What women (don't) want.

[feral chile]

This is old, but I found it interesting, because I myself feel that capitalism is still thwarting the creation of a better society, and kind of reflects some of my reservations. It certainly reflects my own personal development, and disillusionment with the way feminism was going back in the '80s. |(I was also influenced by socialism).

If women succeed in parity with men over pay and representation in the workplace, what good is that if it's to the detriment of the family? We now have situations where both parents could be working and the family still suffers poverty and lack of choice.

I'm inclined to lay most of society's ills in the hands of capitalism, from mental health issues, (forcing us to repress our stress reactions, which is the main cause I believe of mental health conditions) to a sleight of hand trick, getting men and women to compare themselves with how successful they are according to the work ethic. I don't think competing to be exploited by capitalism is the way forward.

https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/writers/german/1981/xx/patriarchy.htm

'We should not just reject the theory of patriarchy and all the idealist talk which accompanies it, we have to assert that as Marxists we have a theory of women’s liberation which can be achieved and which can lead to the liberation of the whole of humanity from capitalist exploitation and alienation. To do so we have to reject the notion underlying the theories of patriarchy, of the little woman analysis, which as Joan Smith describes, pictures ‘women at the hearth, men on the battlefield’. [27] This is a picture which was never really true of whole sections of the working class, and in fact was based much more on the family of ‘the banker, the middle manager, the industrialist and their clerks and skilled workers’ than it was on the family of ‘the casual labourer, the handyman and the immigrant worker’. [28]

If it wasn’t true then, today it is a manifestly absurd view of women. The typical woman today works in waged labour for the majority of her adult life. Typically she leaves work for the period until her children attend school and then goes back to fulltime work. Even 20% of women with children under 5 work usually part time. The full time housewife is a myth when 40% of the workforce are women and where women are entering work at a faster rate than men. Women are also joining trade unions at a much faster rate than men.

The myth has a number of advantages for capital. It enables them to foist poor wages, conditions and hours on women. It makes women feel that their job is not their ‘real’ work which makes them less likely to organise at work, and more likely to acquiesce to unemployment. It promotes the double burden of waged and housework for women. But it is nonetheless, a myth

When we look at women as workers and not as isolated housewives, our response becomes different. We see that women as part of the class organised in workplaces can build the cohesion and confidence to challenge and eventually overthrow capitalism. That has to be our aim, and in the process of building a revolutionary party which can lead the class to overthrow capitalism we have to have a picture of the class which contains women as an integral part of the workforce. But, it is usually argued, this doesn’t solve the problem that men are sexist even in the party and even after the revolution. No one could deny this was true. But our solution to it depends on whether we see fighting sexism as something separate from class struggle, or as an integral part of it. If it is the latter than our strategy cannot be for an autonomous movement separate from the party. We have to make the party and the socialist revolution reflect women’s aspirations and demands as part of the demands of the class. That means recognising the reality of women’s oppression, which often makes it harder for women to get involved at all levels of political life, and which puts on them the double burden of childcare and housework, as well as waged work.

To try to overcome this disadvantage which all women suffer, we need special mechanisms, a women’s paper, meetings, attempts to get women party members to take an active and leading part in all aspects of our work. All these recognise the real problems that women have, and also attempt to overcome them in a material way, not by exhortation. What is clear is that concessions to any theory of patriarchy, or to the idea that men are the enemy, are not only inoperable but point to the wrong problem, to the manifestations of society rather than to its root. Socialist revolution, the abolition of class society, alone provides an answer to how we win our liberation.'.

Edited February 28, 2015 by feral chile

[midnight]

Does anyone know anything about Catherine Hakim and Preference Theory?

It's new to me, I haven't read around it yet:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine_Hakim#External_links

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preference_theory

She's tried to create an evidence based theory.

Yes, see first post on first page of this thread. I don't rate her take on erotic capital and how to use it at all.

Edited March 1, 2015 by midnight

[midnight]

PS I have a lot more patience and time for marxist theory than for Catherine Hakim, btw, I think she's one of those people who contribute to social sciences's bad reputation.

[Katster]

I know I'm always way behind in this thread but it moves too quickly! Anyway, just wanted to say, gender specific toys/clothes are far worse than they've ever been in my opinion! It does my head in!! We'd like Willow to experience all forms of play and we buy her and dress her in clothes which are comfy. I am forever asked how old he is and when I say she I do so not because I am offended but because she IS female. People try to explain themselves out of their mistake and I try to explain that I'm not offended by their presumption...when I look at the way other baby girls are dressed in pink tutus etc its not surprising really. If I had a boy I wouldn't dress him in dresses but if I liked something that was pink he'd be wearing it. A friend of mine wouldn't buy her three year old a tshirt with the frozen princesses on it because they only did girls ones (she even said this to him and so the cycle will continue). Ahhh I dunno, it's 4am, I'm waffling. Night zzzzzz.

