sexism

[Son of Disaster]

This has been bothering for the past few days for the simple reason that i have been accused repeatedly of being a chauvinistic pig. Let me explain...

At some point during the gun control thread the military and women got brought up and i said women aren't allowed in combat for the obvious reason that women lack the physique to perform up to army standards in said conflicts. Yet by addressing the genetic and physical differences between a man and a woman i am now sexist and or chauvinistic.

It would be very helpful if someone could please explain to me where i went wrong and how i am wrong...

 

[Janenmori]

I agree with you wholeheartedly. Women do have a physically weaker physique. HOWEVER, that does in no way make them any less significant than men in any aspect. Men are simply more suited to combat than women. That does not mean that they do not deserve the right to fight for their country. They just may have to strive harder to be a man's PHYSICAL equal in the aspect of PHYSICAL strength. They do not have a lesser inherent value, nor do they deserve any less respect than any man would. They also do not deserve any more respect either. They are equal as human beings and are entitiled the same rights and the same dignity.

 

[Son of Disaster]

I agree with you wholeheartedly. Women do have a physically weaker physique. HOWEVER, that does in no way make them any less significant than men in any aspect. Men are simply more suited to combat than women. That does not mean that they do not deserve the right to fight for their country. They just may have to strive harder to be a man's PHYSICAL equal in the aspect of PHYSICAL strength. They do not have a lesser inherent value, nor do they deserve any less respect than any man would. They also do not deserve any more respect either. They are equal as human beings and are entitiled the same rights and the same dignity.

you say all this and i agree with all of it. I never said anything anywhere that made it look like i thought women were the lesser of the sexes. Yet for merely pointing out facts in physique i'm sexist and chauvinistic.

 

[CaptKirby]

Because succeeding in the military generally does not fucking require bench pressing 300 pounds. It requires willpower and determination.

 

[Son of Disaster]

Because succeeding in the military generally does not fucking require bench pressing 300 pounds. It requires willpower and determination.

yet where did i say all you needed was to bench 300? Also you are a moron if you think physical fitness is not needed in the military.

But i never said women can't suceed in the military. All i said was they can't and shouldn't be in combat.

 

[b0b3rt]

You were right in saying that women generally can't perform to the same physical standards, but I think you made it seem rather exclusionary to exceptions (i.e. there are women who would perform better then men physically). However, what you were saying was generally right.

Actually, I think that a significant reason that women are rarely accepted into the army, besides the physical aspect, is due to the possible sexual tension that they might cause. I also suspect that this would apply to homosexual males, in a somewhat different regard, but I don't know what our policy-makers are thinking.

Edit: you posted before me. I don't know if women are ever allowed into combat, that's not something I'm familiar with.

 

[Janenmori]

To broaden the topic a bit, feminists seek to be equal in absolutely all aspects, if not superior as some extremists may strive to be. I am not saying all women take this stance, though. Women did only very recently in history gain rights, when compared to the grand scheme. The main reason you may be considered sexist and/or chauvinistic is because a poster with a feminist finds that you think that if women are inferior in any stance, that you regard them inferior in all or in general.

Sexism is still a problem that is quite disturbing, especially in a country like America where all are supposed to be eqaul. You cannot blame any women for being so defensive of their equality, given their history. Women still earn less money on a whole for equal work quality at the same level as a man.

The only issue I have with the whole feminist movement is when they see the need to break the standards of society in order to be equal to a man. Mainly these sentiments are expressed physically through the need to be dominant or by refusing to shave excess body hair and such. I guess this is what they feel they have been reduced to or forced to do to be seen as equal, when all they are doing is setting themselves out of the standards accepted commonly on a whole.

 

[Son of Disaster]

You were right in saying that women generally can't perform to the same physical standards, but I think you made it seem rather exclusionary to exceptions (i.e. there are women who would perform better then men physically). However, what you were saying was generally right.

Actually, I think that a significant reason that women are rarely accepted into the army, besides the physical aspect, is due to the possible sexual tension that they might cause. I also suspect that this would apply to homosexual males, in a somewhat different regard, but I don't know what our policy-makers are thinking.

But men as a whole outperform women in the physical requirements of the army. This is not sexist but fact and unavoidable. I can't see how pointing out differences in physique and gentics is sexist.

Women are accepted into the army as readily as males it's simply not as many women wish to join. Don't ask don't tell either....

EDIT: At janemori it's just silly to say you shouldn't shave body hair. I don't have anything against it but that's just deindividuation. That's not equalizing anything it's just blurring the line of male and female. Women can go at it i suppose but it's bizzare to believe that's any sort of statement against sexism.

