Is feminism still needed in the U.S.

[I.S.L.A.M617]

But you're far more likely to get raped by your priest or minister than by a stranger when you're a kid. Why the free pass for kids who are stupid enough to go to church, when no leniency is offered to kids who talk to strangers?

I said kids that are old enough to know better do deserve what they get. I didn't offer any leniency at all.

 

[Alceste]

Not necessarily justice; just the consequence of their stupid decision. And the rapist/murderer deserves to be punished as a consequence of their stupid decision. There's no "winner" or "good guy" in those situations, but nobody's getting something they weren't asking for.

I think I'm following. So if a kid makes the stupid decision of going to a catholic church, knowing it us an institution that habitually shelters and enables known pedophiles, getting sexually abused is a consequence of their stupidity, starting at age 8 or 9?

 

[Alceste]

I said kids that are old enough to know better do deserve what they get. I didn't offer any leniency at all.

Sure you did. If a kid is raped in church, you want to judge them on a "case by case basis". If they're raped in a park by a stranger, it's always their fault for trusting a stranger. This is despite the fact that kids are WAY more likely to get raped by their priest than a stranger in a park.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

I think I'm following. So if a kid makes the stupid decision of going to a catholic church, knowing it us an institution that habitually shelters and enables known pedophiles, getting sexually abused is a consequence of their stupidity, starting at age 8 or 9?

If they go alone in a dark room with a priest, he starts feeling on them, and they don't leave or at least try to, then yes, at that point it's a consequence of their stupidity. Being in the church in the first place isn't the stupid decision.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Sure you did. If a kid is raped in church, you want to judge them on a "case by case basis". If they're raped in a park by a stranger, it's always their fault for trusting a stranger. This is despite the fact that kids are WAY more likely to get raped by their priest than a stranger in a park.

Most of the time, the priest isn't a stranger at all; it's someone the child knows and trusts, which IS completely different from trusting a complete stranger in a park. You have to be plain retarded to trust some sketchy guy in a park, but nobody's going to be instantly wary of someone they know and trust . As I said in the post above, it becomes a consequence of a stupid decision when they don't realize what's going on after it becomes obvious.

 

[Alceste]

Most of the time, the priest isn't a stranger at all; it's someone the child knows and trusts, which IS completely different from trusting a complete stranger in a park. You have to be plain retarded to trust some sketchy guy in a park, but nobody's going to be instantly wary of someone they know and trust . As I said in the post above, it becomes a consequence of a stupid decision when they don't realize what's going on after it becomes obvious.

Hm. I used to talk to sketchy guys in the park all the time. I wanted to understand homelessness. They were all too crazy or drunk to be creepy, poor things. Never laid a finger on me, and I ended up much wiser for spending the time with them. Also, they appreciated it very much.

 

[Volodya]

Absolutely. Being forced is not work, its slavery.

It is also the ciecumstance of most prostitutes. They come in thinking they will work. They find out they are becoming slaves when it is too late.

I disagree, because you are only talking about the forced ones here - but MANY hookers choose their profession one way or the other.

So for these ones, it's not exploitation at all.

 

[Volodya]

I am you jumped offline last night before I could make my point. We left off at sex sells. Now if sex sells the people who are buying sex over good service in the wait staff industry are making a value judgment. From Where does this value judgment stem?

The bosses pay below min wage and expect the customers to top it up - that is a fraud.

But most women working as waitresses love the system because it gives them more power, and more money, at the expense of those lower down the chain.

Then they chant the BS feminist hymn.

It's a double standard.

 

[Volodya]

Besides, if it all was just a case of pure "what the Hell, it'll be fun!" choice, with no other factors keeping them from getting out, then given the dangerous conditions Prostitutes (especially homeless ones) face, virtually all of them would have gone "Nah, maybe this isn't for me" and moved on to a different form of employment.

so why don't they go out and get regular work then, welfare, begging or borrowing.

no excuse in my book.

 

[Volodya]

Are you serious? Are you planning to be a waiter forever?

No idea why you think I'm a waiter, as that would likely be one of the least suitable jobs for me.

I have no time whatsoever for customer service.

 

[Curious George]

The bosses pay below min wage and expect the customers to top it up - that is a fraud.

But most women working as waitresses love the system because it gives them more power, and more money, at the expense of those lower down the chain.

Then they chant the BS feminist hymn.

It's a double standard.

if women are getting these jobs easier and getting tipped better as.ag consequence of the "sex sells system then from where does the value judgment come.

Think of it this way. we have a business owner. That business owner can hire anyone. When the owner hires a woman he finds attractive or a woman he feels his clientele will find attractive regardless of ability over a man he is choosing to value looks and sex.appeal over ability. When a customer gives the more attractive waitress better tips despite worse service he is making a value judgment. I am asking where we get these value judgments. Are these innate? Learned? Some combination?

 

[Volodya]

A combination of innate and cultural.

But so what, it's still a dual pay structure and I don't see any fems complaining.

This is because it serves their interests.

 

[Curious George]

A combination of innate and cultural.

But so what, it's still a dual pay structure and I don't see any fems complaining.

This is because it serves their interests.

in what way is it innate? In what way is it cultural?

 

[Volodya]

Aren't you a curious one.

 

[Curious George]

Aren't you a curious one.

Indeed, but do you have the answer?

 

[Volodya]

Yes, but it's going way off topic, so I'll not get into that right now.

 

[Curious George]

Yes, but it's going way off topic, so I'll not get into that right now.

