Sex Ed, PD style

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

Garbo: whats cis? And is asexuality an orientation in the traditional sense? Or just a general disinterest in sex.

Agree that for the propose of curriculum, just taking on sexuality as a catch all term is good.

The feminism discussion is interesting but beyond ' each partners needs matter' not so relevant to sex ed. I know I was on that particular derailment too.

The hygine stuff is great, I never considered it. Also Pixies lesbian safe sex stuff (though really most of the bits involved are probably still relevant to a hetero relationship.)

Cis is just straight. Born male or female, identify that way, etc.

[Placid Dingo]

Its just the name. Thats all. It's as restricted to females as the Australian Liberal Party is restricted to Liberals. (They're a conservative party). All the issues you seem to be interested in come under the umbrella of feminism.

[Placid Dingo]

Garbo: whats cis? And is asexuality an orientation in the traditional sense? Or just a general disinterest in sex.

Agree that for the propose of curriculum, just taking on sexuality as a catch all term is good.

The feminism discussion is interesting but beyond ' each partners needs matter' not so relevant to sex ed. I know I was on that particular derailment too.

The hygine stuff is great, I never considered it. Also Pixies lesbian safe sex stuff (though really most of the bits involved are probably still relevant to a hetero relationship.)

Cis is just straight. Born male or female, identify that way, etc.

Cheers.

[Juana]

Garbo: whats cis? And is asexuality an orientation in the traditional sense? Or just a general disinterest in sex.

"Cis" describes people whose "expected" gender matches the body they were born with - a man born in a male body or a woman born in a female body. Everyone else is some flavor of trans*.
Asexuality is an orientation, yes. SFAIU, anyway. Although there's graduations of it, too. Here's an overview.

can you explain the bit about feeling special about being a decent human being? i feel like i just want a separate identity here. i'm only allowed in the feminist movement as an ally. the rest of society while granting me immense amounts of privilege isn't down with the identity i want to create. can't i just be part of a group of similar people so we can all say 'i know that feel bro' to each other? i guess i just don't understand why if feminism is both female and male positive, and there's no other space needed to discuss these topics, that it has to be named after females and i can only be an ally? maybe i'm feeling defensive that i'm losing the spotlight or something, but i think having to find my male identity in a movement named after a different identity bothers me.

"I want to be separate from feminists because I'm a dude even though I want to do the same thing" - this is what I'm hearing.
When we say "ally" we mean supporter. It's just that you need to defer to women/females in situations related to feminism and that you don't get to determine what "feminism" means. A further discussion of what it means to be an ally should probably go in another thread.
The "loosing the spotlight" is privilege you should probably check if you want to be a decent person. And don't find your male identity in feminism - that's a loosing game. Instead, feminism should be part of your identity.

[SmogofCogs]

ok, so this is starting to clear up for me, or so it seems. i'm hearing (yes i may have bad hearing) a couple (what i see as) contradictory things.

1. feminism is female and male positive and there's no reason to seek a male positive movement outside of it
2. defer to females about situations related to feminism / feminism is not up to me

i get that feminism isn't about me and that i should defer to females regarding feminist matters. yes feminism should be part of my male identity.

then why is it not necessary to have a male positive movement outside of feminism?

[Juana]

Society is already inherently male positive. It's basically like insisting that heterosexuals need a heterosexual-positive movement.

[Pope Pixie Pickle]

Dude needs to read up on the concept of Kyriarchy.

Just saying.

[Placid Dingo]

Id suggest as with any ideology, read up on it where possible. Then you can assert your own views where they are consistent, and express clearly where you differ. Again though I think most make issues are covered well enough by the general school of thought in feminism that a separate branch of male ideology is unneeded.

Nobody is required to take any ideology 100% as absolute truth.

[SmogofCogs]

this i realize. male behavior that discourages men from being assholes to each other and women is usually not rewarded by society. i don't see the harm in having a space away from the mainstream and separate from (but cooperative with) feminism where males can encourage each other to be good males. am i being privileged here?

anyway i'm done. i'll go read and think some more. as Dingo and Pixie have suggested.

i appreciate the conversation

[tyrannosaurus vex]

ok, so this is starting to clear up for me, or so it seems. i'm hearing (yes i may have bad hearing) a couple (what i see as) contradictory things.

1. feminism is female and male positive and there's no reason to seek a male positive movement outside of it
2. defer to females about situations related to feminism / feminism is not up to me

i get that feminism isn't about me and that i should defer to females regarding feminist matters. yes feminism should be part of my male identity.

then why is it not necessary to have a male positive movement outside of feminism?

