[Discussion] Feminism and social justice, plus FAQ!

This thread is for discussing feminist issues--from the narrow meaning (a movement for social justice in terms of gender equality) to the broader meaning (a movement for social justice, period), and from the scope of issues in gaming and geek culture to kyriarchy in general.

Basic questions are allowed here for now, we will split out a Q&A thread should it become necessary.

When one gets used to privilege equality may feel like oppression.

IMAGE(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/af/59/6f/af596f58db14848770c2c4e211a86077.jpg)

krev82 wrote:

When one gets used to privilege equality may feel like oppression.

Much like how there's a supposed "War on Christmas" in a country where Christian traditions and customs are so dominant that they're the unquestioned assumed default.

Once you're open to seeing it at all, you see it everywhere.

Women Don't Need to Apologize Less—Men Need to Learn How to Apologize

The problem isn't that women are socialized to apologize "too often." It's that men are not socialized to apologize at all.

I agree with the last part of the headline, but not the first.

Stengah wrote:

I agree with the last part of the headline, but not the first.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

Spoiler:

How am I doing? :)

Jonman wrote:
Stengah wrote:

I agree with the last part of the headline, but not the first.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

Spoiler:

How am I doing? :)

Terribly.

Interesting article, although I do have issues with it linking to a Cosmo article when it claims waxing is unsanitary. It's like saying you shouldn't shave because some people share razors. And I couldn't find any study that supports or refutes that claim on PubMed (to be fair, there are very few studies on hair removal, of any kind, a little over one thousand, which is NOTHING on PubMed). I do have to disclose a conflict of interest: you couldn't pay me enough money to shave, and although I've done some laser for my lower legs, I wax.

There, fixed that for you.

Gravey wrote:
Jonman wrote:
Stengah wrote:

I agree with the last part of the headline, but not the first.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

Spoiler:

How am I doing? :)

Terribly.

Knowing Jonman, I think he did that on prupose.

This is probably a bit TMI, but a few years ago, I admit I was shocked to find out that a lot of people considered it normal for women to shave off all their pubic hair and wouldn't even consider a relationship with a woman who didn't. I'd known that women might shave a bit to not show outside of a bathing suit, or I've heard of women who would shave a guy's initials in it, but I'd never heard of people keeping it shaved completely.

I remember when I first hit puberty, I shaved off whatever hair grew in because it seemed weird and I didn't like it, and then suffered serious razor burn for days. Never touched it again after that!

While I did go through an ultra-feminist period in my 20's when I refused to shave at all for a few months, I ultimately decided I would still shave under arms and lower part of legs...which was the same as what I was doing before that period. Not because of men and what they think because I didn't care, but because I felt better doing it for me, especially under the arms as it was itchy keeping hair under there and I don't need to do it every day unless I want to. I can use the same disposable razor for months and months and months.

I don't consider it normal at all for anyone to keep shaving all their pubic hair off on the regular, but apparently it's because I live in the hinterlands of the world (not really). That's... not exactly surprising. American porn overwhelmingly shows shaved participants, so it did seem like that would be a norm for some fraction of people.

bekkilyn wrote:

This is probably a bit TMI, but a few years ago, I admit I was shocked to find out that a lot of people considered it normal for women to shave off all their pubic hair and wouldn't even consider a relationship with a woman who didn't. I'd known that women might shave a bit to not show outside of a bathing suit, or I've heard of women who would shave a guy's initials in it, but I'd never heard of people keeping it shaved completely.

I remember when I first hit puberty, I shaved off whatever hair grew in because it seemed weird and I didn't like it, and then suffered serious razor burn for days. Never touched it again after that!

While I did go through an ultra-feminist period in my 20's when I refused to shave at all for a few months, I ultimately decided I would still shave under arms and lower part of legs...which was the same as what I was doing before that period. Not because of men and what they think because I didn't care, but because I felt better doing it for me, especially under the arms as it was itchy keeping hair under there and I don't need to do it every day unless I want to. I can use the same disposable razor for months and months and months.