 

[Fay]

The only issue I have with the whole feminist movement is when they see the need to break the standards of society in order to be equal to a man. Mainly these sentiments are expressed physically through the need to be dominant or by refusing to shave excess body hair and such. I guess this is what they feel they have been reduced to or forced to do to be seen as equal, when all they are doing is setting themselves out of the standards accepted commonly on a whole.

How can someone have "excess body hair?" The body hair you have is the body hair that you're supposed to have. The only way I could see it being excessive is if an individual had some sort of disease that caused them to grow extreme amounts of hair at an alarming rate... but even then, if that is the amount of hair that that individual is supposed to have, it seems irrational to consider it to be excess.

Of course, you could take the stance that ALL human hair is excess, seeing as it serves no pragmatic purpose for survival or function.

Feminists who refuse to shave their underarms or legs are not trying to be seen as equal to man, they're trying to make the point that women are not objects and should not be expected to act like dolls. Breaking the societal norms is what the protestation is all about.

 

[SEO]

I think that femenists hold so many double standards. If you want complete equality, then everything should be equal; EVERYTHING. This whole army deal is very frustrating, why should I have to sign up for selective service and, although there is currently no draft, have to throw my life away. But a woman does not? You mention sexual tension, how about female only training, troops, ect. Physical fitness, this is a joke. Although combat in itself is tiresome and requires physical endurance ect., there are so many things that women can do in the army that are necessary. Field medics, tanks, scouts, technology, there are so many jobs in the military that do NOT involve physical activity.

But I do agree with the OP, you should not have been called that. There is a clear and defined difference between the physical capabilities of a man and a woman. Do men get insulted and call women sexist or femenist pigs when they mention the fact that they can have children? I dont think so.

Yeah, just read it over. Sorry if it sounded mad. I really have nothing against women.

 

[ungulateman]

[offtopic]
Also, hair DOES have a use - staying warm. Even if it's hardly any hair at all, every little bit counts.
[/offtopic]

ungulateman

 

[Fay]

But we have clothes and air conditioning, so hair is virtually useless in our civilized society.

 

[SSBM roy]

I think that femenists hold so many double standards. If you want complete equality, then everything should be equal; EVERYTHING.

If we have black pride then why can't we have white pride? I'm for complete equality, after all.

This whole army deal is very frustrating, why should I have to sign up for selective service and, although there is currently no draft, have to throw my life away. But a woman does not?

You should take issue with the existence of a system of militairy conscription rather than with feminism. Fortunately, the latter is rarely associated with advocacy in favor of the former.

You mention sexual tension, how about female only training, troops, ect. Physical fitness, this is a joke. Although combat in itself is tiresome and requires physical endurance ect., there are so many things that women can do in the army that are necessary. Field medics, tanks, scouts, technology, there are so many jobs in the military that do NOT involve physical activity.

The fact that men possess a bit more muscle mass on average than women does not magically translate into the fact that all men are Samson and all women are totally incapable of physical exertion.

Yeah, just read it over. Sorry if it sounded mad. I really have nothing against women.

When it becomes necessary to throw in the reminder, chances are you do. It's the misogynist equivalent of starting a joke by reassuring the listener that you're not racist but...

 

[Abacus]

There's a reason that guns are called the Great Equalizer. Women can fire guns just as well as men can. It does not matter that men have on average greater muscle mass as modern combat does not involve swords/punches/anything else relying on brute strength.

"When it becomes necessary to throw in the reminder, chances are you do. It's the misogynist equivalent of starting a joke by reassuring the listener that you're not racist but..." thank you. This is a point that most people I know should become familiar with.

I really fucking hate that feminism has become a dirty word.

 

[Trax]

Just remember that physical endurance =/= strength folks.

 

[jjfun]

There are minor differences that for the most part are unnoticeable, However they don't impede mental capacity, gun control or fitness.

Sure on average men are taller than women but this really doesn't mean anything. Take the Israeli army for example, Men and Women fight in that army and it's a fantastic army, one of the best in the world.

Son Of Disaster, congratulations you can tell that the genders are different!

 

[Hipmonlee]

Women should be the only ones allowed in the army as they are generally smaller and therefore are harder to hit.

Have a nice day.

 

[Alex Practice]

yet where did i say all you needed was to bench 300? Also you are a moron if you think physical fitness is not needed in the military.

But i never said women can't suceed in the military. All i said was they can't and shouldn't be in combat.

Probably because of the bolded stuff.