[bunique]

We're those contrary bugger parents who, when invited to a "superheroes and princesses" party, bought our 3 year old girl a Superman costume (complete with tutu!)

[feral chile]

Yes, see first post on first page of this thread. I don't rate her take on erotic capital and how to use it at all.

sorry midnight, I'll read back over it when I get the chance.

EDIT: oh, I remember now, there's some research saying appearance does count for success, tall men are seen as more competent etc.

I only read what you linked though, so don't have a full understanding of what she's saying.

From experience, though, the women I've seen flying up the career ladder are young and the type you'd associate with hooking up with sportsmen (some are), so they are quite glamorous.

Edited March 1, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

We're those contrary bugger parents who, when invited to a "superheroes and princesses" party, bought our 3 year old girl a Superman costume (complete with tutu!)

That's brilliant

[feral chile]

I know I'm always way behind in this thread but it moves too quickly! Anyway, just wanted to say, gender specific toys/clothes are far worse than they've ever been in my opinion! It does my head in!! We'd like Willow to experience all forms of play and we buy her and dress her in clothes which are comfy. I am forever asked how old he is and when I say she I do so not because I am offended but because she IS female. People try to explain themselves out of their mistake and I try to explain that I'm not offended by their presumption...when I look at the way other baby girls are dressed in pink tutus etc its not surprising really. If I had a boy I wouldn't dress him in dresses but if I liked something that was pink he'd be wearing it. A friend of mine wouldn't buy her three year old a tshirt with the frozen princesses on it because they only did girls ones (she even said this to him and so the cycle will continue). Ahhh I dunno, it's 4am, I'm waffling. Night zzzzzz.

I had this in reverse when my son was small. He had blond wavy hair, and I knew from experience that as soon as I cut it, it would go dark. He was always being mistaken for a girl, he was a very pretty child.

I'm afraid before he went to school I did get it cut, this was because I was afraid he'd be bullied.

Luckily, even though he was quite a sensitive child, the other children were really sweet with him, and by the time he was eight he had decided to grow it. He's got extremely long hair now. it did go darker, though. And straight.

Edited March 1, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

I do remember being a bit depressed by all that type of thing too... but that was years ago. I wonder if it is worse now, or you're just more aware of it?

Fancy dress costumes are pretty gender specific, think Disney films. Lots of frilly dresses for girls and superhero costumes for boys.

I know that you used to be able to get a toddler boy doll called Timmy back in the 80s, to give t boys specifically. Since there was a lot of publicity around gender specific toys then, there probably was a small market. I don't think it's available now, so it couldn't have sold well.

Most toys are only gender specific if you allow them to be though. I used to hate dolls and housewifey toys when I was little because I found them boring. I preferred cars, garages, steam engines and Batman, because I found them more exciting.

You can get a selection of both.

Ah, there it is http://catrinnadolls.skyrock.com/3182859721-USA-TONKA-1993-name-TIMMY-38-cm.html

Edited March 1, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

Well, saying that about fancy dress costumes, as usual, it's easy to dress a girl in superhero costumes, but not so easy to dress a boy as a princess.

They're pretty traditional, aren't they? Clue is in batMAN and princESS.

You do have Batgirl and Catwoman, and Supergirl though, so where are the costumes?

You know, I think we might be going backwards.

Edited March 1, 2015 by feral chile

[bunique]

I think toys are incredibly gender specific. There's a "Lego Friends" range that's clearly aimed at girls - all pink/pastel colours. What's wrong with just Lego?!

Here's the 'toys of the year' for boys and girls:

http://geekdad.com/2015/02/2015-toty-awards/

[bunique]

With regard to costume, the other side of the coin is that some girls costumes are so, so inappropriate. I had to scour the internet for a pirate costume for my 4yo for Christmas that wasn't, for want of a better word, "slutty". Turns out when I posted a pic of her in it, most friends had opted for the same one! I don't know where the demand comes from for some of this stuff.

[feral chile]

I think toys are incredibly gender specific. There's a "Lego Friends" range that's clearly aimed at girls - all pink/pastel colours. What's wrong with just Lego?!

Here's the 'toys of the year' for boys and girls:

http://geekdad.com/2015/02/2015-toty-awards/

Technically, pink doesn't make it for girls (though I know in practice we're conditioned to think so).

I can relate to this bit:

'In 2015, why do these categories even exist? The whole debate over “boys toys” versus “girls toys” is so old as to almost be cliche. But it seems like the Toy Industry Association hasn’t gotten that memo. I’d like to think that we’re already beyond such narrow thinking, but apparently we still have a long way to go'.

