Feminism Catch-All (with FAQ)

Apologies if it was unclear before. As far as I know, local tradition instructs the breadwinner to surrender their salary to the homeowner. Ownership of the money is not joint; it is wholly the homeowner's to dispense with as they please, hence "homeowner." Like, they literally own the money. If breadwinner wants to have property, they have to save it up from their stipend and buy it under their name. Legally, all acquisitions are jointly owned, but that's not how it usually shakes out.

I did not see this setup operating in Japan, Mermaidpirate. In fact, I gather that the reverse is true. The man remains the master of the household; the woman is only his servant. She manages the finances, but at his direction. In our culture, the woman decides what to do with the money. This is not universally observed: steadfastly Chinese families do the Chinese thing, and many of the wealthiest Westernized families do the Western thing; but traditionally, you turned over your paycheck every month and that's the last you'll see of it. It is not for nothing that wives are jokingly referred to as "Commanders."

LarryC wrote:

The man remains the master of the household; the woman is only his servant. She manages the finances, but at his direction.

Yeah, this doesn't surprise me, that it's really the men that are getting looked after. I found the article I was really thinking of when I wrote the post -http://kotaku.com/the-world-of-japanese-husband-salaries-506417591

LarryC wrote:

Apologies if it was unclear before. As far as I know, local tradition instructs the breadwinner to surrender their salary to the homeowner. Ownership of the money is not joint; it is wholly the homeowner's to dispense with as they please, hence "homeowner." Like, they literally own the money. If breadwinner wants to have property, they have to save it up from their stipend and buy it under their name. Legally, all acquisitions are jointly owned, but that's not how it usually shakes out.

...

but traditionally, you turned over your paycheck every month and that's the last you'll see of it. It is not for nothing that wives are jokingly referred to as "Commanders."

Interesting. That's basically what happened in my home, except it was a two-income household, and my mother was the main breadwinner. She signed over the check to my father, and he gave her a ridiculously small stipend (as in barely enough to pay for gas and tolls to go to work). If she wanted anything "extra," like clothing. In fact, he'd buy her clothing most of the time. It still boggles my mind to this day that she let it go that far, since it meant he had a ridiculous amount of control; there are times she contemplated leaving, but she didn't have the money to do so...

It's kind of like that, except with gender roles reversed. The thing is, if you're the breadwinner, you always have money. If it comes to it, you can just pack your bags and live in the car or in a shelter for a month until your next paycheck. Of course, you won't be turning any of that in anymore! Being the person who makes the money is inherently a position of power in this sense. The homeowner can't piss you off so much that you prefer to leave.

LarryC wrote:

It's kind of like that, except with gender roles reversed. The thing is, if you're the breadwinner, you always have money. If it comes to it, you can just pack your bags and live in the car or in a shelter for a month until your next paycheck. Of course, you won't be turning any of that in anymore! Being the person who makes the money is inherently a position of power in this sense. The homeowner can't piss you off so much that you prefer to leave.

That would be true, if and only if money were the only factor in the power dynamic.

I would say rather, "if money were the deciding factor in the power dynamic," or at least powerful enough to force a decision. There are other power dynamics in these relationships. For instance, in Mermaidpirate's Japanese article, my impression of how it is in Japanese households mainly comes from the husband's retained power to decide on large purchases, to own them legally, and to veto pretty much any purchase decision. Filipino husbands traditionally get none of this power. In addition, it is typical for Japanese husbands to not do any household chores. Filipino wives traditionally have a great deal of discretionary power around the house - more than enough to order her husband to do any household chore, on pain of eviction. She does, after all, own the house. Most men are wise enough to just do it. After all, if it's a household chore, it's for everyone's benefit.

If it sounds like men (or working wives) don't get enough power in this relationship, I may be overstating the power of the maybahay. Their power is still mostly limited to house and familial management. They naturally have little power in the workforce, and since each person manages a separate household, they generally have little collective power.

In any case, it's not true that breadwinners are limited by money from leaving an abusive relationship. They have ultimate control over that, so it's usually something else.

