0
1

Is feminism still needed/are women oppressed? (self.TiADiscussion)

cuddlyvampire が 投稿

So I've identified as a feminist for a couple of years but I'm getting less and less sure of its necessity in western countries. Like, I feel like gender roles and general inequality between sexes are still a big problem but I'm not sure if women actually have it worse than men anymore. So I'm asking you guys in this sub; regardless if what you think of the current form feminism has taken (cause I'm sure you'll agree that it's pretty toxic) do you think women are oppressed/have it worse than men and that some form of feminism is still needed in western countries?

全 25 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]ianiemasns 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Are there serious women's issues which need to be rectified? Yes.

Are women oppressed? No.

[–]sp8der -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

No.

Next question.

edit; more precisely, "Not in the first world."

[–]TotesMessenger [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)

[–]FireWankWithMe -1ポイント0ポイント  (10子コメント)

Looking at the statistics we see that the average woman working full time earns ~20% less than the average man working full time. Additionally they hold 29% of elected offices in the United States. I wouldn't blame sexism alone for these statistics, but it seems to me that if we had reached a point of true equality then we wouldn't see such large disparities in the achievement of men and women in America. For me it seems that the most logical explanations for female underperformance would be either female inferiority or continued inequality.

Looking at female representation in the media last year only 12% of protagonists and 30% of all speaking characters were women. 45% of movies didn't even have enough female representation to have two named women have a conversation with each other about something other than a man. While these statistics may seem unimportant to you it's important to remember that our art is a reflection of our society and in my opinion the place of women in cinema is indicative of their perceived place in the world.

The trouble with social issues now is that on paper we're all pretty much equal. However, for most on the left this doesn't mean we've reached a point of equality. Passing laws enforcing equal rights and treatment doesn't undo the effects of decades and centuries in which treatment wasn't equal overnight.

[–]Cartesian_Duelist 4ポイント5ポイント  (5子コメント)

For me it seems that the most logical explanations for female underperformance would be either female inferiority or continued inequality.

Preference. It is not a mark of inferiority to only work 40 hours a week at a non-soul crushing job.

Looking at female representation in the media last year only 12% of protagonists and 30% of all speaking characters were women.

Galbrush Paradox. Women do not receive as many speaking parts or protagonist roles because it is impossible to disassociate them with certain gender norms. Given that movies and TV are expensive and need to appeal to a wide audience, this means often requiring male characters, as they are much more of a blank slate than female characters.

[–]FireWankWithMe -2ポイント-1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Galbrush Paradox.

One of the many rational and well put together thoughts to come from YouTube comments. It's also something completely different to what you outlined in the rest of your comment. I'll address it anyway.

The problem with the Galbrush Paradox being used to explain female under-representation is that it seems to ignore the fact that the under-representation of women isn't a recent thing. According to people who cite the Galbrush paradox female underrepresentation comes from writers not being able to present women in certain ways in case feminists get outraged by simple character flaws. This would suggest that female representation has declined over the years as the SJW crowd has gotten louder and the risk of not presenting a female character well has grown. Instead female representation has improved in response to what GG refers to as over-scrutiny and now there are better and more female characters in the media than ever. The galbrush paradox presents an overinflated view of SJW influence in much the same way as radfems present an overinflated view of patriarchal influence, creating some shapeshifting bogeyman which all problems can be blamed on.

The Galbrush paradox is a bullshit argument used to justify the status quo by saying that the very people who challenge the status quo are perpetuating it. It even seems to misunderstand its own namesake by presenting him as a buttmonkey rather than an inept but likeable comic relief character. Yahtzee points out that it was Guybrush's ineptitude that makes him so such a great character and this from Ghazi did an alright job of explaining why he's so great too:

Guybrush is an awkward, overenthusiastic bumbler who doesn't get any respect, yes. And in the first game alone, he outwits everyone he runs across from the local hustler all the way up to the villain himself, becomes the best swordsman in the whole of the Caribbean, survives a murder attempt, assembles a crew and discovers the legendary Monkey Island which even the pirate kings won't touch because they're all scared shitless, wins the affections of the girl he didn't even really save through sheer charm, and vaporizes an entire crew of ghost pirates while being literally pummeled across the island and back. He's an extremely capable hero in spite of his flaws, and that's what defines him, not the flaws themselves.

The idea that such a character would be criticised if they were a woman is ridiculous. "Unlucky and inept character tries their hardest to succeed but hilariously fucks up" describes a fuckton of episodes of 30 rock.

Women do not receive as many speaking parts or protagonist roles because it is impossible to disassociate them with certain gender norms

How would this not be an example of inequality in action? How would it not be something that required more feminism in the field of filmmaking?

[–]Cartesian_Duelist 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

in certain ways in case feminists get outraged by simple character flaws

Strawman. It's how society in general reacts, and has always reacted. It is the idea that a creation will be seen as doing certain actions because she is a woman, and if they are negative--or even positive--it is a reflection of the sexist mindset of the creator.

How would this not be an example of inequality in action? How would it not be something that required more feminism in the field of filmmaking?

Nope because feminism is the chief perpetuator of this, but it's something that is likely innate within humans.

I'll respond in greater detail when I'm not exhausted/hungry.

[–]FireWankWithMe -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

feminism is the chief perpetuator of this, but it's something that is likely innate within humans. It's how society in general reacts, and has always reacted.

How can feminism be the chief perpetrator in this if it's something which is innate within humans and is how society has always reacted?

Regardless of what the apparent cause is we would still expect some correlation between the number of female characters and the level of outrage expressed by society when female characters are perceived as flawed. That hasn't happened, instead as feminism has been and mostly gone female roles have diversified, expanded, and increased.

Lets look at the two most recent books I've read, Vanity Fair and Gone Girl.

