Welcome to Gaia! ::

Preface to the GCP edition:


This is a paper i wrote for my college English class that i thought id share with my comrades. It possesses a lot of my thoughts toward the Feminist movement and the women's struggle.

The Class is done on a website called "The Webboard" which is basically the English classes forum where we discuss issues. The people mentioned in it are people in my English class. I'll give a quick description of each of them.


V. Hewett - A very good friend of mine outside of school, an aspiring psychologist. Him and I have disputes on political theory and theory in general almost every day, but our best ones are on these Webboards.

Luke Allen Russell- A conservative Republican. Among one of the best writers in the class but i dont actually get along with because of our views

Jonathan LaFrance- A personal friend of Luke, for the most part repeats and agrees with what Luke says and is very sloppy when it comes to ideology. (basically easy to bash wink )


everyone else mentioned is irrelevant . So i hope some of you read this, those of you who do please give me some feed back and tell me what i think. Those of you familiar with Lenin will notice that i ripped off the opening line of his pamphlet "What is to be Done?" and changed the first word xd so please read and enjoy!




Feminism Steeled: Women’s struggle against the social order.
Introduction:

“Change” is undoubtedly the most fashionable slogan at the present time. A change in direction for our country and for America. But who specifically is behind this “Change”? Who is head running it? Who is propelling it forward? Change is a very big thing to accomplish, especially in today’s culture, who among us is capable of a job of this magnitude? These are the burning questions of the current movement in which Democrats and Republicans alike will give you the same, simple answer: “The Women”


Now surly the first question on the readers mind is “How is it that women are behind change? Women have all their rights, why is it that they are so enthusiastic?” What else is to be expected? Women throughout history have been fighting struggles in various countries in order to bring about actual change in their societies and cultures.


There are those among us who do not share this vision, in fact there are a substantial amount of people. These people mostly consist of men (and occasionally some women) who do not realize, care not to realize, or even flat-out ignore the fact that women are still fighting, because the men in this category inheritably do not suffer the same problems in this culture that women do. Anti-feminism and Chauvinism to men’s leading role in our culture forges a counter-revolutionary movement against the feminist struggle. To retain the current social relations, and to downplay the women’s significance in history, are indeed the tasks of this counter-revolutionary movement. What I am here to prove today is the simple fact that this is still a Male dominated world and that the lives of men and women are very different as well as their roles in society, despite what the male chauvinists tell you.


V.Hewett and the “Norm of society”:





Let us use the Webboard discussions on the gender question as our first springboard. The moment women challenged where they stand in America’s social order, we see V. Hewett, L.A. Russell, and J.LaFrance on the attack. We will begin our defense by starting with Hewett. When the topic of marketing towards women and the pressures imposed on women, were brought up, Hewett fell clumsy on his stance and showed nothing but ideological pettiness in his argument, however it requires attention nonetheless to help better explain what is going on here.

“Well im not gunna say women arnt held to double standards on some things, but once again I would like to point out that the only reason the media and people expect women to be stay at home mom is because that’s the norm of society and I am not saying it has to be true I am just saying that’s the norm and you know once again untill men start staying home more then women it is going to be seen as normal for the women to do it, and there are people who will look down on women for going out and getting careers, but you know feminist are annoying.”

Now ignoring the obvious and substantial amount of grammatical errors, it is the ideology we are here to discuss. Hewetts statement raises a lot of questions such as
“What is the norm of society?” “Norm” being the derivation of “normal” means a standard model of pattern and “society” which is a group of humans broadly distinguished from other groups by mutual interest. This being the case, we now find that the phrase “norm of society” is a contradictory term, for no two groups is the same due to the factor of mutual interest. But if the “norm of society” is meant to be the mass consensus then we have on our hands a completely different issue.


