and that was IMO a definite negative and there were a lot of stupid rituals and attitude that lingered from the time when it was a boy-School. For me - not a rugby player, not a cricket player, focus on academic sucess, music and sports like climbing and canoeing and a German (try that in an English boarding school...), it was hard enough as it was, but in an all-boy environment, where you are basically locked in, it would have been unbearable.

However, I don't think that we can generally say that people from single-sex schools will not be able to peoperly communicate with the other sex. It largely depends IMO on the right balance. From what I have read, girls do tend to perform better and learn more in certain subjects like physics, chemistry or maths, when there are no or few boys in the class. And let's face it, good and thorough academic education is important because never in your later life will you get the opportunity to dedicate so much time to learning the basics across such a broad range of subjects. From history, art, music, biology, chemistry, literature, mathematics etc... In an ideal world, the school will open the entire world for you and most choices that follow after that will only narrow it down again. There are a range of topics in geography, chemistry, biology, physics etc. where I have, from the age of 17 onwards, never had any further classes or read any books and I still profit from the basics that I've learned between the age of 13 and 16.

So, for my own daughter, I will definitively consider schools where at least some classes are single-sex classes. But I probably won't send her to a girls boarding shool or a school where she will spend all day in a girls only environment.

[deleted01]

I went to a co-ed school, but took some classes at the girls' school in Sixth Form. My experience was horrible. It was full of stuck-up, spoilt girls, who belittled and bullied anyone who didn't or couldn't have the things they did. They also wore their skirts extremely short, and were known for sneaking out to meet guys from the boys' school. I definitely got my share of dirty looks and sneers, both as an outsider and as a woman who didn't particularly conform to their standards of beauty. (I was asked on several occasions why I didn't wear a skirt, for example.)

I'm sure all schools are different, but in this town, the girls' and boys' schools are perceived to be the schools for the rich kids, whereas my co-ed school is full of poor, naughty kids. There are always exceptions, but that snobbery really got on my nerves, and I soon dropped my classes at the girls' school. Zabz, the schools you're looking at seem much better.

[Suttree]

They also wore their skirts extremely short, and were known for sneaking out to meet guys from the boys' school.

The absolute gall of those hussies.

[Lyanna Stark]

The absolute gall of those hussies.

Hmm, I'd more say these girls suffered a lot of internalised sexism as a lot of young girls can do. And that it is then common to take that out on other girls/women when they fail to live up to the ideals set by a patriarchal society. While it is clearly important not to slut-shame, it is also equally important to recognise that a lot of girls and women feel uncomfortable with ideals aimed at pleasing men.

[deleted01]

Yeah, um. Wasn't slut-shaming. I was simply pointing out that those girls thought that that was the way to attract the attention of boys, as well as exclude other girls who didn't do the same thing. It probably came from not knowing how to socialise with boys in a non-sexual context. And everything Lyanna said.

Nice try though.

[lessthanluke]

Yeah, um. Wasn't slut-shaming. I was simply pointing out that those girls thought that that was the way to attract the attention of boys, as well as exclude other girls who didn't do the same thing. It probably came from not knowing how to socialise with boys in a non-sexual context. And everything Lyanna said.

Nice try though.

It came across the same way to me to be fair Suttree.

[Raja]

To be fair to the poster, that's how it initially came across to me, especially if it's taken in isolation. Your second post makes it more clear, but it's difficult to infer that from the first one.

Maybe it's just me.

Edit: Ninja'd by Luke!

[lessthanluke]

To be fair to the poster, that's how it initially came across to me, especially if it's taken in isolation. Your second post makes it more clear, but it's difficult to infer that from the first one.

Maybe it's just me.

Nope same here.

[deleted01]

Except for the sentence after, that described getting sneered at for not conforming to what they were doing. I was calling them out for being elitist, and mentioning the fact that girls being pressured into wearing short skirts and the like is definitely an important point to consider. But sure, no worries.

[Yersinia]

A mundane question: If you're a woman, do you feel like it's important to stay quiet and not say anything that might be perceived as critical in an attempt at solidarity, when other feminist women say or post things that over-generalize shared female experience?

