How to Join
the Fashion Spot / the Finishing Touches / Shoes, Shoes, Shoes
FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Rules Links Mobile How to Join
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
16-10-2009
  91
windowshopping
 
QUINNSTIL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Gender: femme
Posts: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by PinkGoddess View Post
The differences between the races are purely physical, and the racial discrimination that has existed throughout history has not involved either specific races, or specific attributes assigned to races. When groups are discriminated against, the primary aim is simply to keep them powerless and assign arbitrary negative attributes, which is not at all the aim in a society that assigns women different roles.

I am utterly stupefied by this statement. Because of skin color, specific attributes were ascribed to specific races. Haven't you heard of minstrel shows? African Americans were characterized as being ignorant, lazy, stupid, superstitious buffoons because they were black. It's impossible and, quite frankly, rather asinine to even suggest that the problem of racial discrimination lies solely with physical differentiation. These prejudices were associated with skin color, just like women were and still are associated with certain set of "natural" attributes that are supposedly innate.

  Reply With Quote
 
17-10-2009
  92
Confused & Bewildered
 
Echoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by PinkGoddess View Post
So if a woman for example, wore sneakers to a formal event, you wouldn't be surprised?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PinkGoddess View Post
Even if such an event had no dress code, we would still respond much more differently to a woman wearing sneakers than one wearing heels; that too is expectation.
Cybil Shepard was known for wearing sneakers with gowns to special events.

  Reply With Quote
17-10-2009
  93
front row
 
PinkGoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Gender: femme
Posts: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by QUINNSTIL View Post
I am utterly stupefied by this statement. Because of skin color, specific attributes were ascribed to specific races. Haven't you heard of minstrel shows? African Americans were characterized as being ignorant, lazy, stupid, superstitious buffoons because they were black. It's impossible and, quite frankly, rather asinine to even suggest that the problem of racial discrimination lies solely with physical differentiation. These prejudices were associated with skin color, just like women were and still are associated with certain set of "natural" attributes that are supposedly innate.
I NEVER suggested that the problem of racial discrimination lies within physical differences, I said that physical differences are the only biological traits that differ among the races, and they are. Objective science has never proven otherwise, whereas plenty of reputable primate studies and anthropological studies support gender differences; they simply aren't popularized in most Western nations because they are not politically correct.

  Reply With Quote
17-10-2009
  94
front row
 
PinkGoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Gender: femme
Posts: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Les_Sucettes View Post
That's not at all what i said, I was saying that you seem to have trouble making distinction between what it is a biological trait and something that is a cultural construction.
You said "and as we evolve as society we are trying to filter what is indeed a social convention, or a biological trait." What does that mean, if not that we must reject nature?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Les_Sucettes View Post
That's what progress has been giving women, the freedom from the reductive role of what was expected of them as females because society decided from times immemorial, that because apparently more delicate than men, more "beautiful" and the ones that carry babies , our role was solely solely to be ornamental and domestic related. It's not natural for women to wear high heels, the same way it was not natural for man to wear hats and they wore them religiously for centuries. It's simply cultural. You can live your entire life not wearing heels, not wearing a low cut top, never wearing a bit of make up, not having having babies or a husband, and still be a successful interesting woman. Where are those "natural" expectations that you are talking about? Expecting women to fulfill certain roles that society created for her based on nothing , for me it's simply and absolutely absurd . And sexist to an astonishing degree.
I said it once and I'll say it again, you need to learn to make the distinction between differentiation and sexism, because the latter is not necessary for the former to exist. Facing the facts about the natural distinctions between men and women does not imply the support of unethical treatment of either men or women, and suggesting that it does is putting words in my mouth. We thankfully no longer live in a time where feminine characteristics limit women's freedoms, so repeatedly referring back to this is pointless.

  Reply With Quote
17-10-2009
  95
front row
 
PinkGoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Gender: femme
Posts: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Ida View Post
Eh? There are biological differences between races, as there is between women and men. You obviously don't get my point. You can't treat someone differently because of their race or gender, and most societies still do.
Yes, but those biological differences are purely physical; the biological differences between men and women are wide-ranging.