There is no “norm of society” Mr. Hewett. Normality is subjective, it is an idea, and it does not exist in the material world. If the mass consensus were that women belong in the kitchen, then there would be no feminist movement. Their grievances are living proof that this is simply incorrect.
However, the ideological flaws are illuminated, for if Mr. Hewett took time to better understand his own definition of the “norm of society” there would be no reason for him to say “feminist are annoying”. But that is all that needs to be said on that issue. Let us continue with an elaboration of Feminist theology so that we may help our friend Mr. Hewett on what the “norm of society” is to the feminists.




Feminism Steeled:

Now we’ve read the essay in the text by Susan Sontag, which deals with the things our culture imposes on women. But let’s look at this passage in particular.

“It is not of course the desire to be beautiful that is wrong but the obligation to be-or try. What is accepted by most women as a flattering idealization of their sex is a way of making women feel inferior to what they actually are-or normally grow to be. For the ideal of beauty is administered as a form of self-oppression. Women are taught to see their bodies in parts, and to evaluate each part separately. Breasts, feet, hips, waistline, neck, eyes, nose, complexion, hair and so on-each in turn is submitted to an anxious, fretful, often despairing scrutiny. Even if some past muster, some will always be found wanting. Nothing less then perfection will do.”

Beautifully put and very well said - everything said couldn’t be truer and I strongly affirm that any women who have read this would strongly agree with this passage as well. What Sontag has said is something that is often thought by a lot of women. And I do not say this merely because I think it is the “norm of society” but from actual experience, women I know and talk to confess the exact same grievances. I feel as though Sontag has only managed to scratch the surface.


The class struggle has created institutions within the social strata that keep women down and a life that, comparatively, is much more difficult then men. Women must be attractive and talented in order to achieve. Men can just achieve. How often does one find on television or a movie, an overweight woman with a slightly contorted face that is not otherwise there except to look deliberately low class? Not too often I wager. Why is it that when women sleep around they are labeled a “slut” or a “whore”? Why does this not happen to men? Women must find the equilibrium between virgin and “whore”, and it is not fair. It is not fair because it is impossible, because our culture, this male dominated culture, takes a sadistic pleasure in seeing women fail. Take for example the celebrities Britney Spears and Lindsay Lohan. Do we find such cruel gossip toward any male celebrities? Absolutely not. Men will get away with their behavior with the old time saying of “boys will be boys”. What will women be you ask? As Sontag said earlier “Nothing less then perfect will do”



Luke Allen Russell and the origins of subtle Sexism:


Another struggle the Feminist movement is faced with is the sublimity of sexism. It exists in everyday phrases such as “You throw like a girl” or “You’re such a p***y”. The social stereotype that women are weak is perpetuated by the ignorance of the Anti-feminists-those who feel as if the women’s struggle is inadequate. Let us take the posts of Luke Allen Russell. Now as a disclaimer, I respect Mr. Russell greatly for his writings. There is very little negative I can say about his literary skill, if anything at all. However, where we clash is in the realm of ideology. In terms of theory we are on opposite sides of the specter. Especially when it comes to his views on women.

“I simply feel we have gone too far with the “anything goes” approach when it comes to marriage and gender roles. Sometimes I think the previous generation was better-off when Mom stayed at home and Dad went to work”.

Not much said but very much wrong. Mr. Russell captures perfectly the criminal thought found towards women that must be liquidated. The question on the readers mind is more then likely:”where did these “gender roles” come from? Haven’t they always been there? Is it not the natural role of the women to care for the children at home?” The answer to this is a “yes”. There was a time in history where it was the natural role of the women to stay behind and care for the offspring. This was however during the days before the industrial revolution, when the means of production were not yet developed enough to mass produce and distribute. Mr. Russell’s description of the family (Men at work Women at home) refers to the early tribalism and feudalistic societies that preceded modern day Capitalism. But as previously mentioned this was before it was possible to mass produce commodities, which required more labor. Now that such strenuous labor is no longer needed, neither was need for the woman to stay home. Class manipulated institutions such as religion and religion based moral systems, imposed the biblical views of the family that deviated from the feudalistic times. The men in society were not ready to throw away the old order, and it is here when women began to fight. For almost two centuries women have been fighting to exalt themselves. Women should not be expected to stay home and care for the children any more then men should, for it is no longer necessary. And it is this fact that the media, society, Mr. Russell, and Mr. Hewett must try to understand.