For example, usually I don't say anything because usually I feel like the solidarity is more important than differentiating my individual experience and because usually whatever it is is really minor. However, when a friend posted this article: https://medium.com/matter/the-women-i-pretend-to-be-ef0a5ce97277 I really felt the desire to say (and did) - hey this isn't my experience and I can't really get behind something that implies that my persona in a predominantly male work group in a predominantly male field must be a mask for who I really am. (I felt there was a tone of - women who say they like these male things are probably faking). It seems so petty, there are so many of these pseudo-feminist woman-power articles floating around, if this is someone's experience I don't want them to feel like I'm shooting their experience down. OTOH, I feel more and more with this kind of mundane stuff that women are trying to speak for each other. Instead of saying - this is happening to a lot of women and it's a problem - it's become - if you're a woman, you've experienced this.

I work in the tech industry and don't really feel the need to be anyone but myself around male colleagues (have the vague feeling that I have more in common with them than with female colleagues), but I'm still sympathetic to the issues faced by other women working in tech and I'm mostly just glad that they're speaking out to remind folks that, hey, we do exist. So I guess I'd be reluctant to say anything, even if their experiences don't really mirror my own.

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

Except for the sentence after, that described getting sneered at for not conforming to what they were doing. I was calling them out for being elitist, and mentioning the fact that girls being pressured into wearing short skirts and the like is definitely an important point to consider. But sure, no worries.

The latter doesn't obviate the former. Being an elitist snob has nothing to do with the length of one's skirt, or you could have just mentioned being bullied for not conforming to their notion of femininity.

[lessthanluke]

The latter doesn't obviate the former. Being an elitist snob has nothing to do with the length of one's skirt, or you could have just mentioned being bullied for not conforming to their notion of femininity.

Beat me to it.

[deleted01]

The latter doesn't obviate the former. Being an elitist snob has nothing to do with the length of one's skirt, or you could have just mentioned being bullied for not conforming to their notion of femininity.

And I didn't say that it did. I simply made two observations, and my post has been taken the wrong way. But if it came across as slut-shaming, fine. Obviously my post wasn't clear enough, but I've explained now that it wasn't my intention. Your put my thoughts into words better than I did, actually.

Eta: Not aimed at any one particular person, but this is why I don't usually post in these threads. Clearly I didn't express myself as I meant to, and then I get piled on for "slut-shaming", which wasn't what I was doing. I was making my own observations on girls' schools, from my experience, and my thoughts ran together. The girls I ran into were both elitist snobs and mean to girls who were different to them - whether it was a difference in how rich their parents were, or the length of their skirts. I made a point about the skirts because of the peer pressure in girls' schools to dress a certain way in order to attract the attention of boys, which, as I said earlier, is something to keep in mind, imho.

[Lyanna Stark]

I work in the tech industry and don't really feel the need to be anyone but myself around male colleagues (have the vague feeling that I have more in common with them than with female colleagues), but I'm still sympathetic to the issues faced by other women working in tech and I'm mostly just glad that they're speaking out to remind folks that, hey, we do exist. So I guess I'd be reluctant to say anything, even if their experiences don't really mirror my own.

Nowadays I'd say people outside tech can be far worse, on average, in my experience. I've met some pretty massively misogynist people in my day, but that was about a decade ago now and in another place. I guess you can get lucky and you can get unlucky. Plus times change.

I am getting too old to care what people may think too, so I just act like Godzilla and stomp all over them. :P Or, more like, I am frank and up-front, and myself, which tends to work well enough.

[Raja]

Eta: Not aimed at any one particular person, but this is why I don't usually post in these threads. Clearly I didn't express myself as I meant to, and then I get piled on for "slut-shaming", which wasn't what I was doing.

I'm sorry that you feel that you were being 'piled on', but given that the responses to your post were neither rude nor hostile ( at least not in my opinion), I don't know if they would serve as a deterrent to not posting in this thread. At least they wouldn't be for me, not that I ever really post on this thread. Luke ( he can correct me if I'm wrong here) and I were really only pointing out that your post could have been mistaken for saying that given the way the sentence was structured.

[lessthanluke]

You were piled on? I didn't say anything negative about you, I was just saying it came accross that way(to me) so I thought you could cut Suttree some slack. We all know you are a good person from your other posts and wouldn't intentionally slut shame.

ETA : Or what Raja said.