Dude did you read the article? Women made impartial judgements, men did not. That seems to be a quantitative difference and not semantic “baggage”.
9 Likes
First, how did “people seemed OK” become “everyone was okay”?
But more to the point, the reason the sexual revolution took place to begin with was because women had access to the pill for the first time. The sexual revolution was part of the women’s movements of the day. The feminist movement of the 70’s was less “men make life bad” and more “women can life the life they choose”. Women stopped caring about “slut shaming” and felt empowered for the first time. This lead to the reactionary machismo movements among men and boy were they sad.
Ummm… I never said that… nor was I talking about society but rather gender roles in general. Of course there was tension and work to be done and people did it. I’m not praising the 70’s here, I am saying men were much worse than they are today.
When I say that people seemed ok with their gender roles I am saying that was the problem… get it? That’s why I followed up with the “then again” bit.
Interesting how one can read what they want in to anything. You can make a neutral point about an appple product and fanboys will say you are trying to insult apple and haters will attack you for praising it. Our biases are amazing.
We made huge strides in the 60’s and 70’s towards love and empathy but the jerks ruined it with their 80’s greed “Me” generation. I blame cocaine.
You must be under 50 or not remember that the sexual revolution was a women’s movement.
Certainly many if not most of the Xers who hang around this website are super cynical. 
18 Likes
To be fair, it’s hard not to be cynical.
16 Likes
But what is a “man” or “woman”? A quantitative difference between two arbitrary labels is still rather arbitrary. People who insist upon a difference are creating the same sexism that they are complaining about, which maintains a certain status quo. The only way to change this fundamentally is to change how and why you categorize people in the first place.
2 Likes
What do people think and expect?
I see from the latest 20 years up a growing ‘separation’. Not the dreams I’ve had, with others. About more égalité, more about people being on a scale, not ‘black’ and ‘white’, ‘female’ and ‘male’, but eye for all the folks left and right of the scale. And even on another scale, whatever, let them, see them.
But everyone with small kids, or walking into a toy store, or birthday. Or, how do you call it, a baby shower? Even when not born, it is pretty important to know and brand if it is a boy or a girl.
And imprint.
And I’m a lucky one, surrounded by rebellious kids and parents. Made a very nice kimono dress for a friend of the youngest. And he went to school in it. (5 year). But somehow I’m sorry to say ‘hooray’ about it. Because I remember a time when boys and girls of that age where just free in dressing in, and exploring with and wearing colours they like. Just finding out, and playing who they where, what they liked.
Oh, my point (edit). Won’t surprise me that a next generation will be more sexist than now. (M/V)
But from what I see, probably there will be more room for LGBT(and more), and somehow that is not a contradiction. Because there is so much more to win. (Good, keep on going).
13 Likes
?
I’m discussing the the values incorporated into society.
“Free” sex more important than freedom. There were certainly strides made and good moves for all.
But comparing the ideals of the movement as if they became full reality is unfair to women of the day, like how calling the US a “post racial society” isn’t true simply because we have a black President. I don’t see how redefining reality based on optimistic but inaccurate narratives helps anyone.
6 Likes
Do you believe discussing race creates racism?
These hard right “dance around them and they’ll disappear” games fix nothing but sure do make asshats feel better.
There are and aren’t “differences” so your rhetorical position here that there definitively aren’t any isn’t very feminist either.
I don’t see how pretending that there aren’t any differences in society helps women. There shouldn’t be, but they are. Race is far more arbitrary, and yet pretending at instant equality helps nobody either.
8 Likes
Fair enough, but the prevalence of the feminist movement indicates that gender roles were deeply seen as problematic and it wasn’t just about sex and women’s ability to more freely have sex.
Yes. A part. Only a small part. In some ways, men very much benefited from it too, yet many seemed to be put out by women having more sexual freedom. And one of the reasons why feminism got such a big boost was because many of the young women now on the pill were still in second class social positions and having to deal with sexual harassment (and not having any means of redressing it).
The narrative that women were now sexually free says nothing about the other host of problems. The sexually revolution had a huge gender problem, too, even with the pill, even with a shift to greater sexual empowerment. Part of the reason women became radicalized was because in many cases, they were not in any positions of power within the various movements of the 60s. It wasn’t nearly as liberating from them in terms of traditional gender roles. In New Left orgs, they were expected to do all the secretary work, in communes they ended up doing the house work, raising the children, and were expected to be sexually available at a whim. Women were empowered by standing up for themselves in the late 60s and into the 1970s, it wasn’t just the sexual revolution that did it, even if that was part of it. The sexual revolution became part of a larger discussion on gender issues and there were many sides to it.
I’d suggest looking a bit deeper into the feminist movement in the US. It goes far deeper than you’re allowing. It’s much more than just the freedom to sleep around, especially when there still continues to be a rather large perception gap on that issue, even today. Feeling empowered doesn’t begin and end with sexuality. It’s a continuum of issues connected to not just feeling freer but actually being freer.
Maybe. Maybe we still have big problems that are easier to sweep under the rug because women are generally legally considered equal (which says nothing about the daily reality of women).
Maybe you weren’t making a clear point?
12 Likes
WTF is that?..
