BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


It's The End of the World As We Know It.....

 
  

Page: 1(2)3

 
 
that
11:28 / 29.05.02
Basically, I am overstating my case somewhat, because the fluffy shit just isn't doing the trick in the real world...women are not frigging well treated as men's equals. Most of the women I've talked to about this like the idea of turning the system on its head, making it female-dominated. I don't think this should *actually* happen, but I am getting increasingly pissed off with the baby steps and feints at equality. I have no idea how we could get implement anything resembling an egalitarian system up and running... Haus puts my position, or parts of it, quite clearly. It is a very visceral thing though - I am basically just going 'It's unfair and we're all fuckers' in a very generalised sense. Bear in mind I only managed about three months of a government and politics A-Level...
 
 
sleazenation
11:29 / 29.05.02
personally i think that people, both men and women are equally shitty to each other, sometimes in different ways, sometimes the same.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
11:30 / 29.05.02
Of, course, Dao omits to mention that it's a lot easier to take the moral high ground in a "playground war" when you know that when you go back into the schoolroom your 50% of the class will own 99% of the scholastic supplies...
 
 
sleazenation
11:31 / 29.05.02
whicj is not to deny we are living in a patrirachy bu to state my belief that patriarchy is not the cause of all the worlds ills.
 
 
Dao Jones
11:33 / 29.05.02
That's an impossible question, of course, but I don't think it would necessarily be so different - or rather, so much better.

A few brief observations: violence is not alien to the female of the species in nature, nor is territoriality. Women can be and have been involved in extreme and/or violent political groups at both ends of the political spectrum, though of course this is already in the "man's world" we have. You need only talk to an Irish Catholic Matriarch to get a sense of what can be. Finally, those of you who took the Disinfo 'stuff you thought you knew' quiz will know that female-to-male domestic violence is not nearly as rare as we tend to assume.
 
 
that
11:34 / 29.05.02
Lurid: "Blair's Babes" is exactly the sort of thing I am having such a problem with - fake progress. I don't know what action should be taken. I do *feel* (and I stress, *feel*) like men should just fuck out of it for a bit... sorry, I realise that is dreadful and fascistic and so on and so forth... but it is all so damn frustrating...

Dao Jones: it is all well and good to say do away with the boys v. girls playground war... but the structures arising from the longest war ever are all-pervasive. Basically, it smacks of saying to the "girls", 'stop whining, we're all equal now'. And that just isn't the case...
 
 
that
11:35 / 29.05.02
Sorry, people covered stuff while I was typing that last message...
 
 
Shortfatdyke
11:40 / 29.05.02
and yes, i think it's not exaggerating to describe men and women as being at war.
 
 
No star here laces
11:44 / 29.05.02
Well, in the spirit of utterly asinine gender politics and dodgy logic that this thread has established I'd like to propose something.

Every genoicidal fuckwit the world has ever known has had a mother. Those mothers were all women. Therefore women are clearly not making a very good job of motherhood and I suggest that from now on all mothering should be done by men. With plastic breasts, probably.

I mean, come on.

As Lurid said, just because a group of people have one thing in common, does not mean to say that that thing is the cause of their behaviour - that way lies racism. I somehow think that the conflict over Kashmir might just have a smidgin more to do with religion than it does gender. Just, y'know, a thought.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
11:49 / 29.05.02
Gah! Is it possible to be an extremist PC feminazi zealot and still think that the problem of international conflicts are not entirely the result of men being "macho"? I plead not so much the middle ground as the ground over there, away from this thread...
 
 
w1rebaby
11:52 / 29.05.02
I somehow think that the conflict over Kashmir might just have a smidgin more to do with religion than it does gender.

Actually I think economics have more to do with it. But you are quite right. If women have historically been the primary child rearers, how did all these horrid men grow up with the hatreds and prejudices that cause wars?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
11:54 / 29.05.02
You know, it's discussions like this that lead ultimately to the fall of the Systems Commonwealth...
 
 
Loomis
12:04 / 29.05.02
I wonder if any paper has an interview with Roy Keane's mother?
 
 
Dao Jones
12:11 / 29.05.02
it is all well and good to say do away with the boys v. girls playground war... but the structures arising from the longest war ever are all-pervasive. Basically, it smacks of saying to the "girls", 'stop whining, we're all equal now'. And that just isn't the case...

If the structures are 'all-pervasive', then the idea of 'handing over the reins' is the more ludicrous. Further, your ideas must by definition be in part the result of the male culture you seek to reject.

I've never said anything approaching "stop whining, we're all equal now". We have to work from what we have. If you think saying "the boys have screwed it all up" helps anything, go ahead and say it. Personally, I think it's antagonistic, almost-meaningless nonsense.
 
 
YNH
16:19 / 29.05.02
What about just handing over power to a new set of folks, preferably some radically heterogenous set with nothing in common among them?
 
 
Ierne
17:00 / 29.05.02
I can't believe Cholister and SFD managed to piss off so many guys! Just by speaking their mind! Gosh!

