VeggieBoards - Reply to Topic
Thread: Feminism, law and gender politics (Split from "Any other LGBTQ VBers?") Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the VeggieBoards forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
06-11-2009 01:07 PM
major.walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by das_nut View Post

The evolutionary psychology route leads to some ratherr negative survival-enhancing behaviors for both genders.



I prefer to be more positive about it.

I know full well that we are capable of overcoming our instinctive drives (this forum is testament to that) and furthermore, an understanding of said instincts is integral to co-operating with the person who posesses them, whether they do so to a greater or lesser extent.



The key is, as always, to remember the distinction between behaviours that are just assumed to exist and those that actually do.
06-10-2009 07:29 AM
das_nut The evolutionary psychology route leads to some ratherr negative survival-enhancing behaviors for both genders.
06-10-2009 02:22 AM
major.walrus Exactly. It's always assumed that the opposite gender has some agenda we're not aware of.



Although I do believe that's because we're raised by our mothers and fathers telling us it's naive to think otherwise, rendering it a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy.



Although if you're into evolutionary psychology, it is true that there's a predisposition there because of the inherently different minimum energy required to produce a child by either party.
06-09-2009 02:32 PM
Nishani If I was a man, it would certainly take a lot to convince me that the women I was having sex with were actually telling the truth about the precautions they said they were taking. I'd definitely wear a condom just to make sure.
06-09-2009 02:16 PM
major.walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by das_nut View Post

And a lot of women interviewed on the subject say they don't trust men with the responsibility of taking a birth control pill.



Since when did men trust women to?

In fact, i've seen an editorial on the male birth control pill, and the person writing it made the argument that 'marketers faced with the prospect that men find taking the pill unattractive could always call upon the male fear that some woman they meet in a bar and tells them she's on the pill is lying, and is using their sperm to impregnate themselves with a child he might have to pay support to'.



Obviously, this person doesn't represent a huge section of the population but it's an... interesting perspective.



Sorry to bring bc back up.
06-03-2009 12:43 AM
das_nut It really is a shame that feminism has failed in the goal of equality.



But I guess that's more or less inherent in the nature of the system. It's easier to decide that the grass is greener on the other side than to realize that traditional gender roles restrict both genders.



05-31-2009 12:05 PM
Nishani
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLotus View Post

I wasn't using it as generalized example, just AN example. I'm not sure why you seem to feel the need to be so confrontational in your posts towards me - the overall tone of them seems a bit rude. I have no problem having civilized discourse with people, and of course we are all entitled to our own opinions. I have no issue with people disagreeing with me - but you could be a bit more respectful about it. While I might disagree with you, I don't use phrases like "nobjective nonsense" in reference to your opinions or posts.



As you are a newbie, you probably don't understand that traditionally on VB, the threads in the Compost Heap forum are generally much more direct and confrontational in their manner than all other forums on here. It's always been the case that posters who are easily disturbed by that approach are advised to not post in here.
05-31-2009 06:58 AM
Prajnaparamita
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverFlame819 View Post

Maybe if I was more focused on it all and knew more about what was going on in the feminist movement, I'd be more likely to call myself one.



Just read back over what I said earlier and couldn't stop laughing. I can't believe that nobody slapped me for saying it, or laughed at the double entendre. I didn't even catch it until now!



"But seriously, since when does your sexual preference have anything to do with what you eat?"



Hehehehehe.
05-27-2009 10:41 PM
RedLotus
Quote:
Just read back over what I said earlier and couldn't stop laughing. I can't believe that nobody slapped me for saying it, or laughed at the double entendre. I didn't even catch it until now!



"But seriously, since when does your sexual preference have anything to do with what you eat?"



LOL! I didn't even catch that! That's hilarious!
05-27-2009 06:21 PM
GhostUser Maybe if I was more focused on it all and knew more about what was going on in the feminist movement, I'd be more likely to call myself one.



