Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!

[The Dark Monk]

But since they DO exist, we do need things like feminism, the marches and what have you, as long as it stays educational and not empowerment.

I am by no means suggesting that people should not find common cause.  I am also not telling anyone to reject their identity, whether it be cis, Gay, whatever.  Instead, I am saying that people should not allow themselves to be defined by such a minor thing, and labels are just that.

And yes, this "minor" thing may not be very minor in the eyes of mainstream society.  But I do not identify in any way with mainstream society.  They are not on my side, so why should I be on theirs?

Leaving the effects of society aside, are you your orientation?  Are you your "race"?  Your gender?  Isn't that the same thing as becoming your job?

That opens another can of worms that does need addressed, that is a very good question.
Are you your orientation? I think different groups of orientation feel this way. As gay being more and more accepted into society which is a big step at least in American Culture, means you have to put less importance on being gay. It requires less and less, over time, of "I'm gay yes, I've been fighting for my right to sleep with and love whoever I please and feel attacked constantly so I attack back." Aggressive behavior begets aggressive behavior. When people see John and being John, not John who sleeps with Andy, being gay will no longer require a battle, and will no longer require someone living out their orientation as a label itself and becoming only that. Their worries about the persecution or what have you being gone, John can live the way John wants to.

Are you your race? By societies standard yes. If you were born in America you are American.  Does that mean you have to live drinking bud light on the back of your ford? No. Less importance should be put on race overall. Whether you are any other race, there's no point in not getting along or at least saying "fuck you" and going your separate ways and living your own lives. I feel I need to address culture here as well, which is different than simply color of skin. Are you your culture? Absolutely for one reason: If you continue with the choice of continuing traditions and attitudes which make up your culture, which your parents have done and their parents have done, then you are what you have defined yourself to be. If you choose to go a different way, then you are what you have defined yourself to be.

Are you your gender? In a small matter. It is a shade of grey. Men and women are physically able to do what the others do unless you are a stripper waving different sets of genitals. Emotionally men and women are different due to our internal wiring and hormones. Our experiences are different, the way we handle and process experiences are different. Should all you be is a man? No. If you have a large feminine side, show it. If you like days of our lives, show it. Should all you be is a woman? no. If you hate the kitchen, don't cook. If you love monster trucks and shoving your hands down your pants, do it. Gender does however have a difference in men and women which should be noted, but in no way discriminated against or seen as lesser.

Is it the same as becoming your job? If you allow it to be, yes. I would soup that up to personal decision about personal culture however.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Correct me if need be but I think I'm typical cis because I'm a dude who thinks of himself as a dude. What I do with my jiggly bits or anything else is irrelevant.

Yeah, but what does that entail?  If it isn't to do with sexuality at all, and Nigel (I think) mentioned something about your brain matches up with social customs of the body you have, that just further confused me as to what it means. 

I am definitely a woman, and that's the body I have, but I'd rather act like the guys than a dainty little flower. I'd rather tell an attractive guy "Hey, guy, you want me to take you home and make you call me Daddy?"  I'd rather be curmudgeonly and smart as a whip than something to look at (meh at that) and Nicey McDoormat.

Part of it might be my own set of defense mechanisms, and part of it is that I don't feel feminine enough (by that I mean the standard of femininity in our culture, whatever the hell it means to be a woman) to act like a female.  So what does that make me?

This highlights the main problem I have with the term cis, which is that it reinforces the idea that gender and sex are a set of binaries rather than a group of spectrums, which is, IMO, exactly what we need to be pulling away from if we want a truly egalitarian society. Am I cis, according to the accepted definition? I'm gonna go with yes because I like my body (especially the tits) and I like to wear dresses and makeup, even though in other ways I've always been more of a dude and "cis" makes me cringe. But for people looking for a way to pigeonhole me, I guess they can use that.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I lost the thread of this thread about 30 pages ago, but somewhere since then, between Pixie, P3nt, Roger and Ratatosk, what I was saying has been made pretty clear.  While I'm not a huge fan of the term "patriarchy", because in the way it gets misued and appropriated via popular culture into stupid arguments (I haven't looked into Kyriarchy enough to know what to think - it's 8am in the morning), my essential point is this:

Any sexist system will invariably have a negative influence on all genders, regardless of which one is favoured.  This influence will not be the same, the negative consequences of it will not be evenly distributed.  Nevertheless, an essentialist discourse on gender and sexuality puts everyone into neatly labelled boxes.  If one's behaviour does not match the box one is labelled as, then the identity will take precedence over the behaviour in the essentalist discourse, and will seek to correct the behaviour, rather than the perceptions one has of that label.  If people of the favoured gender do not act in gender appropriate ways, they will be punished for it.  Those of the lower-ranking gender will be considered to not "know their place", to be "uppity" and "disrespectful", and will often be policed by members of the higher ranking gender in order to create compliance, via various social and political arrangements involving ownership of property, voting rights, the ability to move independently and so on.  Those of the higher ranking gender will be associated with the negative qualities of the lower-ranking gender, and may be treated as such in social, political or other situations.