Yeah, I was surprised too, Bekkilyn. I did it once, right before delivering my first kid, because I thought it'd be easier for the delivery, but it really doesn't matter from a medical, midwifery point of view.

Then it grew back. And there are places you don't ever, ever want to have ingrown hairs in. Or razor burns, I gather. I'll do the sides to be bathing suit ready, but didn't have time to hit the beauty parlor before I took my boys to the pool last week, and I wore that bikini in glorious I-don't-give-a-damn comfort. If anyone noticed, they didn't care enough to point it out.

I don't know that I'd stop waxing entirely, because I have really fair skin and really dark hair, and I just feel more comfortable waxing legs and armpits. I'm wholly aware that I probably feel that way simply because I've been conditioned since adolescence.

I usually will do the "tuck in" method for bathing suits and if anything peeks out, then oh well. That one experience with the razor down there has definitely remained in my memory!

I may have tried waxing once long, long ago, but I think the fact that you have to let everything grow out before waxing to do it made me give up on it when it's so much easier for me to just spend a few seconds in the shower giving a few swipes to those areas and it's done. I don't do all the elaborate shaving creams and gels and whatnot. Regular soap and water is fine for my purposes.

I've also tried that Nair stuff once or twice back when I was teen. So messy and smelly and again another huge hassle for me compared to just being in the shower, and I only used it on lower legs anyway and still had to shave under arms.

Naomi Wolf wrote:

In my gym, the 40-year-old women have adult pubic hair; the twentysomethings have all been trimmed and styled.

Pornspectations. In more ways than one.

H.P. Lovesauce wrote:
Naomi Wolf wrote:

In my gym, the 40-year-old women have adult pubic hair; the twentysomethings have all been trimmed and styled.

I have a style called The Edward Teach, which includes smoke effects.

Make-up and body shaving as beauty requirements are just Victorian prudery. I *really* don't like touching someone and having to wipe myself off afterwards. Plus there is almost always some kind of disturbing scent involved.

Alamo Drafthouse has a couple showings of the new DC movie Wonder Woman that are Women Only:

Alamo Drafthouse wrote:

"Apologies, gentlemen, but we're embracing our girl power and saying 'No Guys Allowed' for one special night at the Alamo Ritz...and when we say 'People Who Identify As Women Only,' we mean it. Everyone working at this screening — venue staff, projectionist, and culinary team — will be female."

The manosphere predictably died of shock from the news, but I don't want to pay them the attention they desire.

The whole situation does kind of give me pause, though. I sometimes wish American masculinity wasn't so toxic that it more or less excluded any activity reserved for people who identify as men unless it's done for gross, sexist, or religious reasons. I can't name a single Men-only event that isn't dripping in sexism or religion.

Robear wrote:

Make-up and body shaving as beauty requirements are just Victorian prudery. I *really* don't like touching someone and having to wipe myself off afterwards. Plus there is almost always some kind of disturbing scent involved.

Makeup and shaving (and scarification, tattoos, piercings, etc) as beauty standards have been around a lot longer - and in way more cultures - than Victorian England.

At the end of the day, it's one's choice whether or not they choose to do it, and either choice they make should be respected.

Clearly you've never had an allergic reaction to powder base, or heavy perfumes. I get your point, but it's the *arbitrariness*, and sexism, of makeup/scarification/tattooing as beauty that I was trying to get at. (Akin to female genital mutilation or period isolation being done for "health reasons".) For most of the past, these beauty standards were defined and enforced by men, not by women for their own amusement.