Just read back over what I said earlier and couldn't stop laughing. I can't believe that nobody slapped me for saying it, or laughed at the double entendre. I didn't even catch it until now!



"But seriously, since when does your sexual preference have anything to do with what you eat?"
05-27-2009 02:25 PM
RedLotus
Quote:
I'm sorry to hear that happened to your sis, it's terrible. However, I figured there were extenuating circumstances to this story and you were withholding some important detail in order to support your very weak argument which is why I pushed you on it. The bottom line is, you cannot use the example of your sister's abuse as an inexperienced, young girl to argue in a generalised sense in the way you did, that men are always the ones in control of condoms when they are used as a form of BC. It's just not true and your argument will always get blown out the water every time you say it.



I wasn't using it as generalized example, just AN example. I'm not sure why you seem to feel the need to be so confrontational in your posts towards me - the overall tone of them seems a bit rude. I have no problem having civilized discourse with people, and of course we are all entitled to our own opinions. I have no issue with people disagreeing with me - but you could be a bit more respectful about it. While I might disagree with you, I don't use phrases like "nobjective nonsense" in reference to your opinions or posts.



Quote:
I didn't imply you were. I think that's your defensiveness talking.



And *I* never said that YOU said I was a man-hating b****. I was simply making sure that was clear, since you seem to be implying that I am a "defensive" "unobjective" person. Like I said before, though, I DON'T want to get drawn into negativity and arguing.



I'm done talking about the whole BC issue. This thread seems to have been taken over by the subject (my fault as much as anyone's).
05-27-2009 07:18 AM
das_nut
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLotus View Post

It's in the making. It'll probably hit the market in about 5 years or so. A lot of men interviewed on the subject, however, state that they would never take a hormonal contraceptive. Apparently that responsibility falls on women alone.



And a lot of women interviewed on the subject say they don't trust men with the responsibility of taking a birth control pill.



Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLotus View Post

What I was attempting to get across is that a condom is for use on a penis - the penis belongs to the man and is his physical domain.



There are female condoms.
05-27-2009 04:20 AM
Move of Ten
Quote:
Originally Posted by veggiemeggie View Post

I am inclined to agree with you about this... but could you elaborate? What specific media technology?/



TV and the internet come to mind. we are becoming more and more digitalized. as an aside, my parents, who are normally very laid back and non-controlling never let me watch TV other than movies (at home, i watched it at friends' places) till I was around 14 and I'm glad for that in retrospect. around this age though I'd seen plenty of "hardcore" pornography as seemed to be standard for boys at the time, but would not have been a generation earlier. this is all fueled by the advertising business. so there's an example of the technology/capitalism connection.
05-27-2009 02:16 AM
Nishani
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLotus View Post

Ok, I'm just going to say, you don't know my sister, or the specifics of what happened, so don't make uneducated judgments about her. She was young and inexperienced. We grew up in an abusive situation, where sex WAS something that was done TO you, and she was still learning how to break that mentality. She learned from her mistake, and she's more careful now.





I'm sorry to hear that happened to your sis, it's terrible. However, I figured there were extenuating circumstances to this story and you were withholding some important detail in order to support your very weak argument which is why I pushed you on it. The bottom line is, you cannot use the example of your sister's abuse as an inexperienced, young girl to argue in a generalised sense in the way you did, that men are always the ones in control of condoms when they are used as a form of BC. It's just not true and your argument will always get blown out the water every time you say it.







Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLotus View Post


I'm not some man-hating b****.



I didn't imply you were. I think that's your defensiveness talking.
05-26-2009 08:40 PM
RedLotus
Quote:
I think it's fair to say that I don't use the word "feminist" to describe myself, since these days people think that it means you're a man-hating psycho butch lesbian.



Yes, thank you very much Rush. *sigh*



I do label myself as a feminist despite this sort of negativity towards the word, because the actual credo of feminism fits my general beliefs. Of course there are many definitions of the word and different sects of feminism, but I believe that there is still a lack of equality in this country/world and I believe in trying to rectify it. Just because someone has decided to try to give it a negative slant doesn't mean I'm going to change how I identify myself. (Silverflame819, this is not meant to insinuate that you have done anything wrong by choosing to distance yourself from the word - to each their own!)