You'll notice the above can be applied to pretty much any sexist system, regardless of its particular viewpoints or beliefs.

Yes, yes, and yes!

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

But since they DO exist, we do need things like feminism, the marches and what have you, as long as it stays educational and not empowerment.

I am by no means suggesting that people should not find common cause.  I am also not telling anyone to reject their identity, whether it be cis, Gay, whatever.  Instead, I am saying that people should not allow themselves to be defined by such a minor thing, and labels are just that.

And yes, this "minor" thing may not be very minor in the eyes of mainstream society.  But I do not identify in any way with mainstream society.  They are not on my side, so why should I be on theirs?

Leaving the effects of society aside, are you your orientation?  Are you your "race"?  Your gender?  Isn't that the same thing as becoming your job?

The thing is, it's really really hard to opt out of society. Human beings need societies. And this part of the conversation particularly makes me want to cry, because it's not like I can avoid discrimination, or rape, just by waving a magic wand and saying I don't recognize it.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

And you, Roger, you can't magically exist in a world where sexism doesn't affect you and your son and daughter, just by saying you don't identify with mainstream society. So the question is, what do you DO about it?

I actually do believe that a powerful way to change society is simply to talk.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I've known some pretty misogynist gay men that weren't cis at all.

I just wanted to pick this out because I don't understand it. They were gay men who did not identify as men? Or do you mean they were born as women but identify as gay men, and are misogynistic? It's the "not cis at all" part that's throwing me.

I mean they are Gay men who identify as women, but hate women.

People are really fucking strange.

Yeah, like the weird woman-hating right wing women.

No shortage of them.  They lined right up and bought the goods.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

And you, Roger, you can't magically exist in a world where sexism doesn't affect you and your son and daughter, just by saying you don't identify with mainstream society. So the question is, what do you DO about it?

I actually do believe that a powerful way to change society is simply to talk.

What do I do about it?  I don't tolerate it.  I have taught my children not to tolerate it.  I learned the hard way that "No" is the most important tool to maintain your personal freedom.

Yes, it does impact me.  There is simply no question about this.  However, I fight every battle (when I realize that there is something to fight, which is another thing, entirely), I make no allowances, even for myself.

Example, and I'm not trying to brag, here, just saying:  After our discussion, I have retrofitted myself with an entirely different set of obscenities, and refuse to use the objectionable ones.  Why?  Because I do not tolerate sexism.

Do I win every battle?  No.  I'm not superman.  But I also won't allow myself to quit.

So there is no magical world, as you say.  But there is "No" and "SHUT UP" and "Take your bullshit and get out of my house."...And there is mockery.  That is also a tool that is quite useful in discouraging that sort of crap.

I am fortunate that my current job doesn't tolerate that sort of shit, either, at least - and this is really important - that I can see happening.  If it did, I'd either change that shit or get fired trying.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

That opens another can of worms that does need addressed, that is a very good question.
Are you your orientation? I think different groups of orientation feel this way. As gay being more and more accepted into society which is a big step at least in American Culture, means you have to put less importance on being gay. It requires less and less, over time, of "I'm gay yes, I've been fighting for my right to sleep with and love whoever I please and feel attacked constantly so I attack back."

Bingo.  If you're under attack, you'd BETTER band together in common cause.  But not just with your own subgroup.  An attack on one is an attack on all.  If I stand by while a Gay person or an Hispanic person or whatever is being mistreated, then I am complicit in the attack.

