LKL wrote:
She explicitly stated that she agrees that men face disadvantages due to the current patriarchal system. She just doesn't agree that they are as significant as the disadvantages that women face.
She also explicitly stated that men do not face disadvantages. See the parts I quoted in my earlier post. So which am I to believe is her actual view on the matter? Given that several of the parts she divided the article into are all about explaining why men's issues are human issues and women's issues are specific to women (including the very first paragraph), and only one part acknowledging those issues, I find my interpretation more reasonable.
Yes, I agree that she finds women's issues more significant. She really only goes into socioeconomic issues faced by women, so I'll keep my focus there. The reason she sees women's issues as more significant is because all her focus is on one side of the socioeconomic spectrum. She sees an abundance of men, and a lack of women, at the top. While I agree about the unfairness of this, and that steps should be taken to correct it, it only tells part of the story. If she were to look at the very bottom she'd see much the same, men making up an overwhelming majority. Personally, I find "more likely to starve in the street" to be
at least as big a disadvantage as any that women face.
It is, looking at the available literature, very easy to come to the conclusion that women face more, or more significant, disadvantages. But that is, at least in part, due to the available literature. There are far more studies concerning women's issues, more written about them, entire college majors devoted to them, while men's issues simply do not receive the same kind of attention. I do not believe we can come to any reasonable conclusions about gendered advantages and disadvantages, about "privilege," while giving serious study or thought to only one side.
Quote:
you're begging the question, there. Not everyone agrees that male circumcision is 'wrong.' I have enough Jewish friends and family members, who view it as a contract with a god, that I'm not comfortable making a carte blanche statement about the 'wrongness' of it.
I'm perfectly comfortable with the view that cutting off body parts without informed consent is wrong. Period. For any reason (save one, medical necessity). My mother's side of the family is Jewish, so I have plenty of Jewish family as well. And I still have no problem saying they are wrong.
If we are going to introduce religious tradition as justification for behavior that would otherwise be unacceptable, then what of those religions (hint: most of them) that promote the subjugation of women?
Quote:
I think that things like the assumption that men are incapable of, or less good at, childcare is my business. Circumcision is a separate issue. I don't think that abortion is really men's business, either, whether they're feminists or not.
Fair enough, at least that's consistent. I just disagree pretty strongly. If someone tries to take away
any of my girlfriend's, or my sisters', or my mother's rights (including one of their most fundamental rights, autonomy over their own bodies) then I definitely do consider that my business. Just as it is their business if someone tries to do the same to me.
12 Apr 2013, 10:29 am