IMAGE(https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/18582301_1519439844798115_8709716856334318729_n.jpg?oh=9c6b80d604c86998158f18c976ba8252&oe=59B1E03E)

Robear wrote:

Clearly you've never had an allergic reaction to powder base, or heavy perfumes. I get your point, but it's the *arbitrariness*, and sexism, of makeup/scarification/tattooing as beauty that I was trying to get at. (Akin to female genital mutilation or period isolation being done for "health reasons".) For most of the past, these beauty standards were defined and enforced by men, not by women for their own amusement.

No, I don't have allergies like that, and I agree with your latter point. But I think making a discussion of beauty standards about your personal allergies and ick factors pales in comparison to the psychological and physiological damage they wreak, and recenters it again on how men react to it.

Wait, my initial point was about Victorian standards, which are usually understood to be psychologically and physiologically damaging, so... I must not be expressing myself well here.

Continuing the Wonder Woman movie women only screening debate:

PaladinTom wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
PaladinTom wrote:

The whole point is that it's meant to be a political statement. It's not equal. It's not fair. It shouldn't need to exist. That's the point. Law be damned.

So when a law isn't convenient, ignore it? The law is supposed to protect. If you don't enforce it here, it starts a slippery slope situation. Next time, you might not agree with what hapens, but you've ceded ground to where you might have to deal with something pretty distasteful and it gets allowed.

It's not illegal to be an asshole. It is to block people or even advertise blocking people by sex and gender.

I'm saying the point is not about "the law" for THIS specific situation. It's about making a statement. Technically breaking the absolute letter of the law isn't the point. And if they are, who GAF? They aren't trying to create new women-only laws. That's. Not. The. Point.

The fact the law is in any way germane to this issue is silly and a distraction.

I'm done though. This is indeed off topic.

Re: the law.

If we are interpreting the spirit of the law, I don't believe there is any illegal activity here. Anyway, what judge is going to let this go to trial? If it did go to trial, what are your damages? Do you expect the D.A. To prosecute? It's a ridiculous angle to take on the matter.

I don't think the slippery slope concept applies here either. What do you think this might lead to? Another women only movie screening? I'm totally ok with that.

And on the topic of ignoring a law when it's inconvenient: Laws are ignored ALL THE TIME. I can think of far more egregious and damaging instances than this movie screening. If your goal is to defend the legal system, this is not the hill you should want to potentially die on.

I think this women only Wonder Woman screening is a positive thing. I'm glad it's happening. As long as nobody is being marginalized, I hope to see more of this in the future.

Joss Whedon

Joss wrote:

I got to see Wonder Woman by myself weeks ago so shut up there's already been a man-only screening.

Oh and it's a godddamn delight.

https://www.fatherly.com/love-and-mo...

According to new research, coworkers and employers are likely to conclude both that women who take maternity leave are incompetent and unworthy of promotions and that women who stay at work and stick it out are rotten parents and undesirable partners. These disturbing results emerged from data collected by having 296 volunteers evaluate a woman based on a staged conversation with HR about parental leave.

Wow. That's some grade A BS there. Wouldn't you have to at least stake out one position and stick with it? Should women work or take the leave? One or the other.

LarryC wrote:

Wow. That's some grade A BS there. Wouldn't you have to at least stake out one position and stick with it? Should women work or take the leave? One or the other.

They have staked out a position -- that women should really just leave the workforce once they are mothers. But they can't say that without getting in hot water.

Yeah, and a lot of the loosely thrown together justifications for things like the wage gap tend to be based on the sexist expectation that women will leave the workforce.

Near as I can tell it goes roughly; women will always have kids, or more kids, they will take the leave instead of the dad because men are incapable of care and affection without developing 'the gay' whilst women are each an innately nurturing embodiment of mother Gaia even if they don't want to be.

Y'know. I've been reading The Secret History of Wonder Woman, which covers a large chunk of the suffragette movement in the early 1900's (both Holloway and Byrne were involved in the movement), and it's shocking just how much of the language and excuses used by men today IS EXACTLY THE SAME language being used by them in the early 1900's. That's over a CENTURY ago now.