To ignore bad behavior is to condone it.  This includes - ESPECIALLY includes - behavior exhibited by people when the people they are targetting is not present.  That's when people develop bad information loops like racism, etc...If they are around the people they would target, then they are less likely to behave that way.  But when it's "just the boys" hanging around, you can reinforce a lot of bad behavior.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

That opens another can of worms that does need addressed, that is a very good question.
Are you your orientation? I think different groups of orientation feel this way. As gay being more and more accepted into society which is a big step at least in American Culture, means you have to put less importance on being gay. It requires less and less, over time, of "I'm gay yes, I've been fighting for my right to sleep with and love whoever I please and feel attacked constantly so I attack back."

Bingo.  If you're under attack, you'd BETTER band together in common cause.  But not just with your own subgroup.  An attack on one is an attack on all.  If I stand by while a Gay person or an Hispanic person or whatever is being mistreated, then I am complicit in the attack.

To ignore bad behavior is to condone it.  This includes - ESPECIALLY includes - behavior exhibited by people when the people they are targetting is not present.  That's when people develop bad information loops like racism, etc...If they are around the people they would target, then they are less likely to behave that way.  But when it's "just the boys" hanging around, you can reinforce a lot of bad behavior.

THIS!

[P3nT4gR4m]

But since they DO exist, we do need things like feminism, the marches and what have you, as long as it stays educational and not empowerment.

I am by no means suggesting that people should not find common cause.  I am also not telling anyone to reject their identity, whether it be cis, Gay, whatever.  Instead, I am saying that people should not allow themselves to be defined by such a minor thing, and labels are just that.

And yes, this "minor" thing may not be very minor in the eyes of mainstream society.  But I do not identify in any way with mainstream society.  They are not on my side, so why should I be on theirs?

Leaving the effects of society aside, are you your orientation?  Are you your "race"?  Your gender?  Isn't that the same thing as becoming your job?

The thing is, it's really really hard to opt out of society. Human beings need societies. And this part of the conversation particularly makes me want to cry, because it's not like I can avoid discrimination, or rape, just by waving a magic wand and saying I don't recognize it.

You can't avoid it. If I came across as saying that then chalk it down to the piss poor at explaining thing. The way I see it is that I can't beat them but there's no fucking way I'm going to join them. It's kinda how I feel about voting - you don't change a retarded fucking system by pushing button A or button B like you're supposed to. Same with labels - I don't feel I can change discrimination against group-x by joining the group-x appreciation society. That's just reinforcing the idea that group-x are different from the rest of society, which is what the problem stems from in the first place. So instead I treat everyone the same. Isn't that the idea behind equality? To treat everyone the same? So I do that, not because I think the world will magically change but because I think it's the right thing to do.

Meanwhile I'm being told that I'm wrong and the right way to make sure everyone gets treated the same is to form a little enclave and bitch and whine about how everything is wrong. Well I can't buy into that mentality. I go with what feels right, not with what is popular. Popular is how we got in this mess to begin with.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

But since they DO exist, we do need things like feminism, the marches and what have you, as long as it stays educational and not empowerment.

I am by no means suggesting that people should not find common cause.  I am also not telling anyone to reject their identity, whether it be cis, Gay, whatever.  Instead, I am saying that people should not allow themselves to be defined by such a minor thing, and labels are just that.

And yes, this "minor" thing may not be very minor in the eyes of mainstream society.  But I do not identify in any way with mainstream society.  They are not on my side, so why should I be on theirs?

Leaving the effects of society aside, are you your orientation?  Are you your "race"?  Your gender?  Isn't that the same thing as becoming your job?

The thing is, it's really really hard to opt out of society. Human beings need societies. And this part of the conversation particularly makes me want to cry, because it's not like I can avoid discrimination, or rape, just by waving a magic wand and saying I don't recognize it.

Of course. You can't avoid discrimination by refusing to recognize that other people label you. You can however refuse to label yourself or others. You aren't discriminated against because you are a woman, you are discriminated against because some men are assholes. Put the blame where it belongs.

Not accepting the label doesn't change how some people will treat you... but I don't think that accepting the label will change how those people treat you either.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

But since they DO exist, we do need things like feminism, the marches and what have you, as long as it stays educational and not empowerment.

I am by no means suggesting that people should not find common cause.  I am also not telling anyone to reject their identity, whether it be cis, Gay, whatever.  Instead, I am saying that people should not allow themselves to be defined by such a minor thing, and labels are just that.

And yes, this "minor" thing may not be very minor in the eyes of mainstream society.  But I do not identify in any way with mainstream society.  They are not on my side, so why should I be on theirs?

Leaving the effects of society aside, are you your orientation?  Are you your "race"?  Your gender?  Isn't that the same thing as becoming your job?