Of course, while I'm not a man-hater or particularly butch, I *am* a lesbian, so maybe that's part of it.
05-26-2009 08:09 PM
hollywoodveg
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverFlame819 View Post

I think it's fair to say that I don't use the word "feminist" to describe myself, since these days people think that it means you're a man-hating psycho butch lesbian.



That started when Rush coined the term "feminazi". Generalizing a group of people by the most extreme is so transparent, ugh.
05-26-2009 07:48 PM
GhostUser I think it's fair to say that I don't use the word "feminist" to describe myself, since these days people think that it means you're a man-hating psycho butch lesbian. Also, I am completely shocked to hear that some people assume that you're gay if you're a vegetarian. wtf? Seriously? Maybe all those people who have thought I was a lesbian over the years were right! *grins* Just joking... But seriously, since when does your sexual preference have anything to do with what you eat? (And suddenly I'm surprised that all the glbt-hating people in the world haven't sponsored a test to prove there's a correlation yet - they have for everything else that's ridiculously lame!)



I believe that everyone should have the same rights. I believe men and women are equally beautiful and amazing and should be treated as such.



I'm sure I could comment more, but I got lost in some of the arguing, and I just can't think concentrate with Shane's pic, and the rat with the strawberry.



Maybe I'm hungry? :P
05-26-2009 07:35 PM
hollywoodveg
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLotus View Post




I'm not some man-hating b****. I'm not trying to demonize men here or blame them for society's problems. It's an inequality in social attitude and norms that I am upset about.





I totally agree with this sentiment.
05-26-2009 05:15 PM
RedLotus
Quote:
Why not, it IS partly her fault that he got away with that. Is your sister not capable of making adult decisions? Sex is something you're supposed to have WITH a man, it's not something he does TO you. Adult woman need to take responsibility for what they are doing in bed. He shouldn't have done that, but she should have been paying attention to what was going on.



Ok, I'm just going to say, you don't know my sister, or the specifics of what happened, so don't make uneducated judgments about her. She was young and inexperienced. We grew up in an abusive situation, where sex WAS something that was done TO you, and she was still learning how to break that mentality. She learned from her mistake, and she's more careful now.



Quote:
And it seems to me that you're trying to make it look like that's because they are more interested in men, just because they are men, which is unobjective nonsense. It's far more complicated than that.



I'm not trying to say that at all. The pharm industry is made up of individuals (men AND women) and I'm not making an "unobjective" judgment on them. What I *am* saying is that society in general seems to place more value on a man's ability to have a satisfying sexual life than on a woman's ability to do so, and that the pharm industry (being an INDUSTRY) responds to that.



I'm not some man-hating b****. I'm not trying to demonize men here or blame them for society's problems. It's an inequality in social attitude and norms that I am upset about.



But clearly we have differing opinions on this subject, so why don't we just leave it at that and agree to disagree. I certainly don't want to be arguing with people or offending anyone, and this seems to be turning into a circular debate.
05-26-2009 04:49 PM
Skylark I'm finding it a bit unbelievable that she couldn't tell just by feel the difference between a penis with a condom on it and a penis without.
05-26-2009 02:58 PM
Nishani
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLotus View Post

This was a man she trusted (up until that point)



You need to trust a man, but not trust him so blindly that you don't even know what the hell he is doing in the dark.



Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLotus View Post

I'm not saying we shouldn't all make a point to be aware of things like rather or not your partner is using protection, but please don't lay blame on her.



Why not, it IS partly her fault that he got away with that. Is your sister not capable of making adult decisions? Sex is something you're supposed to have WITH a man, it's not something he does TO you. Adult woman need to take responsibility for what they are doing in bed. He shouldn't have done that, but she should have been paying attention to what was going on.



Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLotus View Post

I am aware that female sexual dysfunction is more complicated than male. But I think it's inaccurate to say that it's all caused by sexual abuse.



I didn't say it was, I said a lot of it was.



Quote:
I'm saying that there isn't nearly the same degree of interest in the pharm field in trying to solve the issue as there is in trying to solve male ED.



And it seems to me that you're trying to make it look like that's because they are more interested in men, just because they are men, which is unobjective nonsense. It's far more complicated than that.
05-26-2009 02:22 PM
RedLotus
Quote:
No really. There's nothing to stop a woman buying her own condoms and insisting on putting them on her partner's penis herself if she wants to.



What I was attempting to get across is that a condom is for use on a penis - the penis belongs to the man and is his physical domain. Oral BC is for a uterus, which is a woman's domain. Yes, a woman has a say for sure in rather or not her partner uses a condom, just as a man can say "no sex unless you're on the pill." That's not the point I'm trying to argue - just that condoms are a "male" BC and oral contraceptives are (at least for now) a female BC.



Quote:
He had control in that situation because she LET him have control by having sex in a place that is so dark that she can't even see what is going on.



This was a man she trusted (up until that point). People have sex in the dark all the time. I'm not saying we shouldn't all make a point to be aware of things like rather or not your partner is using protection, but please don't lay blame on her.



Quote:
That's partly because it's easier to help with male sexual dysfunction because the majority of it is physical in origin. With females, a lot of the dysfunction can be attributed to sexual abuse as a child and that kind of dysfunction is difficult to overcome with a pill without having a psychoactive component to the drug. You would need a pill like Viagra or Cialis that stimulates blood flow to the sexual organs, but more importantly, it would also need to break down inhibition and increase libido at the same time. Once you make a pill like that, a lot of people will want to take it recreationally just like they do with the illegal drugs that already act in that way, and then it will be in demand on the street, which is obviously a problem.



I am aware that female sexual dysfunction is more complicated than male. But I think it's inaccurate to say that it's all caused by sexual abuse. I'm not talking about a pill to fix the psychological issues that come with that. One of the uses of Viagra is to counteract ED side effects of other meds, diabetes, etc. There is plenty of sexual dysfunction in women that is attributed to med side effects (like SSRI anti-depressants) or purely physical issues. I'm not saying that it's not a complex issue, I'm saying that there isn't nearly the same degree of interest in the pharm field in trying to solve the issue as there is in trying to solve male ED.
05-26-2009 02:03 PM
greensgood http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3543478/ its been developed and they have been saying for years that it will be available in a few more years...still waiting. one of the possible side effects is decreased sex drive (also a side effect for women's oral bc) and that is one of the things they have been working on before making it available for sale.



my point with comparing ed meds to oral bc is that the insurance companies obviously value men's sexual issues more than women's because they cover meds for ed and not oral bc. both ed and pregnancy are sexual concerns, how is that a false comparison?
05-26-2009 01:53 PM
Nishani
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLotus View Post

Condoms break. Plus, while a woman has a right to say "no glove no love" etc, the actual use of the condom is in the man's control.



No really. There's nothing to stop a woman buying her own condoms and insisting on putting them on her partner's penis herself if she wants to.



Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLotus View Post

My sister was in a situation where she was getting intimate with a man, it was dark, he "pretended" to put on a condom, and had unprotected sex with her under the false pretense that he was using protection - that's the sort of thing I meant when I talked about the man having control etc.



He had control in that situation because she LET him have control by having sex in a place that is so dark that she can't even see what is going on.



Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLotus View Post

They would have to actually MAKE a pill for female libido issues first. Like I said before, modern pharm companies are way more interested in solving male sexual dysfunction than female sexual dysfunction, despite the fact that the number of women with sexual dysfunction is at least as high (if not higher) than men.