The Question of Beauty:


The “Norm of Society's” next issue to be tackled, and an issue that I feel must be thrown out there is the term “Beauty”. Beauty is by far the most difficult term to define, due to the so many different perceptions of it.Let us take Mr. Russell's perception of “Beauty” and see what we can get.

“I define feminine beauty in these three terms: A combination of mental strength, moral character, and some elements of physical beauty”


What the reader should notice right of the bat is that Mr. Russell has used the term “beauty” to define the term “beauty”, In other words: Mr.Russell's consensus of beauty is paradoxical! The question now is who determines what beauty is in society if not Mr. Russell? I mean surely it came from somewhere. In America, the “norm of society” would more then likely claim that Hollywood says who is beautiful. However, upon further investigation we will plainly see that Hollywood merely conveys beauty. Who is it that Hollywood views as beautiful? I most certainly doubt its women with mental strength and moral character. So what is left? The answer is simple. Beauty is defined by sex appeal. Sex sells and the sexiest women are the most marketed and as we had said earlier, when they fail they pay the price. It is a sad fact but a true fact. Since women are the ones most often bought and sold buy the media, proves that not only male supremacy is still present but that women still have a long raod to travel before they are seen as equals to men. To quote a post made by Kimberli Nelson “Beauty hinders women”. It should become the task of all women to properly define to society what Beauty truly is rather then compromising themselves and their morals to live up to Hollywood’s vile definition.



Respect towards Women:



The last issue that must be dealt with is the overall respect women receive in this culture. Now this topic in particular is perhaps the one I am most passionate about, and is undoubtedly the most important. Let us kick off our exposure with the infamous echo of Luke Russell, the one and only Jonathan LaFrance!

“To a degree, women are looked more at their appearance then their mind simply because they are more sensitive because women are technically so emotionally sensitive that could be a possibility of another reason why women don’t get the benefit of the doubt. Being too emotionally sensitive could lead lead to depression as well from what I hear, and don’t quote me on it. Women are more chronically depressed then men”


It’s very difficult to maintain a cool head after reading these awful words, but I will do my best to keep from insulting Mr. Lafrance. I would also take this opportunity to apologize to Mr. Lafrance for quoting him even though I was specifically told not to, but there is just far too much in this passage that deals with exactly what im writing about.

Now Mr.LaFrance is correct in his in his statement that women are looked more at their appearance then their mind. This no one can deny and I will address this particular issue in a moment. But my first question to LaFrance is what exactly makes women technically so emotionally sensitive? What in your distorted line of thinking has led you to utter such a disrespectful assumption? Emotional sensitiveness is something that transcends gender, as any psychologist will tell you. It is an incorrect comparative between men and women. I cannot stress enough how important it is to avoid the mistake made by Mr. Lafrance which is confusing ignorant ideals with reality and fact. Let us take a moment to build upon the one issue he has addressed that actually contains validity.


Now I believe I had seen a post on the Webboard that gave me a very excellent insight to the issue of beauty over mind and I apologize I cannot give credit or properly quote the original poster of this idea because I was unable to find it again after reading it, its also possible that I’ve read it somewhere else as well but here is the gist. Beautiful women do not under any circumstances receive the intellectual recognition they deserve simply because beauty (true beauty) is something that is something is synonymous with stupidity. In our culture. And the exact opposite also true, that: intellectual women must strive to be intellectually recognized. If they are not viewed as beautiful enough. We see the same disrespect toward women.
Let’s take a look at another one Mr.LaFrance’s posts.


