No, for complaining that the entire male gender isn't living up to her standard of a suitable husband and whining about the fact that North American youth are too educated and monied, she and her shitty, selfish argument gets thrown under the bus.
I don't think it's people like you the debate should be about. The author spoke in broad strokes about all men, this and that, which was silly, because sweeping generalizations about entire generations of men are easy to poke holes in. However, I think there's a certain subset of men for which her criticisms are spot-on. I graduated college in 2009. I know a ton of people that have no idea what they want to do with their life, and are lazy, and a result are very much treading water right now. Some live at home, others live independently but require financial support from their parents. They are pretty good at concocting career plans in some depth if you were to ask them, but the reality is they are directionless, or what goals they do have are ill-thought out and unrealistic. I would argue that the majority of these people, male and female alike, are probably worthy of the criticism the author would levy on them. Financial independence isn't the end-all, be-all of someone's existence, but I would argue it's a pretty reasonable and reliable sign of someone's maturity. I can respect for someone who works 6 mos. out of the year and travels the other 6. I can also respect people who want to live cheaply and work only part-time so that they have 3 days a week free to paint, or jam, or whatever. But it's the person who is "waiting to apply to grad school" while living on their parents dime, going out every weekend -- this is the kind of person I pictured when I read the article -- that draws my ire. This kind of thing seems to be a recent development in our society, and I would argue, is not a good thing at all. Not wanting to commit to a career you may hate? Sure. Not wanting to take a particular job you may dislike? Ehh, ok. But not being able to support yourself while you try and search for your life's purpose? That's where the line gets drawn in my mind.
I hope to God you are NOT including Germaine Greer in that statement. She should be ground up into shark chum. Claiming that heterosexual intercourse is sexual assault? What is she trying to do, out-stupid Pat Robertson? Fucking bitch.
I'm on my way out the door, so I can't really engage this argument, but I get it. I don't agree with it, but if your schema is that women are conditioned and brainwashed, deliberately to be beholden to male sexuality (which is inherently dangerous), it's not a huge leap to then assert that any sort of PIV that takes place in this context is assaultory. Added in the imbalanced risk involved, especially with respect to pregnancy, and the argument is valid. Not sound, imho, but valid.
I'm not arguing with anybody. I'm simply stating that I hope Germaine Greer dies soon so feminists will stop being disgraced by her deranged, monstrously retarded statements.
Wait, whut? How the fuck would a feminists who actually get the point of their own fucking argument possibly include Greer? The point of feminism is equal rights and equal consideration regardless of gender. Greer is an idiot who doesn't get the point of shoe laces, let alone that equal rights and misanthropy aren't the same thing. On a side note, I'm getting lots of positive feedback from the girls about my self description as feminist. I hate to crap on my own parade here - but I'm an egalitarian. Feminism implies an agenda for the sole pursuit of female interests. I think all gender (and sexual, ethnic and most political) discrimination is equally stupid - and I'm just as opposed to anti-masculinity sentiment in family courts and childrens services industries as I am to anti-femininity sentiment in physics and engineering, or homophobia in sports and the military. I think it's fucking retarded that Queers, minorities, women and the increasing MRA types are respectively pushing their own agendas without understanding that their all selling the same fucking argument, that bias based on situation irrelevant factors is stupid, unfair and unethical. Your gender doesn't determine if you're a better CEO, a better teacher or a better parent. Your sexual preference doesn't influence how well you'll do your job under fire in a combat situation, or how fast you can run carrying an inflated pig skin. Etc. Who gives a fuck? Base descisions about who can and can't be a whatever based on if they are actually any good at whatever the fuck they want to do - not some arbitrary marker like gender. So while I love that every time I describe myself as feminist, a certain boards member considers flying to Australia to fuck my brains out - I'm not actually a feminist. But as an egalitarian, most of the smart people who I might want to talk to about how stupid gender based discrimination is, are smart feminists who get that at the core of their agenda - is equal rights.
Also, "feminists" aren't a monolith. Self-described feminists range from Camille Paglia to Amanda Hess to Andrea Dworkin, and they all have quite differing views about a lot of issues. One definition I like: "Men, their rights, and nothing more; Women, their rights, and nothing less."
I don't know why this has to be a gender debate, except to exclude the faulty, subjective portion of her argument. Maturity isn't a single gender concept. Maybe maturity (or at least a sign of it) is being capable of self-realisation. If you realise that sitting on a couch in your parents basement is what you really want to do with your life, that would be considered dumb by general standards. But it also might be mature, especially if you're such a fuckup that excluding yourself from society is a good thing. Maturity and dumbassery aren't mutually exclusive notions. Look at it from another angle. If you have a genetic disorder that is congenital and severely life affecting, is it not a mature decision to decide not to procreate? Is it then immature to breed knowing what the likely outcome will be? So, does identifying as a feminist or an egalitarian get you more pussy? I'm suspenseful with a pencil right here.