This whole debate has really opened my eyes to how little things have changed in 30 years - or maybe reverted when I wasn't paying attention.

[feral chile]

With regard to costume, the other side of the coin is that some girls costumes are so, so inappropriate. I had to scour the internet for a pirate costume for my 4yo for Christmas that wasn't, for want of a better word, "slutty". Turns out when I posted a pic of her in it, most friends had opted for the same one! I don't know where the demand comes from for some of this stuff.

This is just so wrong. It's presumably because girls have to be stereotypically feminine, either pink frills r raunchy. And fantasy brings this out in people.

Mind you, the fancy dress designers are so un-pc - remember the scandal about the mental patient halloween costume?

It's only 'a bit of fun' according to them.

Edited March 1, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

Yes, see first post on first page of this thread. I don't rate her take on erotic capital and how to use it at all.

How do you account for her statistical evidence that more attractive people are more successful?

Surely, more attractive people would have an advantage if people favour them, both because of that bias and because of their increased confidence and empowerment?

For instance, I'm due to deliver a presentation to a large group, so I'm putting off experimenting with my hair colour, because I don't want any of us distracted from the message I need to deliver.

Edited March 1, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/23/stephen-hawking-aggression_n_6733584.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

'While being shown around, Uyanwah asked Hawking which human shortcoming he would most like to change, and which trait he'd enhance.

Hawking chose aggression and warned that a nuclear war could end civilization and possibly the human race. We need to replace aggression with empathy, which "brings us together in a peaceful loving state,” he said.'

Mind you, he's invoked the wrath of lots of women by saying women are a mystery.

That's a pet hate of mine, too. All this 'men are from mars women are from venus' stuff.

Edited March 1, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

Wow, this article provoked some angry responses:

http://leftfootforward.org/2013/09/opinion-man-up-the-need-for-feminists-to-tackle-the-crisis-in-masculinity/

[feral chile]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/26/21-quotes-on-womanhood-by-authors_n_6707248.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

[Katster]

Most toys are only gender specific if you allow them to be though.

You can get a selection of both.

I was meaning the marketing of toys more than the toys themselves. If you disagree get yourself to Tesco and have a wander up and down the aisles and tell me what you think!

Of course I can buy trains and nerf guns for Willow, but is she going to want them when all the other girls are raving about something different? I will protect her from all that as much as I can but at school etc she will be listening to those same peers who currently attend sure start sessions in tutus and headbands with big flowers on who's mothers quite openly giggle and comment on me and Willow being alternative. It's worse living where I do and we are hoping to move before she's much older but she's still going to be influenced by clever marketing etc.

[feral chile]

I was meaning the marketing of toys more than the toys themselves. If you disagree get yourself to Tesco and have a wander up and down the aisles and tell me what you think!

Of course I can buy trains and nerf guns for Willow, but is she going to want them when all the other girls are raving about something different? I will protect her from all that as much as I can but at school etc she will be listening to those same peers who currently attend sure start sessions in tutus and headbands with big flowers on who's mothers quite openly giggle and comment on me and Willow being alternative. It's worse living where I do and we are hoping to move before she's much older but she's still going to be influenced by clever marketing etc.

Yes, this has always been a problem. My older 3 were both boys and a girl, so it was easier to get them to play with all toys.

My youngest son - even though I provided kitchens, cars, craft toys etc. (avoided guns as far as possible) he was still obsessed with cars and war. He's even now wanting to study military history for his degree.

Maybe I should have allowed guns - maybe the taboo caused the interest.

[feral chile]

I can remember finding it hard to relate to girls as a child, I didn't like Barbies, I preferred action figures, and the boys all did cool stuff like climbing, building dens and camp fires, and wouldn't let the girls join in.

As a teenager, I still wanted to be one of the lads, because girls just seemed to wait in hoping to get a date, and boys were out doing stuff.

I was kind of accepted, but every now and then they'd remember I had a vagina, and I'd either get 'you'd give me a drink if I was thirsty' type of complaints, or there'd be a double take, and I'd get, 'why do you hang around with us, who do you fancy then?'

One time, I'd had my hair cut short, and some boys mistook me for a boy, and I know now how differently they relate to fellow males.

even as an adult, I like watching live bands and drinking pints, and it was difficult finding like minded women, and again my motives were questioned.

It's seriously annoying

Edited March 1, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

OK.

I think this is a case of FB meets 50 Shades:

http://metro.co.uk/2015/02/28/this-vibrator-has-an-inbuilt-camera-and-even-syncs-with-facetime-5083198/?ito=v-a

A vibrator-camera:

'And like all good selfies, you don’t need to keep these images to yourself.

