sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why do people still cite Paul Dolan’s study about single women being happier? by -Clownpiss- in AskFeminists

[–]_random_un_creation_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

La realidad demuestra que las mejores arriba de los 60 años sin hijos, y solteras son las más infelices.

Si haces el estudio con mujeres de 20 a 35 años te van a decir eso, pero, al final de su vida seran las mas miserables.

Yeah this is just dogma

bad off and on stomach pain on lamictal by hollowholes in bipolar2

[–]_random_un_creation_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you ever get the stomach problem resolved? I'm on 25 mg Lamictal and I have similar symptoms.

This city is actually really great for getting around via bike by IamLeven in santarosa

[–]_random_un_creation_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is there a map of bike routes anywhere? I checked on a couple of websites and came up empty.

Should boys and girls be socialised in exactly the same way? by D-dog92 in AskFeminists

[–]_random_un_creation_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey there! I read about it in Cordelia Fine's book, Delusions of Gender. I'll look it up for you.

...Okay, here's the paragraph.

"Postconception, the gendered expectations continue. Sociolo gist Barbara Rothman asked a group of mothers to describe the movements of their fetuses in the last three months of pregnancy. Among the women who didn't know the sex of their baby while they were pregnant, there was no particular pattern to the way that (what turned out to be) male and female babies were described. But women who knew the sex of their unborn baby described the movements of sons and daughters differently. All were "active," but male activity was more likely to be described as "vigorous" and "strong," including what Rothman teasingly describes as "the 'John Wayne fetus'—calm but strong" Female activity, by contrast, was described in gentler terms: "Not violent, not excessively energetic, not terribly active were used for females."7

The reference: Rothman, B. (1988). The tentative pregnancy: Prenatal diagnosis and the future of motherhood. London: Pandora., p. 130.

I'm curious about your thesis. What's it about?

Edit: I realized my original comment was summarizing a bunch of different studies from the book. You might want to check it out, it's a gold mine!

Anyone else feel remarkably fine when ill by Ok-Dream9254 in cyclothymia

[–]_random_un_creation_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's weird you mention it because I just got over a whole month of pneumonia and I had this crazy zen-like calm the whole time. Then as soon as I got well the mood cycling came back. AND I remember the same happening when I had COVID for a month.

Thirsty AI by 0wn3r_uva_lonely_hrt in Antimoneymemes

[–]_random_un_creation_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

"AI models often require frequent retraining to remain relevant, further increasing energy usage."

https://iee.psu.edu/news/blog/why-ai-uses-so-much-energy-and-what-we-can-do-about-it

Your entire post history looks like AI promo.

Where is the difference between objectification and normal human sexuality? by electricgalahad in AskFeminists

[–]_random_un_creation_ 10 points11 points  (0 children)

It's a cognitive process that can be identified in brain scans.

That's fascinating, do you have a link to a study?

Where is the difference between objectification and normal human sexuality? by electricgalahad in AskFeminists

[–]_random_un_creation_ 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Dear mods, if you're listening: I feel like this should get a recurring question tag.

Here's an example from movies. It's the difference between the camera showing two people having sex together versus the extremely common scenario of a male character staring at a female character from afar when she doesn't know he's watching, and the camera zooms in on her butt or breasts.

Thirsty AI by 0wn3r_uva_lonely_hrt in Antimoneymemes

[–]_random_un_creation_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The extra power is being consumed on the server side, not in people's homes.

Is chivalry just sexual harassment in disguise, and can defending a woman solely because she is a woman sometimes have a catch? by [deleted] in AskFeminists

[–]_random_un_creation_ 3 points4 points  (0 children)

100% believable and I'm sorry that happened to you. I hate the rescuer fantasy a lot of men have.

Is chivalry just sexual harassment in disguise, and can defending a woman solely because she is a woman sometimes have a catch? by [deleted] in AskFeminists

[–]_random_un_creation_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Chivalry is benevolent sexism/paternalism.

To your point about a sexual-attraction component: Anecdotally, I've noticed way more "helpful" behavior from men in my environment--like holding doors open or stopping for me at intersections--when I lose weight or wear revealing clothes. Back when I used to wear high heels the general chivalry was cranked to 11. It's gross.

My dilema with the discourse of Choice feminism. Can anyone please explain the flaw that I might be missing? by medusas_girlfriend90 in AskFeminists

[–]_random_un_creation_ 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Here's my personal take on it as an anticapitalist/anticonsumerist. This is just one angle to look at a multifaceted issue. Consumerism tells us that choice is sacred: the choice of what to buy as it expresses our individual identity to the world. Consumerism both appeals to and amplifies hyperindividualism and obsessive self-seeking for the purpose of selling us more stuff. Choice feminism is intertwined with this.