Here you go: And just in case any of the women on here are wondering, I'm a feminist. A hard core feminist.
Just in case any of the women on here are wondering, in college I decided it was time to start acting like a responsible grown up. Instead of sitting around writing fiction all day long, I took an LSAT prep class, drop kicked the exam, got into a very prestigious law school, graduated with decent but not great grades, and went to work at a law firm. I had my own apartment, financial independence, and a long term relationship. That was a while ago though. Now I've given up on that "mature" "adult" bullshit, live with my parents, drink in the afternoon and am trying to make money off of writing and podcasts. By every metric, I am now the losers the article was discussing. In fact, I'm worse. I was a responsible, mature adult, and now I've reverted.
For one eat shit for my punctuation, my job dosent entail typing shit out on a computer all day long. I could give a fuck less how you or anyone else lives their lives. The people on this board were just throwing out their opinions on how they think they should live their life, and I was throwing out mine. And yYes by the time your 30 your youth is gone. I work with a bunch of 30-39 yearolds and they all say the same thing: they cant do what they did in their 20's when they're in their 30's. They also say to me that they wished they worked more hours in their youth so they dont have to work so much now. And how exactly am I contradicting myself? I dont have a desire to visit foreign countries right now but Ive been to every Canadian provence so far. I spend about 4 weeks a year up north, or where ever else hunting, riding ATV's or fishing. Those are my hobbies, Id rather do that then sit on a beach somewhere. I didnt like the college program I was in so now Im essentially signed up to school for 5 years because thats what an apprenticeship is. And Ive done alot more in my teens then most people I know. I can honestly say I had an awesome childhood and I have a lifetime of memories because of it, but I did both at the same time, thats what weekends are for. Again your body starts to slow down in your 30's. I reconcile those two things because (and I said it before) Id rather bust my back now though when Im young and my body can take it, so when Im older I can relax and not have to work so hard. How is that a contradiction? Im not saying that hes less of a man or looking down on him. He loves downhill biking just as much as I love working then because if I truely dont love what Im doing, then I wouldnt be doing it, which is a point you dont grasp. Your friend though, when his kids are 7 or 8 years old, will he be able to afford to put them into hockey or football? Will he be able to buy them a dirtbike or a snowmobile etc? Even If he could, will be be able to see them play or teach them to ride their toys? Probably not. When I have kids (hopefully in my early 30's) I want them to have all that shit, and I want to see the enjoy it too. Thats why I work so hard now, for the future of me and my family. And just like DCC said, maybe one day Ill want to go to Europe. I know Ill definitely want to take my family on a vacation. Working hard now allows me to do that without stress and without debt later on in life.
Well I ment to say backpack through a foreign country. Aisa never interested me but I like European history so it would be cool to see the sites over there.
I have it on personal authority that there are tons of employers in Asia who would let you work all the overtime you want.
How about everyone does what makes them happiest, and we all stop trying to justify our respective worldviews against the judgments of a journalist none of us know or care about? Sounds like a plan to me.
You missed the point of the article. Imagine if girls just did what made them happiest: eat ice cream and not shave their legs. Do you really want to live in that kind of world?
I've been biting my tongue for most of this thread, but I can't keep quiet about this. Why do you think that this definition of egalitarianism is different from being a feminist? Feminism has the worst fucking PR ever and it drives me crazy that it's meaning is being bogged down by outdated sexism and nutcases like Camille Paglia and Germaine Greer getting press. It makes me so sad that it took me until college to have this fucking revelation that I could like sex, men, cooking, and fashion AND still be a feminist, and it makes me so sad every time I hear anyone say anything along the lines of "Well, I would be a feminist, but, like, I like men, so I'm not." Correct me if I'm wrong, but this makes it sound like you're included in the masses of people that still think feminism is about replacing men's power with women's, and while this was the idea behind radical "feminists" of the second wave of feminism, it doesn't/shouldn't hold any weight in modern feminism. Today, feminism is about equality: that women, men, and everything in between should be considered equal in any cultural/legal/political/societal etc frame. They think that this backlash against men that people were ranting about earlier where the only types of men shown in the media are bumbling idiots/disgusting pigs/evil criminals is just as stupid and sexist as you all do, and anyone who revels in it or spouts nonsense about how a feminist should really act doesn't have the right to call themselves a feminist and I wish they'd shut the fuck up. They're not doing anything but tainting the image of feminism and ultimately doing a lot more harm than good because then too many people are scared to label themselves that way because of a misunderstanding. Gah. Also, I need to point out that the theory from the book I brought up in my first point about guys devolving because they're pissed that their power was taken away from them was supported a few pages later in the thread: So, there you go. Also: "...while women decided to become offended by everything." Fucking love it.