Because, as I understand it, "Feminism" isn't about "women," either, it's about equality. It will tend to look "pro-woman" when the prevailing culture is male-dominant, because it must boost the power and prestige of women in order to achieve some kind of equality. If everything else was equal, there would be no need for feminism at all, even for women. Until you find a scenario where it makes sense to fight for equality by fighting for men's rights, it's unnecessary to latch on to a "male-positive" movement.

[Pope Pixie Pickle]

this i realize. male behavior that discourages men from being assholes to each other and women is usually not rewarded by society. i don't see the harm in having a space away from the mainstream and separate from (but cooperative with) feminism where males can encourage each other to be good males. am i being privileged here?

anyway i'm done. i'll go read and think some more. as Dingo and Pixie have suggested.

i appreciate the conversation

You might also want to check out the Good Men Project blog, and also Manboobz

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

We live in a heterosexist society (which is to say that only heterosexual relationships are considered natural and normal), so I would actually support discussing the queer community.
Also trans* people are not a sexuality, since it's about sex and gender and various ways people are not cis (man born in a male body, woman born in a female body), which is worth mentioning I think (because, horray, cissexism).


I think your privilege may be showing (although I'm glad you realized that that was a possibility! You are definitely looking like a biped). Cis men are 100% welcome in feminism (as allies, since you are not and never have been actually one of us), so far as most feminists are concerned, but women/females need a movement of their own for the same reason queers, POC, etc. do. We're not the dominant paradigm and need a movement in order to do the work.
Also, not our problem if men can't get behind the term 'feminism'.

yeah. i guess it would be silly to call it anything other than feminism. maybe i'm just wishing that there was a decent men's movement for men to get behind that wasn't so anti-women? i like being an ally though. it's a hat i wear, although i don't belong to any formal groups. really made me identify with being a white hetero cis-male (instead of assuming i'm the default or something) for the first time and start trying to accept all the bullshit that comes with that.

There is one, it's called "feminism".

really?

I guess it depends on what you want the movement for. Is it for equality? Egalitarianism? The rights of men to be on level footing with women, to show their emotions, to be nurturing, and to be loving and engaged fathers, partners, and sons? That one's called "feminism".

If you're looking for one that reinforces men's position of privilege in Western society, I think that one's called "The Tea Party".

I'm not sure what you're going for, here, but your lament kind of reminds me of the lament that there's no such channel as White Entertainment Television. There is; it's called "all of the rest of them."

Males, particularly white males, already have the biggest, most solid support group there is, and it's called "society".

i don't feel like i'm lamenting. just pondering.

i'm looking for the former description. can't men be organizing separately from women on these issues? in constant communication with the feminist movement, but separately? it'd seem like a positive experience to have a male movement that espoused the values of feminism, but focused on helping men make that a reality. shouldn't it be our job to teach ourselves about rape culture? to have other men who understand what it's like to be defensive and angry explain to young men what sexism really is? or are men not capable of doing so without having their privilege run amok?

i guess i'm wondering why it can't also be male-positive. i understand that society is already defaulted to males, but why can't males who are trying to overcome this shit create a positive identity for themselves separate from the one society has placed upon them?

Feminism is NOT A FEMALE MOVEMENT. It has, as core issues, the problems surrounding the subjugation of women in society; that's what it sprang from. Feminism, to be effective, requires men and women to both be feminists. Maybe at some point the movement will find a new name, but for now that's what it's called.

A movement that wanted equality for men and women, but was exclusive to men, is as absurd as a movement calling for equality for blacks and whites, but is exclusive to whites. That movement exists; you may know it as "Separate But Equal". Perhaps you can see what I'm getting at.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Also, since at the fundamental core of rape culture lies the problem of men not listening to women, the idea of a men's movement wherein men define and explain rape to each other without including women in that dialogue is, IMO, just more of the same.

The movement must be inclusive, or it doesn't work.

[Cain]

Society is already inherently male positive.

Well, yes and no.  It's inherently male positive so long as men act in accordance with patriarchical values.

One of the most interesting areas of feminist thinking, to me, is how patriarchical societies constrain men as well as they do women, and I strongly suspect if there was a greater focus on this, it would get a lot of guys who might otherwise be not so interested in feminism thinking about how such things impact on them personally.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Society is already inherently male positive.

Well, yes and no.  It's inherently male positive so long as men act in accordance with patriarchical values.

One of the most interesting areas of feminist thinking, to me, is how patriarchical societies constrain men as well as they do women, and I strongly suspect if there was a greater focus on this, it would get a lot of guys who might otherwise be not so interested in feminism thinking about how such things impact on them personally.

I agree completely.