And this is genrally treu - women are very often treated in the justice system as if they do not have free will or to power to give consent. This is nfantilization.

Excellent point.

When anyone, including women’s advocates, insists that a drunk woman cannot consent to sex while drunk but somehow thinks that a drunk man not only can consent but can held accountable for intiating sex, that is this mentality in action.

I wonder if the prevalence of this very mentality, that women are child-like and can’t help themselves, may be why men and women both refuse to vote very many women into high office.

Connecting that sort of glass ceiling on the one hand with the anti-male bias in interpreting consent in certain types of rape cases (who is responsible for drunk sex?) is fascinating.

Somehow I don’t think too many feminists would buy that connection, and that I would get beat up for so much as hinting at it.

It’s not an idle pursuit. langugae is often the best ource of empirical data about the mentlaity of a culture. it is very apposite in a discussion like this.

“sometimes contrasts with ‘guy’ (and therefore refers to a grown woman in an informal context, and would not be insulting:”

Not overtly insulting in the speaker’s mind, but the eqaution of “girl” with boy and also with “man’ menas that the culture using those words distinguishes between men and boys but equates women and gorls. And this is genrally treu - women are very often treated in the justice system as if they do not have free will or to power to give consent. This is nfantilization.

When anyone, including women’s advocates, insists that a drunk woman cannot consent to sex while drunk but somehow thinks that a drunk man not only can consent but can held accountable for intiating sex, that is this mentality in action.

I’m not saying this to take away from Kristina’s original point about pale portraits of women (’the girl’), although I have a hard time accepting ‘Sex in the City’ as a step forward in portrayals of women

I just enjoy analyzing language, I guess.

And if you look at what those women in those roles over the years have done you see that a lot of them, even the ones that are supposed to be badass like Michelle Yeoh’s character in “Tomorrow Never Dies” seem to be dependent on Bond himself.

Misogyny, Danny. Calling a grown woman”girl” is degrading. Women do it all the time too. That doesn’t make it right.

“More on point however, as a woman I would like to add several issues which are almost never talked about by anyone, feminist, anti-feminist, or otherwise. They are:”

…..since these have been discussed at length and in greta detail for more than 40 years now - Goddess feminism, the “Mommy wars”, etc.

“1. Lack of any accepted concept of female Divinity. Not seeing ourselves as Divine, but rather seeing ourselves as the reason there is evil in the world, is tremendously damaging. ”

That is completely dependent on your religion. In Roman Catholicism the Vrigin Mary is emotioanlly dominant - this is especially obvious in Mexico, but it’s true in Italy as well - to the point where even some depiction of Jesus, such as the Sacred Heart, are effeminate. So go find a new religion if you don’t like the one you were raised in.

Deva, what is your cultural background? I ask because many of your observations don’t apply to Anglo culture in particular or European cultures - I am thinking here specifically of Scandinavian and German cultures - in general. This for instance:

“It also reinforces the idea that males are worth more than females because only males can continue your family name. Women also lose contact with old friends when they change their names upon marriage, losing identity and continuity of social support. ”

….is completely untrue in America, for instance. America has basically a matrilocal family structure. There is even a proverb “A daughter’s a dughter for all of her life; a son’. However the observation is completely true in China, in India and in Arab countries.

and this:

“A lack of willingness for many people (male and female) to acknowledge the psychological trauma that results from past and present devaluing of the feminine archetype and of female humans. ”

…is untrue of Anglo cultures in general. Female life is valued over male life in these cultures, female norms of behavior are considered the cultural standard and so on.

Oh, and this is a litle surprising to me:

Nevertheless, if your point is there is still a lot of revision that eneds to happens in these cultures, we agree.

The economic risk of being a homemaker, (you have adressed this before).

A point similar to one Deva brought forward: Femal sexuality is still shamefull. Rape victims still feel shame. Young girls spend years trying to undestand what they personally have done wrong when sexually herased (why me?). In yonger years this is still a fact: men are studs, women are sluts. Women (and men) should have the right not to feel this shame.

Again, well done Pelle.

So you think all the power worth talking about rests with men, and that addressing the suffering of women is largely a question of getting men to change their thinking?

I wouldn’t phrase it the way you do, but I have no trouble acknowledging that female sexuality has gone through a lot of hardships through the ages, and that women’s work in the home hasn’t always been properly acknowledged.

The price women paid for being safe (compared to men) was that they were stuck in the home, and didn’t have access to the outside world in the same way.

None of this arose with the intention to oppress women, just like the male struggles didn’t arise in order to oppress men.

To start the healing I believe we simply need to acknowledge the trauma of each gender role deeply, and separately, without comparing or fighting about who got the worst deal. What happened, happened. We cannot change it. All we can do is acknowledge it and say to ourselves that now that we know better we can do better.

I don’t really have time to comment any more than that.