Question for females about sexism

[Thanda]

Yes, that is conditioning, which is why those people who consider the roles within a relationship from a neutral perspective are going against the grain. I do not think paid work outside the home is necessarily superior to caring for kids at home, but I can see clear evidence that the former are treated better than the latter, whatever their gender. A person considering forgoing paid work so they can work at home with kids must weigh that up. They are likely to have delayed career progression, and financial risk. It may be worth it, or it may not. It is hard work, and no easy ride.

I agree it is conditioning. But the point is we are all conditioned. There are risks to being the working parent as well - should a divorce occur courts are likely to give custody to the care-giver.

So even the husband who is going to work is accepting a risk and is probably as conditioned to accept the role as a women is to accept the role of SAHM. In fact I would be willing to bet that women are less conditioned to carry the role of SAHM than men are to carry the role of sole-provider. This can be seen by how much likelier a man is to consider a wife's request to work that a women is to consider a man's request not to work.

 

[Thanda]

So you believe if someone is conditioned to believe that they deserve to stay at home and not seek a career, then that's fair?

The problem appears to be that you are looking at this from only one side. You are assuming that going to work is more worthwhile than staying home. As a result your calculus does not seem to include men's feelings about having to be the sole provider.
So your question could as well be put back to you as "So you believe if someone is conditioned to believe they should work and not take primary care of their own children and family from home, then that is fair?"

 

[Mycroft]

The problem appears to be that you are looking at this from only one side. You are assuming that going to work is more worthwhile than staying home. As a result your calculus does not seem to include men's feelings about having to be the sole provider.
So your question could as well be put back to you as "So you believe if someone is conditioned to believe they should work and not take primary care of their own children and family from home, then that is fair?"

I believe that the right of a women to do what she wants trumps a social conditioning that she shouldn't do what she wants.

I suppose you also believe that a guy who sleeps around is Don Juan, but a woman who does the same is a ****.

 

[Thanda]

Because, historically, it was men who made the decision that women should be the ones to stay at home. So all you're doing is buying into patriarchy in the end.

You absolutely no proof it was men who made this decision. We simply don't know that. There is every possibility that women preferred to be home with their children and family than go to work in what was historically often very appalling working conditions.

 

[Thanda]

I believe that the right of a women to do what she wants trumps a social conditioning that she shouldn't do what she wants.

True, but the conditioning principle which you brought up assumes that the woman wants to do it since it is what she was taught. So there is no contradiction.

I suppose you also believe that a guy who sleeps around is Don Juan, but a woman who does the same is a ****.

Both are whores.

 

[Mycroft]

Both are whores.

But the social conditioning is that the man is Don Juan, and the woman is a ****. And by your logic that's fair.

 

[Thanda]

But the social conditioning is that the man is Don Juan, and the woman is a ****. And by your logic that's fair.

My logic states that it cannot be proven whether it is more worthwhile to have a career than to be home taking care of ones own children. And therefore any social conditioning (and there will always be social conditioning) that prefers either one or the other is equally as good or bad as the other.

Therefore we cannot hold up a social conditioning that teaches women to stay home as being an example of oppression while denying that a social conditioning that teaches women to seek a career is not oppressive (my wife being a perfect example of this).

Therefore your analogy is somewhat off the mark.

 

[FTNZ]

You absolutely no proof it was men who made this decision. We simply don't know that. There is every possibility that women preferred to be home with their children and family than go to work in what was historically often very appalling working conditions.

This issue has been extensively researched in sociology and other fields, and not just by feminists. There is clear evidence that everyone is conditioned in a range of ways, and that over time in the cultures that we are a part of, men have been accorded more rights and privileges than women. It doesn't mean individual men set out to consciously oppress women. Both genders are disadvantaged by conditioning and both have a chance to work against it if they wish.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I think who decides to work or handle specific household tasks and decisions in a relationship should be determined by their desire and ability, not by what's between their legs.

 

[Thanda]

This issue has been extensively researched in sociology and other fields, and not just by feminists. There is clear evidence that everyone is conditioned in a range of ways, and that over time in the cultures that we are a part of, men have been accorded more rights and privileges than women. It doesn't mean individual men set out to consciously oppress women. Both genders are disadvantaged by conditioning and both have a chance to work against it if they wish.

What are the rights and privileges that women have been accorded over the last few centuries which men did not have?

 

[Thanda]

I think who decides to work or handle specific household tasks and decisions in a relationship should be determined by their desire and ability, not by what's between their legs.

Do you believe biology has some effect on desires and abilities?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Do you believe biology has some effect on desires and abilities?

Nope. At least not enough to make one better or worse at things like working, parenting, finances, leadership et all.
And I think those that do have to pull rediculously thin justifications for propping up unnecessary artifacts of traditionalism, not biologically sound arguments.

 

[Thanda]

Nope. At least not enough to make one better or worse at things like working, parenting, finances, leadership et all.
And I think those that do have to pull rediculously thin justifications for propping up unnecessary artifacts of traditionalism, not biologically sound arguments.

Interesting. Good to hear you opinion.

 

[Revoltingest]

This issue has been extensively researched in sociology and other fields, and not just by feminists. There is clear evidence that everyone is conditioned in a range of ways, and that over time in the cultures that we are a part of, men have been accorded more rights and privileges than women.

Women have been conditioned to feel they have fewer privileges than men, eh?
But when comparing them (in Americastan) here, women fare even better,
depending upon how one weights the various advantages & disadvantages.

 

[FTNZ]

Women have been conditioned to feel they have fewer privileges than men, eh?
But when comparing them (in Americastan) here, women fare even better,
depending upon how one weights the various advantages & disadvantages.

the last line of your post is all-important. And the US is not all that different from other western cultures in this regard.

 

[FTNZ]

What are the rights and privileges that women have been accorded over the last few centuries which men did not have?

Answering this would require a 200 page book. I'd rather you answered my question at post #80 first, thanks.

 

[Orbit]

Hi,

My name is Noah and I wanted to ask you this question.

Is it sexist in your opinion to say that in a heterosexual relationship the male must take care of (be the provider for) the female because he is the male?

Thank you very very much for all answers,
Noah

Feminism is about everyone having the choice to live the kind of life and perform the gender roles that they want to. Sexism is when you don't let them do that, or insult them for doing it.

 

[FTNZ]

Feminism is about everyone having the choice to live the kind of life and perform the gender roles that they want to. Sexism is when you don't let them do that, or insult them for doing it.

Threadkiller.

 

[NewChapter]

How is it sexist if the woman wants to be a housewife? It's what I want and I know others who want it. We are not saying all females ought to do that. It's called making a choice.

Yeah, I was saying that the claim that men are automatically the providers for women is sexist, not the choice to be a home-maker.

 

[NewChapter]

Yes I have my reasons for believing so. I believe women are generally more suited to nurturing children during their earlier stages than men. I also believe that two parents working (especially when both are working high stress jobs) often leads to a neglect of children and problems later on in life.

I see sister (sister believer in the God of Abraham.)

Just out of curiosity my sister, I think I knew an African poster by the name of Thanda...are you an African woman?

Peace and may God Bless you,
Bro. Noah