You can treat someone differently if they ARE different. Just because there have been many instances throughout history where differences were either fabricated or imposed unethically does NOT mean we must pretend that actual differences are non-existent, or that the denial of actual differences will somehow eradicate sexism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Ida View Post
And hello specific attributes assigned to races...what about the Jews? OF COURSE they were and ARE discriminated against because of the really odd idea of them being rich, greedy, evil...all sorts of strange things. I could go on and on and on.
Every single attribute assigned to the Jews was negative. Women's roles as nurturing mothers (to give one example of a gender-based characteristic) is a positive and objective one (except of course, to those who see women as inferior). A society that seeks to keep women powerless would either deny that such a characteristic exists, or reduce its importance.


Last edited by PinkGoddess; 17-10-2009 at 02:19 AM.
  Reply With Quote
17-10-2009
  96
trendsetter
 
Dego's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sweden
Gender: homme
Posts: 1,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by PinkGoddess View Post
Women's roles as nurturing mothers is a positive and objective one .
Are you saying that a woman who never wants to bear a child and never feels the "instinct" to nurse, is a lesser woman?

__________________

  Reply With Quote
17-10-2009
  97
front row
 
PinkGoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Gender: femme
Posts: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by fashionista-ta View Post
There seem to be some mistaken views floating around here I would recommend the book Why Him? Why Her? (which btw includes quite a bit of actual science) to anyone who thinks gender and attraction is simple ... right/left, black/white. It is not, and that's true even if you take people attracted to their own gender out of the mix (which of course should not be done if one wants to have any kind of clear picture of the spectrum of expression).
Attraction as a whole is certainly not simple, but physical attraction definitely has many essential components.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fashionista-ta View Post
Women are hardly uniquely capable of using beauty and sex appeal to their advantage; men do it every day, everywhere I've ever been, and there are a boatload of studies documenting the advantage of being goodlooking to either gender.
Being good-looking is certainly beneficial to both genders, but the majority of ways in which women can utilise their beauty and sex appeal are scarcely available to men to the same extent, when they actually are. The sex industry is a good example of this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fashionista-ta View Post
Additionally, I'd like to be shown a feminist today who doesn't acknowledge differences between men and women. The perspective being touted here as 'feminist' is extremely old school and out of date. Every mode of thinking and movement evolves. There's no point in arguing with a viewpoint that's not really held by anyone to speak of today
I'm not acknowledging any viewpoint as typically feminist; I refer to the propagandists who encourage the notion that gender is social construct as 'so-called feminists' because that is what they choose to call themselves (though in reality the opposite is true). These radicals certainly don't speak for all feminists, though sadly they are the ones given the most attention.

  Reply With Quote
17-10-2009
  98
front row
 
PinkGoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Gender: femme
Posts: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dego View Post
Are you saying that a woman who never wants to bear a child and never feels the "instinct" to nurse, is a lesser woman?
Copied and pasted:

Facing the facts about the natural distinctions between men and women does not imply the support of unethical treatment of either men or women, and suggesting that it does is putting words in my mouth.

  Reply With Quote
17-10-2009
  99
trendsetter
 
Dego's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sweden
Gender: homme
Posts: 1,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by PinkGoddess View Post
Copied and pasted:

Facing the facts about the natural distinctions between men and women does not imply the support of unethical treatment of either men or women, and suggesting that it does is putting words in my mouth.
Then, what do you mean by:

"Women's roles as nurturing mothers is a [...] objective one."


And, for the sake of discussion here, what do you regard as the major differences between men and women, apart from physiological?

__________________

  Reply With Quote
17-10-2009
  100
clever ain't wise
 
iluvjeisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Gender: femme
Posts: 13,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by fashionista-ta View Post
Additionally, I'd like to be shown a feminist today who doesn't acknowledge differences between men and women. The perspective being touted here as 'feminist' is extremely old school and out of date. Every mode of thinking and movement evolves. There's no point in arguing with a viewpoint that's not really held by anyone to speak of today.
You could come to Sweden and talk with feminist groups here. Some of them actually staunchly believe there are no mental differences between men and women.

It seems all of these discussions are quite hampered by the little thing called statistics. You can say that something is more common in one group than in another. This might simply mean that whereas in one group 100 out of 10.000 people have a trait and in another it's 10 in 10.000.