 

[akuchi]

The only issue I have with the whole feminist movement is when they see the need to break the standards of society in order to be equal to a man. Mainly these sentiments are expressed physically through the need to be dominant or by refusing to shave excess body hair and such. I guess this is what they feel they have been reduced to or forced to do to be seen as equal, when all they are doing is setting themselves out of the standards accepted commonly on a whole.

Um, why should I shave my 'excess body hair' just because I'm a woman? You really have no idea why a woman would choose to stop doing that, do you? It's about fighting the 'standards accepted commonly' - the thin, hairless, Western beauty ideal. Women being told they are not 'feminine' for not shaving their legs - it's female hair growing out of female skin, how much more feminine can you get? There isn't a 'need to be dominant', there's a tendency to be more assertive. Or would you rather women just smiled, nodded, and presented perfectly shaven legs to you at all times?

 

[Hipmonlee]

The thing is that males and females fit certain characteristics. If you look at portrayals of femininity throughout the ages usually they come down to taking an average of males and females and subtracting from that all things male and then when portraying females amplifying what you had left. Things like narrow waists, breasts, large hips, lack of hair. And for masculinity you would do the opposite. This is more or less the blueprint for attractiveness in both sexes. So yeah, I mean basically men and women have a lot of shared features, but some of them are masculine and some are feminine. Hair is mostly masculine.

This sort of thing isnt even societal, it is pretty much as fundamental to human nature can get.

Basically hairy legs on girls are ugly and will probably remain ugly, unless you can create some really serious external pressure changing that view. Sorry. I am trying to think of a comparitive male example but I cant just now.. I mean, society has traditionally been pretty male dominated so that is hardly surprising, but yeah, leg shaving isnt an example of that.

Have a nice day.

 

[Doctor Heartbreak]

the biggest reason your statement is sexist is because it needlessly differentiates between men and women.

it's true that men are stronger than women as a general rule. however, weak men and strong women exist, so it's not an absolute division. to say "women shouldn't be allowed into the military because they're too weak" is sexist because of the possibility (it doesn't even need to be an actuality, though it is) that a women who meets fitness and strength standards could exist.

people who cannot meet the standards of physical fitness and strength should not be allowed into the military, regardless of their gender. people who can and do meet those standards should be allowed into the military, again, regardless of gender.

gender is a generally successful but occasionally flawed indicator of strength, which is the important factor. therefore, making decisions based on gender rather than strength tests is sexist

hope that clears things up for you.

 

[CaptKirby]

yet where did i say all you needed was to bench 300? Also you are a moron if you think physical fitness is not needed in the military.

But i never said women can't suceed in the military. All i said was they can't and shouldn't be in combat.

Yes, I am the moron making sexist statements yet denying that I am sexist. Sure.

Also akuchi sorry a mustache on a woman will never be attractive. I am pro-leg hair, pro-arm hair on women (a lot of either can be a bit offputting on either a man or a woman), but a mustache on a woman is repulsive to me. Maybe it is genetic/instinctual in some way, maybe it is just ingrained by societal ideals, but yuckkk.

 

[ivar]

Um, why should I shave my 'excess body hair' just because I'm a woman? You really have no idea why a woman would choose to stop doing that, do you? It's about fighting the 'standards accepted commonly' - the thin, hairless, Western beauty ideal. Women being told they are not 'feminine' for not shaving their legs - it's female hair growing out of female skin, how much more feminine can you get? There isn't a 'need to be dominant', there's a tendency to be more assertive. Or would you rather women just smiled, nodded, and presented perfectly shaven legs to you at all times?

I would agree with you, but I am weak and cannot stand body hair on women; I find it repulsive. I'm a neat freak as it is and body hair can be so unsightly (especially on a woman). I mean, all the more power to you; I can certainly respect your stance, but I can never find it anything but extremely unattractive (not saying you should care or anything, but that's my opinion).

I wouldn't say that makes me sexist though; it just happens to be what I find attractive (and that is the traditional perception of femininity).

 

[shade]

This is an interesting topic. Of course, complete equality is ideal for a more enjoyable world for everyone and socially and morally, this can be achieved. However, complete equality can never be established simply because of the genetic differences between males and females. Oh, and I'd strive for equality between all people but clearly there's a mark where people have to be different.

 

[Janenmori]

I would agree with you, but I am weak and cannot stand body hair on women; I find it repulsive. I'm a neat freak as it is and body hair can be so unsightly (especially on a woman). I mean, all the more power to you; I can certainly respect your stance, but I can never find it anything but extremely unattractive (not saying you should care or anything, but that's my opinion).

I wouldn't say that makes me sexist though; it just happens to be what I find attractive (and that is the traditional perception of femininity).

Thank you for understanding my point. I poorly worded what I said. "Excess" was not the best word for that situation.