I really feel like focusing on the finances, especially with an increasing number of dual income households isn't really the right place to put the attention.
Even in a single income household if the 'bread winner' keeps the books things can still be very much equal depending upon how decisions about purchases are made, and how all the other multitude of factors and specific personalities interact.

I think the approach of talking openly about the fact that there ARE power dynamics in relationships, what they are, and wither the people in the relationship are truly ok with them is a better approach. Phoenix Rev mentioned something recently in another thread about his church allowing dom/sub couples to get married with different vows than the require for others (http://www.gamerswithjobs.com/node/4...)

My point is that cohabiting couples married or not are never going to be equal in every way. Trying to balance the use/spending of money seems myopic to me. In addition I know a lot of people where each partner gets an 'allowance' and the remainder goes towards bills etc. when they need a new appliance or whatever both parties are involved and redoing the kitchen might be predicated on a vacation the other wants to take.
While I am glad that the system being described works for people I think many MANY other cultural factors are at play and it is unlikely to be the best solution for even the majority of people.

Just like making time for each person to do their own thing, and time to be together, and splitting up chores, money doesn't have one solution IMO. It is all about teaching people before they are in that position to know that it is NECESSARY to talk about such things openly. Just like you might tell someone they should talk openly about STD risk factors or what they expect out of a relationship.

A lot of people may be making the mistake of thinking that I want this tradition imposed on everyone. It's for discussion. It is a cultural tradition that says things about women and men and what they're good at and where their broad powers are. This is the Feminism thread, after all. The similar Japanese tradition is a good comparision in that it's similar in some ways, but profoundly different in everything else, such that the overall effect is different. In one state, the homeowner wields a great deal of power, in the other, the housewife is just a poorly paid accountant.

LarryC wrote:

In any case, it's not true that breadwinners are limited by money from leaving an abusive relationship. They have ultimate control over that, so it's usually something else.

Captain Obvious strikes again! Of course there's something else. But not having access to anything past your current paycheck does limit things, especially when kids are involved.

Real Female Role Models As Disney Princesses

Not a Hawkeye Initiative level of win, but still.

"Holocaust Princess"

Bloo Driver wrote:

"Holocaust Princess"

I was going to say, I'd have sent that back for a rewrite.

SpacePPoliceman wrote:
Bloo Driver wrote:

"Holocaust Princess"

I was going to say, I'd have sent that back for a rewrite.

Well, it's supposed to be intentionally ridiculous. But maaaaann...

LarryC wrote:

In any case, it's not true that breadwinners are limited by money from leaving an abusive relationship. They have ultimate control over that, so it's usually something else.

Wait am I reading that right? We are expressing concern of the breadwinners ability to leave an abusive relationship?
Shouldn't the concern be over non-breadwinners leaving?

Sorry I am just confused.

realityhack wrote:
LarryC wrote:

In any case, it's not true that breadwinners are limited by money from leaving an abusive relationship. They have ultimate control over that, so it's usually something else.

Wait am I reading that right? We are expressing concern of the breadwinners ability to leave an abusive relationship?
Shouldn't the concern be over non-breadwinners leaving?

Sorry I am just confused.

We were talking about when the non-breadwinner has control over the finances. For example, my mother made a good bit more than my father, but he controlled everything, including finances. Sure, money wasn't the only factor; mere control over the finances does not constitute abuse.

We were expressing a traditional setup where the homeowner is a position contrasted to the breadwinner - one makes the money, but it belongs to the other as a matter of course.

As another data point, there is also another piece of advice many Filipino women receive in marriage - never be dependent on one breadwinner. That is, take the money, but also make sure you can live without it. This usually means a part time job, a small business, or both. It is traditional for most homeowners to have supplementary sources of income. The majority of small to medium businesses in the country are owned and operated by women.

This state of affairs reinforces the traditional view that women are more responsible with money. It is easier to get a loan for a small business if you're a woman.

Ladies, do you know when the STFU?

Check out these amazing boy's & girl's magazines!
http://whtbout2ndbrkfst.tumblr.com/p...

DanB wrote:

Ladies, do you know when the STFU?