Vanity Fair's Becky Sharp is amoral, greedy, two-faced, bitchy, petty, manipulative, a user, a cheat, a homewrecker, a deadbeat mother, and a potential murderer. Despite being highly intelligent and skilled her schemes fall to pieces throughout the book and she ends up abandoned, miserable, and alone. The books other lead Amellia has one shitty thing happen to her after another, and goes from being beautiful rich and loved to being (at several points) haggard and penniless and mocked. Was there outrage over how Thackeray presented these women? Nope: his book was successful, was considered a classic shortly after its publication, and still pops up in greatest book lists even from the lefty lefty Guardian.

Gone Girl's Amy Dunne needs little introduction, mostly because if anyone doesn't know about her I wouldn't want to spoil any surprises. Flynn and Fincher were criticised extensively for their portrayal of her by the media and feminists in particular. Did this have a negative impact on Gone Girl or the careers of Gillian Flynn or David Fincher? Nope, they each made millions and a-sure-to-be-shitty sequel is already in the works.

So tell me: how is the galbrush paradox not just a lazy way of blaming the people criticising the faults of the industry for the faults of the industry?

[–]woofhorse -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

"Women can't be dissociated from gender norms"

...yeah, that's part of the problem bud. In what world is that okay? Why can't we BREAK that habit? That's not an excuse to just keep doing it, just because that's how it's always been done and it's the easier way out for you.

"Males are more of a blank slate so it's easier"

...

Women are not this monolith. Jesus christ. We have different personalities and preferences and backgrounds too. We're... y'know... people, after all. Buuut I guess women by default are just too darn complicated though and trying to delve into womanhood at all is too inconvenient. Boo. :( And there are women in that wide audience, I don't see how making males the default is in any way fair.

[–]Cartesian_Duelist 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

...yeah, that's part of the problem bud. In what world is that okay? Why can't we BREAK that habit?

Because of things like the aforementioned Galbrush Paradox, in a world where the creators will be judged for their improper portrayals of women, among other things, and it's creatively suffocating.

Women are not this monolith. Jesus christ.

Never said that they are.

Like the above, I'll respond in more detail.

[–]ianiemasns 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

So you've cherrypicked statistics which paint an unfavorable picture for women.

Now go do the same for men.

Thnx.

[–]FireWankWithMe 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Cherrypicking would imply that these statistics are misleading or paint an inaccurate picture. I think they paint a pretty accurate picture of female performance in politics, work, and the media. I think they're all more than enough to show that feminism isn't irrelevant now too. That's what I was asked to provide.

[–]ianiemasns 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Politics: compare laws designed to protect women and laws designed to protect men. Primary aggressor policies, etc. Compare government healthcare spending by gender.

Work: compare workplace deaths and injuries.

Media: Portrayal of men as incompetent idiots. Male deaths vs female deaths. Male villains vs female villains.

You're intentionally cherrypicking statistics which are unfavorable to women in order to mislead readers into thinking that these particular spheres, and, really, life in general, is always worse for women.

[–]FireWankWithMe [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It seems you've got the impression I don't think men have problems too. I was never trying to suggest that, only that women have enough problems for feminism to be relevant. Looking at your points I can't help but feel that they're minor compared to the problems women face though.

Politics: compare laws designed to protect women and laws designed to protect men. Primary aggressor policies, etc. Compare government healthcare spending by gender.

In describing the demographics of elected officials I was pointing to who has the power in society as it would be difficult to suggest the 29% of women do. As for the imbalanced laws cool, that's all stuff we need to fix. When it comes to government spending on gender it's worth noting women have greater needs than men, with periods, pregnancies and the many compilations of menopause all racking up the hospital bill much more than conditions only men have. I could point to things that men are provided with on certain healthcare plans such as Viagra while women aren't provided with birth control as a corresponding point too.

Work: compare workplace deaths and injuries.

123,000,000 people are working full time in the U.S. workforce while ~4500 full and part time workers die every year. These aren't equitable statistics, the bottom line is the impact of the wage gap influences our society and economy scores more than the deaths of 4500.

Portrayal of men as incompetent idiots

This is a problem that effects men? On the same level of only 12% of protagonists and 30% of speaking characters being female? Right. What exactly do you mean by the portrayal of men as incompetent idiots? If you're talking about Homer Simpson types I fail to see how this is a negative thing: Homer is beloved for being an idiot compared to other men and women around him, he isn't seen as a typical man. Additionally these bumbling idiots are the protaganists we sympathise with and root for, and are often successful with hot wives and girlfriends as well as a cushy life.

Male deaths vs female deaths. Male villains vs female villains.

If only 30% of speaking characters are female and female characters are so underdeveloped that only 55% of movies manage to have two women talk about something other than a man then it's not exactly surprising that this leads to more men dying and more men being villains.

You're intentionally cherrypicking statistics which are unfavorable to women in order to mislead readers into thinking that these particular spheres, and, really, life in general, is always worse for women.

How is it not worse for women? Workplace death affects 4,500 while the wage gap affects 123,000,000. Women being only 12% of protagonists and 30% of speaking characters is something that directly affects job opportunities in Hollywood while some of the 88% of protagonists and 70% of speaking characters apparently being portrayed as idiots has a much lesser impact.

[–]theholybope -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'll say I think women still have bad in certain ways. For example even though the right to abortion is in theory the law of the land and something women have access to, there are certain parts of the country where state and local governments do everything they can to stop any woman from getting an abortion in the name of "safety." In a sense feminism is still needed in a limited extent in the West. I know the "who has it worse?" thing is a big argument but I think ultimately its irrelevant and not productive since these problems are defined as gendered problems due to their probability, though any individual can be effected or not effected by them.