Gentlemen: I don't think being smug or over-intellectual about the obvious, blatant inequalities between men and women is doing any good here. The rage that Cholister and SFD are expressing is felt globally by many, many women, and it is a very difficult thing to express eloquently.

If some of you can stop being condescending for a moment, maybe we can all start thinking past the anger and move towards ideas on a more egalitarian society?
 
 
Murray Hamhandler
17:33 / 29.05.02
It has next to fuck-all to do w/chromosomes and everything to do with power. Power corrupts. I don't want to see women running shit and I don't want to see men running shit. Because anyone w/power is ultimately just going to run that shit into the ground. My two cents.
 
 
Murray Hamhandler
17:51 / 29.05.02
That last one wasn't a specific reply to anyone, BTW. But this one is:

"it's a fairly obvious change in the balance of power to say replace men with women...i am wondering what the planet would be like if women had always run it. difficult to visualise, but would we be in this sorry state if it were the case?" -shortfatdyke

I don't see why not. Why (oh, why) does everyone seem to think that this is all about having or not having a penis? I'm a man and my disposition is about as far from being dominant and macho as one can get. I have no desire to lord over or subvert the autonomy of anyone. And I'm sure that there are many other men and many women who feel the same. And there are many other men and women who want and/or have power over others. Sure, men might have some genetic predisposition towards these tendencies, but thinking that that instantly makes us all mad power-mongers kind of degrades the concept of free will, doesn't it?

I feel the same concerns here. I don't think that the people in charge should be in charge. But proposing that they should simply be replaced by women is ridiculous. It's about power. It's about the hierarchical structures our governments and institutions. And, yes, it may be, to some degree, about testosterone and that pesky Y chromosome. But I must say that I've personally known as many irrational and wrathful females as I have males, and I'd be just as terrified by the thought of their fingers hovering over the button as I would by the males. I don't want anyone to have any control over my life or the lives of others. Once that's settled, then I think we can change the overarching structures for the better.
 
 
Shortfatdyke
21:13 / 29.05.02
what i have been talking about is men *as an institution*.

in a similar way to many many people's issues with america as an institution i.e. they despise america but not all americans.

i do wish i could explain myself more clearly - ierne has an idea of what i'm on about. and rage is an accurate term.
 
 
sleazenation
22:39 / 29.05.02

Posted by Ierne:
If some of you can stop being condescending for a moment, maybe we can all start thinking past the anger and move towards ideas on a more egalitarian society?

Well, surely this is the point. Some unspeakable crimes have been perpetrated by men. And SFD and Chollister are quite rightly disgusted at the agonizingly slow pace of progress toward an increasingly more equal state. BUT what they appear to be advocating comes accross as impracticle/unworkable at best and at worst wolly-headed railing against the THEM (in this case patriarchy) that is constantly opressing them by its very existance.

Yes, we are still living in a patriarchy. The question is, what to DO about it. Work from within the current system from within (ala thatcher etc.) and forever be branded as a woman who plays the role of a man in an inherantly male system. Or tear down all vestiges of 'civilization' (a loaded term i know, but hey the vast majority of us, men and women, are the product of a western society here and doing pretty well out of it thank you very much) as we currently know it an place some alternative (and please feel free to elucidate a model of society that is free of patriarchal taint) in its place. And then of course there is the little problem of how to bring about the workable non-patriarchal model about.

I am not attempting to be condescending here.

This is about working out where we go from here. As i said the pace of change is infuriatingly slow, but is there a workable alternative? and will that alternative cause pain to others in a same or different way? will it create a truly equal society?
 
 
w1rebaby
23:03 / 29.05.02
If some of you can stop being condescending for a moment, maybe we can all start thinking past the anger and move towards ideas on a more egalitarian society?

If you could stop being condescending for a moment, maybe you could start thinking that, while the world is full of hideous injustices, not all of them are connected with all of the rest?
 
 
Murray Hamhandler
00:59 / 30.05.02
"what i have been talking about is men *as an institution*. in a similar way to many many people's issues with america as an institution i.e. they despise america but not all americans." -shortfatdyke

I understand exactly what you mean when you explain it that way. It's just that my warning flag tends to go up when it seems like someone is making broad generalizations about a group of people based on genetic traits (and to a lesser degree w/r/t broad generalizations of any arbitrary group in general). It disturbs me that it seems perfectly acceptable in many circles anymore to make derogatory statements towards and about white males, to the point where many people (even white males themselves) are thoughtlessly racist and sexist in what they say and no one seems to bat an eye. It's much easier, I admit, to ascribe an undesirable trait to a group than to look at the underlying reasons that certain members of that group act the way that they do, or to accept that the trait that one ascribes to the group does not apply to all members of said group. It's simpler, but it's bigotry whichever way you look at it.