Check out these amazing boy's & girl's magazines!
http://whtbout2ndbrkfst.tumblr.com/p...

6 Ways To Have More Confidence Right Now

1. Throw this magazine in the garbage.

DanB wrote:

Ladies, do you know when the STFU?

Check out these amazing boy's & girl's magazines!
http://whtbout2ndbrkfst.tumblr.com/p...

This is a perfect example of how feminism helps women and men.

"Do you know when to shut up?" is a question we should be asking all of our children. And teens. And adults.

Gravey wrote:
DanB wrote:

Ladies, do you know when the STFU?

Check out these amazing boy's & girl's magazines!
http://whtbout2ndbrkfst.tumblr.com/p...

6 Ways To Have More Confidence Right Now

1. Throw this magazine in the garbage.

+billions and billions to that, Gravey!

I'll admit to having bought a few Teen Beat magazines when I was 12 and 13 (mostly for pictures of Wil Wheaton because I lurrrrvved him) but, those never had "Do you know when to shut up?" quizzes, or anything even vaguely Cosmo-ish when I was buying them. I can't believe sh*t like this is actually sold to young women, and it breaks my heart that these same young women are reading it and taking it at all seriously (and it angers me, too). "Be pretty with your date night hair and don't talk too much, mmmkay?"

I need to go vomit now.

Bloo Driver wrote:
DanB wrote:

Ladies, do you know when the STFU?

Check out these amazing boy's & girl's magazines!
http://whtbout2ndbrkfst.tumblr.com/p...

This is a perfect example of how feminism helps women and men.

"Do you know when to shut up?" is a question we should be asking all of our children. And teens. And adults.

Matrix Games releases a bunch of faction info for their new game Pandora: First Contact. It includes leader portraits and details for each of six factions.

Here are the first two responses:

Can you do something with Lady Vermillion's boobs? I cannot put my finger on it, but something about them is wrong. Perhaps you could spread them out and make them bigger, please. And while you are at it, you might as well jack-up the ecological gals also.

Oh and about the game, I am getting it.

I was about to post this. The boob divot is weird as hell. Also getting the game too btw.

I couldn't believe my eyes.

Haha. I see some forum user named "badken" fighting the good fight.

BadKen wrote:

Matrix Games releases a bunch of faction info for their new game Pandora: First Contact. It includes leader portraits and details for each of six factions.

Here are the first two responses:

Can you do something with Lady Vermillion's boobs? I cannot put my finger on it, but something about them is wrong. Perhaps you could spread them out and make them bigger, please. And while you are at it, you might as well jack-up the ecological gals also.

Oh and about the game, I am getting it.

I was about to post this. The boob divot is weird as hell. Also getting the game too btw.

I couldn't believe my eyes.

What the heck is a boob divot? Is that what you get when you swing a sex toy too hard?

Ego Man wrote:

What the heck is a boob divot? Is that what you get when you swing a sex toy too hard?

It's bad form to not replace your divots.

It looks like a UV mapping issue on the model, so it looks like her top is tucked into her cleavage. It is an actual bug and rather obvious, and I can see bringing it up. There's definitely a lot more about her to talk about than that, though, judging by reading her description.

The bit about how they should make the other gal more busty is really annoying.

Sounds like Matrix could learn from Crytek:

Male soldiers in Crytek's huge free-to-play online shooter Warface are depicted realistically but, comparatively, female soldiers are not. Their proportions are exaggerated, their clothing is revealing - they're sexualised.

They're that way because a male-dominated audience asked for them to be. And while Crytek recoiled at the "considerably more extreme" requests, applying an authenticity filter to rule out things such as high heels, impractical open-chested combat fatigues exposing plenty of cleavage were kept in.

And, thankfully, first comment:

How about a toggle between realistic and sexualised? The catch being that the toggle applies to both male and female characters.
Ego Man wrote:

What the heck is a boob divot? Is that what you get when you swing a sex toy too hard?

There is a weird divot in her chest. I think it's just a bad character model. Honestly, they all look really bad.

I don't see why that's a catch. That's a feature!