The thing is, it's really really hard to opt out of society. Human beings need societies. And this part of the conversation particularly makes me want to cry, because it's not like I can avoid discrimination, or rape, just by waving a magic wand and saying I don't recognize it.

Perhaps I didn't explain my position well enough.  What I meant by "not tolerating it" is that I control my environment to the best of my ability (We Holy Men™ call this "politics") to prevent these things from occurring.  It isn't always successful...I have lost a job on religious grounds (ie, I wasn't a Calvinist, and when the owner found out, I suddenly couldn't do anything right, and was fired after an argument on the subject).

As far as rape goes, I don't know what to say.  Nothing I do can prevent assault outside of my sphere of influence.  I term that a crime of violence, and there's nothing I can do with a label that will increase my ability to prevent it.  After all, "getting the word out" isn't going to keep some frat bastard from roofying up a drink or two.  If they were the kind of person that would listen, they wouldn't be doing that shit in the first place.  About the only thing I CAN do is not tolerate anyone trying to make it less serious of an issue as it is.  Inside my sphere of influence, there is no shortage of nasty things I can do, should the assault happen in my presence, etc.

So my question is, what can I do by recognizing it, that I'm not already doing?  This isn't an argument, it's an honest question.

[Juana]

Rat, Imma start a new thread for the labels thing, okay?

But I think the criticism - that men who otherwise want to help but freak out when asked to think about/change their shitty behavior are out of line - is still valid.

Sure.  But remember that to some degree, the medium IS the message...In this case, the choice of words contaminated the message.

And I've known some pretty misogynist gay men that weren't cis at all.  And we've seen that misandry is quite the same.  It's not related in any way to what your own orientation or gender or any of that shit happens to be, but rather what your perception of the quality in question is.  Otherwise, there'd be no such thing as a "self-loathing homosexual" or "self-loathing Black person".

What you and Nigel were describing is "threatened privilege", I think.  This can be displayed among people who say silly-ass shit like "If Gays marry, then all marriages become meaningless" (I wonder what THEIR home life is like?).  Or it can be seen among men who view feminism as "ball-busting"...Or hell, among women who think that the rise of feminism means they can't be feminine anymore (ludicrous, but very common), and therefore reject it.

It can REALLY be seen on Fox News, when they get all torqued up about Iran having its own opinions, or the fact that one of Those People got elected president.  And it's the same fucking thing, no matter what wrapper it comes in.

Gender =/= sexuality. At all. Cis doesn't necessarily have anything to do with gender presentation, either, which is where I'm thinking you're getting the "not cis at all" thing. Are you pretty femme but still ID as a man? You're still a cis man.

Threatened privilege is definitely part of it, but what I was specifically describing was men who generally want to help women, but flip the fuck out when asked to think about/modify subtle parts of their behavior. Which is what Pent was doing.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Gender =/= sexuality. At all. Cis doesn't necessarily have anything to do with gender presentation, either, which is where I'm thinking you're getting the "not cis at all" thing. Are you pretty femme but still ID as a man? You're still a cis man.

I clarified that in a later post.  I meant it exactly as described.

Threatened privilege is definitely part of it, but what I was specifically describing was men who generally want to help women, but flip the fuck out when asked to think about/modify subtle parts of their behavior. Which is what Pent was doing.

And what I was doing for a moment, a few days back, although that's actually just how I work through things.  I gotta slam my head against it for a while.

But on the other hand, there has been some flipping out in the other direction.  You have to account for the fact that you're dealing with a lifetime of conditioning.  Becoming frustrated because your point isn't getting through is an indication that you might want to alter your method of explaining your point (but not your point) because, well, it isn't getting through.  And it doesn't matter why it's not getting through, if it's not getting through.  "He's not listening" can also be said "I haven't found a means to get by his filters".  Not talking about P3nt here, mind you, I'm talking about ANYBODY about ANYTHING.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Flip the fuck out? must have missed that one.

What actually happened was that I disagreed that certain words and phrases I use are tantamount to an attack on gender. You tried to explain to me why you thought I was badwrong. I explained that I'd heard this crap before so I understood but disagreed. You then explained it in a more condescending way, perhaps under the misguided impression that I was lying and didn't really understand such a complex notion, given that I only have a tiny little man brain. I restated my position a couple of times then gave up, since I wasn't getting through to you.

Flip the fuck out? No, I found it vaguely funny in a depressing, facepalmy kind of way.