As you say, though, your rage is instead directed towards the prevalent patriarchal institutions, and rightfully so, IMHO. I usually try not to be too much of a pedant, but I think this is definitely an instance where we have to be really careful about how we say what we're trying to say. I also try keep from getting overly-defensive about stuff, but I have to take issue when I feel like I'm being associated, by virtue of my sex alone, with what I myself view as a serious problem. I'm glad to know that it was a misinterpretation on my part, and I hope that people in general can come to realize that all of those who oppose the patriarchal norms in our society are on the same "side" of the issue, regardless of a given individual's sex.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
07:36 / 30.05.02
Here's my couple of euros...
I'm largely in agreement with sfd and cholister here... but I'm far more in agreement with sleaze's first post to this thread- yes, there is a huge fucking gender problem. But even if that's ever sorted out (and don't get me wrong, I'm all in favour of that) then we're still gonna be left with the fact that people are bad. Hence rising to the "top" of the evolutionary ladder- for "survival of the fittest" read "survival of the species most capable of fucking over the others".
Sorry. Hungover and grumpy. Will attempt to lose my misanthropy over breakfast.
 
 
akira
08:29 / 30.05.02
How about the Two Ronnies 'the worm that turned' sketch. Woman take over the world, men wear dress.
 
 
No star here laces
09:03 / 30.05.02
I think Deric is OTM.

Margaret Thatcher is not an aberration - she's the exception that proves the rule.

To rise to a position of power in any society, including a democracy involves having a degree of ruthlessness and ambition that correlates very strongly with sfd's "macho idiocy". The gender of the ruler is largely irrelevant - it's the fact that they are a ruler that matters.

Fair enough to have rage at this situation, but blaming it on men is about as constructive (and exactly equivalent, btw) to saying "these fucking pakis are always causing trouble, things would be better if white people ran those countries".

The nation state, the apparatus of government, the mechanics of power - these are the things you should be getting angry about. Not men.
 
 
Mr Wolfe
09:42 / 30.05.02
As a male, I want to register my contempt for this topic. I haven't posted in a long time, particularly because of all the knowledge bullshit, but, am I the only one who thought this type of sexist wank was removed along with the presence of the boy knowledge? Where the hell do you get off stating that men have fucked up their 'job' of running the world? The last time I looked it was a free country (world seems a bit too broad a term). Ask not what your country can do for you...etc.

The kind of jumped-up propaganda displayed just serves to make a bigger war out of sexual divides, and, to be frankly honest, it's not surprising that the topic was started by a clear out-and-out feminist and has been continually supported by females with clear feminist tendencies.

If I had begun a topic about how women would probably botch the job if they were allowed to run the world and men should remain sitting on their thrones, I'd have been fucking lynched. Congratulations people. I'm off for more than just s little while to cool down. Needless to say, I think some of the females on this site (Barbelith) need to grow up and learn some perspective. END RANT
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
09:54 / 30.05.02
to be frankly honest, it's not surprising that the topic was started by a clear out-and-out feminist and has been continually supported by females with clear feminist tendencies

As long as Phil Knows! is kept out of power, I don't care *who* runs the world...
 
 
The Natural Way
09:56 / 30.05.02
Oh, shut up. All yr noise about "I'm not surprised a feminist started this thread" doesn't help matters.
 
 
Lurid Archive
09:59 / 30.05.02
Tempers do run high with this sort of thing and I perfectly understand the frustration that many women feel. However, I also understand the hurt feelings of the men. After all, many men do not care for and feel powerless to stop patriarchal power structures. Conversely, it seems an implicit assumption that women are mere victims in this game with no element of complicity.

Is it only me who finds these attitudes ironic? After all, the powerful man against the weak woman is one of the caricatures we want to get away from, right? I also think the appraisal of patriarchy as being unadulterated good for men and bad for women as a touch simplistic.

I guess I find the strong rhetoric to be ultimately self defeating. Moreover, the morality of redressing sexism against women by replacing it with sexism against men escapes me. I don't think that anyone actually holds this position, but why give the opponents of feminism extra ammunition? *looks up a few posts*
 
 
The Natural Way
10:00 / 30.05.02
Above aimed at Phil.
 
 
Mr Wolfe
10:03 / 30.05.02
The Haus of lovely warm schnoogles
Runs

Let me guess....You're both bra-burners. Right?

Right.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
10:06 / 30.05.02
Never burned a bra in my life. Have crispy-fried the odd troll, though...
 
 
Mr Wolfe
10:09 / 30.05.02
Oh there you go with the troll rhetoric again. (Which you seem to apply to anyone you disagree with). Piss off if you've nothing useful to say Mr Haus of Schnoogles.
 
 
Mr Wolfe
10:16 / 30.05.02
I's interesting to see that you so quickly defended yourself against the bra-burning comment don't you think? I didn't make any kind of comment about your gender.

Jump in with both feet why don't you?
 
 
The Natural Way
10:17 / 30.05.02
I am cuddling you even as we speak. Cuddling, holding and loving you. You are very special and lovely.
 
  

Page: 1(2)3

 
  
Add Your Reply