New Post
Search
HelpRe: frankly ...
in reply to a message by RoxStar
That’s just a symptom of societal sexism. Femininity shouldn’t be identified with weakness.
*previously posted as summitseeker*
--hike more / worry less--
*previously posted as summitseeker*
--hike more / worry less--
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
Exactly. It pisses me off that femininity is used as an insult. Throwing like a girl, crying like a girl, etc. What a load of sexist bullshit, and it's exactly the same thing and line of thinking when kids try to insult a boy by calling him a girl's name.
1
I don't think it means "femininity is being identified with weakness." Nor a "symptom of societal sexism."
It's just kids who think they have to express gender in certain ways for it to be valid, trying to make each other feel inadequate for not expressing gender to their simplistic standard. They try to apply the pressure they feel, by denying recognition of the gender you want to be seen as - and the simplistic way to do that is to name-call you as if you're the other gender. Nasty, but not sexism. It can happen among girls too, taunting each other for seeming unfeminine by calling them a boy's name - just not as much, because girls aren't as vulnerable to that kind of attack.
It's just kids who think they have to express gender in certain ways for it to be valid, trying to make each other feel inadequate for not expressing gender to their simplistic standard. They try to apply the pressure they feel, by denying recognition of the gender you want to be seen as - and the simplistic way to do that is to name-call you as if you're the other gender. Nasty, but not sexism. It can happen among girls too, taunting each other for seeming unfeminine by calling them a boy's name - just not as much, because girls aren't as vulnerable to that kind of attack.
1
"Nasty, but not sexism. It can happen among girls too, taunting each other for seeming unfeminine by calling them a boy's name - just not as much, because girls aren't as vulnerable to that kind of attack."
I completely disagree. The reason why a girl being called a boy's name not having the same weight behind it is precisely due to the devaluing of femininity. It has nothing to do with girls not being vulnerable to that kind of attack; I find that whole argument extremely comical. If a girl is seen as having masculine traits, that's not seen as bad as a boy with feminine traits because femininity = lesser than masculinity.
I completely disagree. The reason why a girl being called a boy's name not having the same weight behind it is precisely due to the devaluing of femininity. It has nothing to do with girls not being vulnerable to that kind of attack; I find that whole argument extremely comical. If a girl is seen as having masculine traits, that's not seen as bad as a boy with feminine traits because femininity = lesser than masculinity.
1
Eh, nevermind, I don't think you understand what I meant. We just don't agree.
This message was edited 6/2/2018, 11:31 PM
1
late to the party ...
But wanted to say that from things I've seen, at least online, here included, a lot of so-called feminists seem to devalue stereotypically "feminine" things/traits ... unless a boy or man is displaying/espousing them. They hate it when a little girl likes pink dresses and dolls, but they're over the moon over the idea of a little boy insisting on wearing a dress to play house. The reverse is often true too, but seems less glaring. This is yet another reason I don't like to align myself with a lot of self-identified feminists, because I see some hypocrisy in a lot of the things they say, that they of all people ought to be aware of but don't seem to be.
But wanted to say that from things I've seen, at least online, here included, a lot of so-called feminists seem to devalue stereotypically "feminine" things/traits ... unless a boy or man is displaying/espousing them. They hate it when a little girl likes pink dresses and dolls, but they're over the moon over the idea of a little boy insisting on wearing a dress to play house. The reverse is often true too, but seems less glaring. This is yet another reason I don't like to align myself with a lot of self-identified feminists, because I see some hypocrisy in a lot of the things they say, that they of all people ought to be aware of but don't seem to be.
1
I agree with you about - when people move the boundary on boy-ness to include more feminine-associated things, in order to try to match the fairness of making "good" masculine things like strength gender-neutral ... yet they still accept that those are "feminine" things, when they are for girls. As if they want to bring girls "up" by showing that feminine things are good enough for boys, instead of just de-gendering "feminine" things.
This message was edited 6/4/2018, 2:35 PM
1
forget it
don't care
don't care
This message was edited 6/1/2018, 6:23 PM
1