I am not so sure it is. Your assertion is that feminists ignore the problems toward which you have pointed. My point, to cut to the chase, is that feminists have and continue to address these points. When we are socialized to objectify the other gender, that gender becomes a commodity on which people capitalize. Were this as simple as a girl getting drinks at the bar for free we probably shouldn't be too concerned. However, the problem is not so simple. Rather women are objectified to such an extent that they are seem as holes to use, property to protect, and pieces in a male dominated game. thus, masculine traits in males are praised and elevated, while feminine traits in males are belittled. the opposite is then true for women. How many times do we hear sissy or ****** (that's f#gg#t in case I get censored) in reference to males or dyke or ball buster in reference to females. Though seemingly unconnected this teasing, bullying, or joking is aimed at correcting behavior to fit the status quo. What is the status quo? Men are regarded as the rational leaders that aggressively conquer each other and problems in part to win objects. What are those objects? Females of course. And what are these objects suppose to do? Well nurture, serve and follow of course. Don't believe me? Take a good look at the jobs you yourself posted. And why? Well let's face it "sex sells." am I, as a feminist concerned about this thinking which leads to the problems to which you pointed. Sure I am. What feminist is not? Now do not think that I am blaming men. Hell, I am a man. Women are just as much to blame. especially given that after being relegated to the primary parent role, mothers and female teachers have fostered this thinking. But feminism is not about pointing fingers and whining about men (or women). It is about rethinking our socialization and thinking about what we have learned, it is about identifying our biases so we are more aware that such biases exist, it is about asking questions. When we critically analyze how gender roles shape our world, we are left with a dismal picture indeed: inequality. While inequalities do certainly exist for men, while there is certainly female advantage the two do not even each other out because not only does our society socialize us into unfitting roles, it also places a higher premium on maleness. All of the male stereotypes aggressive, leader, rational, independent, etc are valued higher than the female stereotypes nurturing, followers, emotional, dependent. So yeah. Feminists do fight against the issues about which you speak. despite, anti feminist attacks, hatred and trolling. They are not hypocrites. The only part that you misunderstand is that feminists look at your issues from a feminine perspective. If you want to discuss the masculinists perspective I would be happy to do that as well. But a little piece of me thinks you care little about either perspective. Hence your less than willing attitude to read through the thread and your short answers. Though I could be wrong (about your investment in the issues, not feminism).

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Can't seem to pm very well on my phone. To find exact services I would need to look in your state. But, assuming you are in u.s. The first step would be to file a complaint with the EEOC. You should be able to google them. Next, find your states human rights department, if you live in a big city the city should have one. If you do not live in a big city, then you will contact the human rights department in your state capital. Some human rights departments will just screen and investigate complaints while others will help victims pursue litigation by connecting them with attorneys. Different non profit groups will also help and connecting to these groups is sometimes hard because not all of them deal with the same issues and some are more obscure. So I would suggest contacting your local community action agency (even most small cities have these). Community action agencies can usually point you in all directions everything from WIC to legal aid. "legal aid" however is your best option if you want to pursue legal recourse. There are local lawyers that will sit down and either offer their services or help connect you with a lawyer who can help. legal aid is great and they help people in poverty with everything from taxes to discrimination. When dealing with discrimination or loss of rights the ACLU is also worth looking into. Much of their work is pro bono and they have some of the best legal minds at some of their locations. Finally, many lawyers will take up an employment lawsuit that is so blatant such as yours not pro bono but for a contingency. so, while you could just scroll through the employment law attorneys for your area, make sure pursuing a law suit is what the woman wants first. Perhaps, she just wants to get her job back in which case talking with her boss by herself or with an advocate might be the best course.

That's very helpful. Thank you.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

The bosses pay below min wage and expect the customers to top it up - that is a fraud.

But most women working as waitresses love the system because it gives them more power, and more money, at the expense of those lower down the chain.

Then they chant the BS feminist hymn.

It's a double standard.

LOL I was a waitress for years because it was the one job that I knew - as a professional dancer not getting paid for several weeks at a time and only paid a pittance after weeks of 6-8 hour rehearsal days - where I could work a night and have some cash to have at the end of the night so I could eat.

The restaurants I worked at had a few men, and half of them a few men had some of the most tips night after night. Look at the thread here at RF that talks about tipping for food, and the people who talk about getting the best wages are all male. When it comes to disparity solely on looks, attractive females do receive more overall, but are we also counting establishments such as Hooters or ShowMe's where the point of female service is to accentuate the sexualized server?

Statistics show that food service is one of only four occupations out of 108 occupations where women do make a higher median income by about 11%. Not way more, and certainly not more than the national average in income disparity between men and women. I posted a link to the wiki entry for a simple starter for conversation after I linked to Lilly Ledbetter to show that first it even does exist.

However, feminism does insist that labor should not be compensated differently because of gender. I've never heard any feminist say, "We only care about the income disparity if it's women. If men get screwed, so what, we don't care."

I've stated repeatedly I see discriminatory practices in pay between male porn actors and female porn actors. Ron Jeremy has brought to light one of the problems among others in the industry which I find notable and should be given consideration to combat it.

 

[Aquitaine]

so why don't they go out and get regular work then, welfare, begging or borrowing.

no excuse in my book.

I'm sure many are at least trying. They're homeless. For all we know, there may not be any form of Welfare they could tap into, or it could even be that they simply aren't aware of any such help. Begging on the street - maybe they already do, but obviously if one only needs to live off $5 a day for the rest of their lives.

Borrowing, from who? A bank? Pffft.
Also if they're in a position to be homeless in the first place, I'm going to assume they don't have any available family support, or any family/friends they could borrow money from.

I wonder though, do Pimps lend them money at first? Then ensnare them with "debt", which can only be payed back via income from prostitution?

Like I said, I (thankfully) have no direct experience with homelessness or prostitution, but I'm still unwilling to believe your assertion that it's all just for "fun" and "choice" because they're lazy. (!)

Stupid women, right? :sarcastic