…spends thirty seconds searching DDG…
26 Likes
OT, but can you add that to the gif bank, KTXBYE!
8 Likes
Oh I’m sorry… I always feel bad when i introduce people to a level of depravity they didn’t know existed… 
18 Likes
No, I think it can be demonstrated that believing in race creates racism. Talking about what people believe can be crucial, so long as it doesn’t involve internalizing those values. Which is the very process I was cautioning about here. Creating and destroying these categories deliberately is participatory and arguably a social process. But I think that presuming them to have an independent existence is an insidious perceptual slight which humans are susceptible to, so it is better to be explicit.
There are innumerable differences between things and people. But as I was saying, what I think is crucial is that people be conscious of how and why they create these categories. What makes category Z so significant to one that it should be the framework for an “identity”?
3 Likes
That you have to accept that some people frame their beliefs and government on these arbitrary distinguishments, and ignoring them doesn’t make racism and sexism go away.
On the contrary, not paying attention and debunking/adjusting policy to target those views allows hate to flourish unabated.
7 Likes
No, it wasn’t gender roles that were being discussed. It was equality. On the heels of the equal rights movement, the women’s movements pushed for the same basic things: equal protection under the law, equal pay for equal work, and on a more social note, the elimination of the idea of women as the lesser or weaker sex. Sure, many women freed themselves from the expected gender role but that was because those roles did not suit them. It wasn’t a disdain or rejection of traditional gender roles but rather a choice to live beyond and outside of those roles. It was a search for empowerment, equality of choice and opportunity.
I think you are completely my reasons for bringing up the sexual revolution. My point is that in reaction to the feminist sexual revolution we had an era of machismo. Remember that? This is the my primary point that men were much worse in my generation than that of today. It was far beyond overestimating the intelligence of other men. It was a focus on women as objects rather than people and it was in direct reaction to womens new found sexual freedom. Men reacted by embracing the sexual revolution and trying to turn it in to a male fantasy which really never happened for them.
This is why I think this study is bogus because I am and know men of that generation. We were worse than those who came before and after. This isn’t to say that problems no longer exist but rather to lend praise to the changes my brothers have made. Is it as fast as we would like. of course not. But we are making progress which is why this article bothers me. Let’s praise the progress and seek more instead of being upset that we haven’t yet reached the goal.
I’m guessing you will find people react better to being told “Hey, we noticed that. Still a long way to go but keep it up.” But then again, expressing anger and making people think you may live in hate might be a better path.
It’s the difference between reading for comprehension and reading for points to counter and argue. We all fall in to that trap on these forums.
1 Like
The idea that pretending that any marginalized group isn’t marginalized or “different” can affect reality in a positive manner is like to a toddler playing hide and go seek, believing nobody can see her because she covered her own eyes.
5 Likes
“My point is that in reaction to the feminist sexual revolution we had an era of machismo”
Your point is shitty, machismo didn’t disappear in the 70s. It was always there, and in still as significant in influence as the 80s.
False nostalgia has nothing to offer us.
3 Likes
I made the mistake (not really) of white-knighting in some threads discussing the NYC woman being filmed as she walks through the city and receives a wide range of insulting and degrading comments–that wasn’t my first time recognizing the shittiness of people, but the level of near-spittle-flinging vitriol against women for…being women was depressing and alarming. One of those moments where I had to recognize that I wasn’t representative of the norm.
I kept asking, “Yes, but what if that was your sister? Wouldn’t you find that to be out of bounds? Wouldn’t that infuriate you?” And many answers stayed in the, “it’s the bitch’s fault for [everything under the sun]” category. My sample size is small and anecdotal, but wow.
I’d make a misandry joke about your leading me to horrible stuff, but that didn’t turn out so great last time. 
(Actually, it was @anon61221983, but I’m still not gonna do it).
And to the point of expecting millenials to be less sexist, count me in the group who expected them to be more educated on this topic. And further, I haven’t the faintest idea what would engender that idea, other than expecting civil society to get better with time (which I don’t want to say is fairly ludicrous on its face even though I kinda think it is).
9 Likes
The debunking I am doing is that of insisting upon personal responsibility - if you create this category or label - then it is your own values and responsibility. What people do is load labels such as “human”, “male”, “Asian”, “Jew”, etc with their own values, and then perform a game of making their values appear as universal, when they demonstrably aren’t universal. Humans are symbol-using animals, and their identities are purely symbolic rather than real - while the humans themselves are very real. You are not what you say about yourself, and neither am I.
The egalitarian perspective, as I understand it, is that NO CATEGORY makes anybody of greater or lesser value than anybody else. So what categories people choose, or how they attribute them to people becomes very much beside the point. Otherwise all we can do is struggle in vain to balance an endless proliferation of false dichotomies.
Dude, the only person who appears “upset” on this thread is you.
This is why ironic misandry is such a thing. Because we’re not allowed to critique without also complimenting… like, dude, I only have so many cookies to give out on a given day… maybe @anon61221983 has a cookie left for you?
@wrecksdart - you know you can use me or @anon61221983 or @anon15383236 interchangeably. 
And yeah, I used to think this younger generation would be better too… at a lot of things, gender politics and technology especially, and then I started working in post-secondary education and oh god we are so doomed.
8 Likes