That's partly because it's easier to help with male sexual dysfunction because the majority of it is physical in origin. With females, a lot of the dysfunction can be attributed to sexual abuse as a child and that kind of dysfunction is difficult to overcome with a pill without having a psychoactive component to the drug. You would need a pill like Viagra or Cialis that stimulates blood flow to the sexual organs, but more importantly, it would also need to break down inhibition and increase libido at the same time. Once you make a pill like that, a lot of people will want to take it recreationally just like they do with the illegal drugs that already act in that way, and then it will be in demand on the street, which is obviously a problem.
05-26-2009 12:23 PM
RedLotus
Quote:
There's a male birth control pill?



It's in the making. It'll probably hit the market in about 5 years or so. A lot of men interviewed on the subject, however, state that they would never take a hormonal contraceptive. Apparently that responsibility falls on women alone.



Quote:
False comparison.



Show where insurance companies have failed to approve pills approved to treat the female libido and then you'll have a case.



Right now, you're comparing apples to oranges.



They would have to actually MAKE a pill for female libido issues first. Like I said before, modern pharm companies are way more interested in solving male sexual dysfunction than female sexual dysfunction, despite the fact that the number of women with sexual dysfunction is at least as high (if not higher) than men.
05-26-2009 12:03 PM
das_nut
Quote:
Originally Posted by greensgood View Post

because their customers use it and want it to be covered. insurance companies are businesses, it is disgusting that they ignore the demand for products at affordable prices from one sex yet dole out similar drugs for the other sex no problem.



There's a male birth control pill?



Quote:
im pretty sure way more women use oral bc than men use ed meds. also unwanted pregnancy is more expensive and complicated a problem than a limp penis...



False comparison.



Show where insurance companies have failed to approve pills approved to treat the female libido and then you'll have a case.



Right now, you're comparing apples to oranges.
05-26-2009 09:52 AM
greensgood
Quote:
Originally Posted by das_nut View Post




So why should insurance companies cover a method of birth control that is more expensive and does not prevent the spread of disease?



because their customers use it and want it to be covered. insurance companies are businesses, it is disgusting that they ignore the demand for products at affordable prices from one sex yet dole out similar drugs for the other sex no problem.



im pretty sure way more women use oral bc than men use ed meds. also unwanted pregnancy is more expensive and complicated a problem than a limp penis...



the only medication i use is oral bc, i don't have insurance so i spend $600 a year on it. i had insurance a few years ago that did not cover my bc, so i ended up paying $3,000 a year for insurance plus an extra $600 for my prescription. i only used my insurance for my yearly pap and Rx for bc, i quit the dumb insurance because i cannot afford to waste $2000 every year for something that doesn't even help me when i need it.
05-26-2009 12:14 AM
RedLotus
Quote:
Some people are horrible people.



Hopefully she kicked him to the curb.



Yeah, well, I sort of beat her to it! I think he'll be scared of me for the rest of his life! But yeah, she did break it off with him, and didn't get knocked up or sick either, thanks heavens.
05-26-2009 12:10 AM
das_nut
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLotus View Post

My sister was in a situation where she was getting intimate with a man, it was dark, he "pretended" to put on a condom, and had unprotected sex with her under the false pretense that he was using protection - that's the sort of thing I meant when I talked about the man having control etc.



Some people are horrible people.



Hopefully she kicked him to the curb.
05-25-2009 11:59 PM
RedLotus
Quote:
I'm not sure what part of the world you live in, but in the United States, there is the female condom.



Interestingly, from what I've been told, they are all non-latex as well.



As for actual use of a male condom, sure, he has the actual control when it comes to using it, but his partner has the actual control if she or he wants to participate in sex.



My sister was in a situation where she was getting intimate with a man, it was dark, he "pretended" to put on a condom, and had unprotected sex with her under the false pretense that he was using protection - that's the sort of thing I meant when I talked about the man having control etc.



I do live in the US, and now that you mention it I do remember reading about the female condom. Since I'm a lesbian, accidental pregnancy isn't something that I tend to worry about personally! But good point.
This thread has more than 30 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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