Recordings can be uploaded straight on to your PC or smart phone, and it even syncs with FaceTime. Yes, you read that right.

Lovehoney enthused: ‘Thanks to its FaceTime compatibility, sharing the view with your lover couldn’t be easier – whether you’re sat right next to each other or miles apart.’

Is it only us who can’t help thinking this might be an innovation too far?'

Edited March 1, 2015 by feral chile

[Katster]

I can remember finding it hard to relate to girls as a child, I didn't like Barbies, I preferred action figures, and the boys all did cool stuff like climbing, building dens and camp fires, and wouldn't let the girls join in.

As a teenager, I still wanted to be one of the lads, because girls just seemed to wait in hoping to get a date, and boys were out doing stuff.

I was kind of accepted, but every now and then they'd remember I had a vagina, and I'd either get 'you'd give me a drink if I was thirsty' type of complaints, or there'd be a double take, and I'd get, 'why do you hang around with us, who do you fancy then?'

One time, I'd had my hair cut short, and some boys mistook me for a boy, and I know now how differently they relate to fellow males.

even as an adult, I like watching live bands and drinking pints, and it was difficult finding like minded women, and again my motives were questioned.

It's seriously annoying

I have had similar experiences. I had my brother and male cousins growing up as a kid so it was no surprise as I got older I just preferred male company. Most of my mates are males and I haven't shagged any of them (apart from my best friend and father of my child).

[midnight]

How do you account for her statistical evidence that more attractive people are more successful?

Surely, more attractive people would have an advantage if people favour them, both because of that bias and because of their increased confidence and empowerment?

For instance, I'm due to deliver a presentation to a large group, so I'm putting off experimenting with my hair colour, because I don't want any of us distracted from the message I need to deliver.

Attractive people have an advantage in life? Well I never..... It's a bit like saying most parents love their children. It is coming from the department of the bleeding obvious.

Conventionally good looking people will always be able to use their looks to get ahead in many spheres of life. This is neither new, nor does it need encouragement - it is already happening. And I don't see why it should be promoted as a good idea to women, even if there were a few hapless souls who haven't realised it yet (doubt that). It re-enforces a lot of negative stereotypes, it simply sends the wrong message and encourages all sorts of potential misunderstandings (what if he thinks you really like or want him?).

And again, the whole thing is based on the idea that women over 30 (Why over 30? What science is that arbitrary figure coming from?) want sex less than men and have to dangle the possibility in front of them. Because the vast majority of men is always gagging for it (Are they? Most grown up men I know have someone to go it if they want that sort of thing, a wife, a girlfriend, a friend-with-benefits, and some just don't care, they don't need to hanker after someone at work who is playing evasive games and all the potential problems that brings. Plus, she's already over 30!!).

I've no idea how men actually feel about this. Assuming they realise a woman is trying that sort of thing on, perhaps some don't, but I'd like to think many do. Is it funny? Annoying? Embarrassing (beauty/attractiveness is in the eye of the beholder, after all)? Does it not matter at all? Would they consider promoting a women who does that sort of thing, because there might be something in it for them or would they think she's actually less suitable for a responsible position? Any chance this might backfire? If a guy tried that sort of thing on with me, I'd be quite annoyed.

That's not the same as you not wanting to have an unusual haircolour for your presentation. The equivalent to this erotic capital idea would be you wearing a tight or low cut top and telling flirty jokes whilst making eye contact with the men in the front row throughout your presentation (vivaciousness, social charm).

[midnight]

I can remember finding it hard to relate to girls as a child, I didn't like Barbies, I preferred action figures, and the boys all did cool stuff like climbing, building dens and camp fires, and wouldn't let the girls join in.

As a teenager, I still wanted to be one of the lads, because girls just seemed to wait in hoping to get a date, and boys were out doing stuff.

I was kind of accepted, but every now and then they'd remember I had a vagina, and I'd either get 'you'd give me a drink if I was thirsty' type of complaints, or there'd be a double take, and I'd get, 'why do you hang around with us, who do you fancy then?'

One time, I'd had my hair cut short, and some boys mistook me for a boy, and I know now how differently they relate to fellow males.

even as an adult, I like watching live bands and drinking pints, and it was difficult finding like minded women, and again my motives were questioned.

It's seriously annoying

I was lucky! I found some girls who wanted to do that too, we were forever falling out of trees.

My dad loved having a tomboy for a daughter (I never got into cars, though).

The strange thing in my case is that I don't remember hostility from other girls, or later, women. All this female jealousy stuff is quite alien to me, although I often read/hear about it.