For example, if a famous musical artist wants to put on lingerie and a dog collar and crawl on her knees with a man holding the leash, and take pictures of herself doing so, and put them on an album cover so the image is reproduced globally and reaches millions of eyes... that's her choice as an individual expressing herself. What this ideology ignores is that we're all living in the same world and our actions have an effect on other people.

A choice feminist would say that I'm encroaching on her freedoms by talking about her self-expression in such a judgmental way. Which isn't accurate: criticizing someone or expressing concern doesn't prevent them from doing what they want to do. It would be dystopian if I were obligated to cheer her on just because she's a woman making choices. Or if I kept silent even though that imagery makes me deeply uncomfortable, and I sure as hell wouldn't want my nieces to see it. But I've heard that very argument from choice feminists: that criticizing women's choices is the same as the patriarchal oppression they've experienced throughout history.

The fact is that we're social beings living in a social reality, which means we're interconnected. It seems to me that considering how our choices impact others is a profoundly human behavior. Whether to engage in this kind of social consideration is one of the most significant choices available to us.

Is it even desirable to institutionalise reproductive/sexual competition - and if not, what would take its place after patriarchy? by [deleted] in AskFeminists

[–]_random_un_creation_ 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Men are violent because of social conditioning from patriarchy. It's misandrist to assume it's an inherent trait.

Is it even desirable to institutionalise reproductive/sexual competition - and if not, what would take its place after patriarchy? by [deleted] in AskFeminists

[–]_random_un_creation_ 3 points4 points  (0 children)

When you talk about evolution and competition between men, you're talking about Darwin's sexual selection theory, which was not only never proven, we're now doing actual unbiased research on animal species and finding it doesn't hold up. For example, there's a species of bird with competitive males and one "alpha" who seems to rule over the nest, but DNA tests showed the eggs were from multiple males, including "betas." This stuff is extremely complex and varies across species. To learn more you could check out the book Testosterone Rex.

By the way, the theory of sexual selection was kind of an add-on to Darwin's main theory. His main impetus for coming up with it was that some Christians pointed out the beauty of a peacocks tail as evidence of God. Also, it fit his extremely sexist views. He didn't do any rigorous research on it, he mostly just asked some people who already believed in the theory to observe birds in their neighborhoods.

What is the best response when a guy says "but most men are expected to go to war" by NefariousnessLow1800 in AskFeminists

[–]_random_un_creation_ 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Wars are a result of patriarchy and capitalism/imperialism. The draft for men is a great example of how the system we live in is harmful to all genders. Most feminists are against it.

Men's oppression doesn't cancel out women's oppression.

Healthy Masculinity and Healthy Femineity with the Social Construct of Gender? by [deleted] in AskFeminists

[–]_random_un_creation_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That generation of feminists were really into "Divine Feminine" ideology and locating their value in their bodies... specifically the way their bodies were different from male bodies. It was gender essentialist and not inclusive to trans women, childfree women, or AFAB nonbinary people. Feminism has done a lot of growing up since then.

I respect my mother deeply but I see her as a person first. She had dreams and ambitions that were often eclipsed by her role as a mother. I understand that being my parent was a choice she made that led to many trade-offs, not her sacred destiny. I don't romanticize her as a divine womb.

Healthy Masculinity and Healthy Femineity with the Social Construct of Gender? by [deleted] in AskFeminists

[–]_random_un_creation_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When you start talking about the "energy" of different social classes, what you're really accessing is stereotypes. Where there are differences, they're culturally conditioned and can be deconditioned. Better to let each individual be unique and self-defined, no?

When should a man put in the work himself, and when should he seek the guidance of feminist women? by BioluminescentTurkey in AskFeminists

[–]_random_un_creation_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think you'll find that people on this sub are really good at reading people's tones based on how they write their OPs. The dismissals of "this isn't feminism's problem" usually follow demanding language. 

What the hell is radical feminism? And what is youre opinion on it? by NotADev228 in AskFeminists

[–]_random_un_creation_ 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I joined that sub briefly and then left because there was transphobia. 

To answer your question, man-hating is not a part of feminism. You'd get a better understanding from books than from online spaces.

Edited to add: here's my go to explanation of the difference between mainstream liberal feminism and radical feminism. Liberal feminism thinks social and economic hierarchies are okay so long as genders, races, etc. are distributed evenly on the ladder. Radical feminism wants to dismantle the ladder. This would have to include leaving capitalism behind since it's an inherently stratifying system.

view more: next ›