It's perfectly possible to say there are differences, but that these differences do not allow generalization.

  Reply With Quote
17-10-2009
  101
THE STRANGER
 
michyed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Gender: femme
Posts: 2,519
Quote:
Originally Posted by PinkGoddess View Post
Yes, but those biological differences are purely physical;
Twinning rates, gestation periods, premature infant mortality rate, lactose intolerance, duffy null antigen BT - physical? I don't think so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PinkGoddess View Post
You can treat someone differently if they ARE different.
Withhold, the mentality behind scientific racism, antisemitism and somebody you as an Australian should be familiar with- Pauline Hanson. Are you a supporter, by chance?


Last edited by michyed; 17-10-2009 at 08:13 AM.
  Reply With Quote
17-10-2009
  102
front row
 
PinkGoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Gender: femme
Posts: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dego View Post
Then, what do you mean by:

"Women's roles as nurturing mothers is a [...] objective one."
It's an objective one because it's based on fact, unlike the notion that Jews are evil, money-hungry, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dego View Post
And, for the sake of discussion here, what do you regard as the major differences between men and women, apart from physiological?
The "main differences"? Just about everything. Men and women act differently, think differently, speak differently, even walk differently. Anyone who has ever been in any kind of a relationship with a member of the opposite sex should be able to see the differences; just the differences in verbal communication style are profound. Not to mention the vast sexual differences, the different approaches to risk-taking, the differences in how people relate to strangers...it would be easier to list how how men and women are not different.

  Reply With Quote
17-10-2009
  103
front row
 
PinkGoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Gender: femme
Posts: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by michyed View Post
Twinning rates, gestation periods, premature infant mortality rate, lactose intolerance, duffy null antigen BT - physical? I don't think so.
By "physical" I didn't mean merely appearance-based; "physiological" is a better word.

Quote:
Originally Posted by michyed View Post
Withhold, the mentality behind scientific racism, antisemitism and somebody you as an Australian should be familiar with- Pauline Hanson. Are you a supporter, by chance?
The mentality behind racism is "you can treat someone differently if they ARE different"? No, because then the differential treatment would have been limited to the physiological, which it was not. And since when have racism and anti-Semitism been supported by objectively researched studies? What a trivialisation of racism.

  Reply With Quote
17-10-2009
  104
trendsetter
 
Dego's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sweden
Gender: homme
Posts: 1,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by PinkGoddess View Post
It's an objective one because it's based on fact,
Exactly what is that "fact"? Not all women are mothers, not all women can have children. Not all women are "nurturing".

Quote:
Originally Posted by PinkGoddess View Post
The "main differences"? Just about everything. Men and women act differently, think differently, speak differently, even walk differently.
If you generalize heavily (which you shouldn't, that's where sexism is born), there might be some truth to this statement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PinkGoddess View Post
Anyone who has ever been in any kind of a relationship with a member of the opposite sex should be able to see the differences; just the differences in verbal communication style are profound. Not to mention the vast sexual differences, the different approaches to risk-taking, the differences in how people relate to strangers...it would be easier to list how how men and women are not different.
..and do you actually believe that all of these differences are all because of genes and hormones?

__________________

  Reply With Quote
17-10-2009
  105
clever ain't wise
 
iluvjeisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Gender: femme
Posts: 13,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dego View Post
..and do you actually believe that all of these differences are all because of genes and hormones?
I don't know about PinkGoddess but I believe the basis for risk taken is highly, even very highly, genetic. But that doesn't mean that every man is risk taking and every woman is not. There's an overrepresentation of risktakers among men, not sure exactly the numbers on that but just traffic statistics will tell you as much. Then you can argue that it's because of the environment rather than genes, of course.

Risk taking behavior is related to dopamine (and adrenalin etc) responses. There are other genetic factors than X/Y chromosomes that are important for the risk taking behavior of a person. We have 46 chromosomes, the sex chromosomes are just two of them.


Last edited by iluvjeisa; 17-10-2009 at 12:00 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Reply
Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Tags
achieve, ambitions, heels, high, won’t
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"


 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:30 AM.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
TheFashionSpot.com is a property of TotallyHer Media, LLC, an Evolve Media LLC company. ©2014 All rights reserved.