Joe blow wrote:
I'm interested in understanding why you chose the phrase “Male Feminism,” as the title for your blog entry. Do you think that says anything about your own stereotypes? If so, what?
Fair question. First, I'd try not to get hung up on the term. I won't say that I don't have stereotypes, but I don' think this speaks to any of those. The passage you quoted for clarification, sozobe did a pretty good job of reading (despite my VERY wordy nature). The point is that women's issues take place in places where there are NO women at all (at least in the corporeal.). An example might be that a man may openly broadcast ideas of equality about women, but in a private setting might think contrary, perhaps in benign ways. Music and film are experiences where men consume large amounts of ideas about women and not all of them positive. How does the man on his own, internally (or perhaps with other men) process the media? This is the type of topics at that depth I want to explore in the future.
I'm talking about the mystique of a females virginity to men.
Sorry Gala, but you're just far off on this. The social perception of virginity differs between men and women. I'm not saying that it should, but it does. Mystique to men? You think that women are less concerned on the topic of a women's virginity? How is this mystique to men? Most of the comments I've ever received about the difference in perception, have come from women. If talking about mystique, could it not be the females mystique with the man's social allowance to be promiscuous and rewarded?
The way I read your entry-- the glorification of the female virgin.
Then keep reading, because the subtext is about the moral subjugation of women for doing the same act man does and is socially rewarded for.
What if your friend had a bachelorette party with strippers?
This is certainly a topic that I could write about and explore the many issues that could be present.
The way I am reading Deists point involves men expressing their sexuality in what he considers a "disrespectful" way.
How about just expressing themselves. Not the whole of feminism is about sexuality. How I treat my female coworkers, is not an expression of sexuality. Think bigger. It goes beyond expression too. How a man internalizes things is topical too.
Odd example. I would not have friends that use the "n" word.
Well, me neither. The friends I used to have that did use language like that... well... let's just say we grew apart, and I'm really not that upset that they don't invite me to their parties.
There is much in common between feminism and Puritanism-- particularly in the need to dictate acceptable sexual behavior.
Again, think bigger. You are limiting yourself to the topic of sexual behavior. Beyond that, what about feminism is dictating what is and is not acceptable sexual behavior? Isn't it more accurate to say the opposite, that feminism challenges the establishment on what is acceptable sexual behavior? Feminism doesn't say to be either virginal or promiscuous.
Thanks for the all the replies everyone. We're starting to get somewhere now!