“Not only are men physically stronger then women but me, for the most part, are more outgoing and don’t care what most people think, yes that’s an opinion, but you see more men treating women like s**t then vise versa”


Again, Ignorant ideals confused with reality and fact. A quick lesson in Anatomy: There is only a 13% difference in the muscle mass between Men and Women. A difference so insignificant that it couldn’t possibly make a difference in any field of work. In other words, it does not matter, to any degree. Secondly LaFrance addresses two things that transcend gender. The first being that “men for the most part are more outgoing”. Not only is LaFrance perpetuating the stereotype of women in our culture, but he is also ignoring the fundamentals of basic psychology! The second statement being that “you see more women treating women like s**t then vise versa”. I’ll dispute this with a personal experience ive had.


A year or two ago I had a girlfriend who mistook me looking dazing off into space as me gawking at another women in the classroom. When I was confronted on the matter, she had slapped me across the face, and then proceeded to take me by the hair and slam my head on the tile floor. This incident is not to make women look bad. I unlike LaFrance know that problems such as these transcend gender. The reason I bring this up is to show people like LaFrance that it’s not always the best policy to generalize.


The last example I want to use regarding this topic is another post made by Luke Russell. It’s brief but it’s shocking nonetheless.


“Women are just really special lady creatures.”

Creatures huh? “Special lady creatures”! This is exactly what I am writing about ladies and gentlemen! This is the disgusting ideology that must be eradicated. Viewing women as objects, as commodities to be bought and sole, as “creatures” I will let you in on a little secret Luke. Women are human beings! Hard to believe I know, but it is 100% true. And it’s high time you and all the other anti-feminists wake up and smell the God-damned coffee because this line of thinking cannot be tolerated any longer, by me or the Feminists. Men are not viewed as creatures in our culture and neither should women. To quote a post by Caitlin Henry


“The “Gender Issue” will always be a battle of the sexes; Men don’t understand how sick some women are of the little respect we receive”

Bravo comrade well said.



Conclusion:


The bottom line Comrades is that, compared to the lives of men in our society, women are anything but on-par. So many things stand in the way of women in society and the time has come for us to begin to pay close attention. Let’s sum up has been discussed.


1.) The Plight of women in our society and culture is downplayed and denied by anti-feminists

2.) Beauty is a hinder on women. It chains them down and prevents them from achieving an equally leading role in society.

3.) Women are not seen as equal to men

4.) Sexism bleeds America, and it is a point of interest for the women to combat it in order to advance their struggle.

5.) Women are very much disrespected and ignorance clouds and distorts this fact. Women must also fight to abolish these stereotypes and exalt themselves to a level that is equal to men.


Those who are for the rights and the emancipation of women In our society without a doubt agree with me when I say that education and have basic respect towards women is the best thing men can do to support their struggle, and above all viewing them as Humans equal to us men and not as “special lady creatures”. They need all the help they can get because this change is needed. Whether or not this change comes from the president or the masses one thing remains certain, Women are and will continue to be at the front line of change in our society. Ladies, the struggle that you fight today is the most important and the the struggle will go on so long as you keep fighting for your cause. No matter how hopeless things may seem keep on drudging, Me and others like myself will fight along beside you, and when the day comes that we one day see a world where women and men are equal, never forget those who died early on along the way and most importantly and above all, never forget just how you got there.



D.S.Robson

I dislike feminism. This is supposed to be an age of equality. Not of male power, female power, white or black power. Just equality.

There is a difference (as the ED has taught me) between feminism and "feminazi". Feminists truly want equality and that's what they fight for, the feminazis want control. I think equality is good obviously.

We are no where near equality my good comrade

But this is why women are a very important aspect to the revolution. Women, 85% of them seek emancipation in society. Communism seeks to create a classless society. Assert this women everywhere, and there's half of the population ready to fight for ultimate democracy