MeerderWörter’s
Comments
(group member since Jan 08, 2016)
MeerderWörter’s
comments
from the Our Shared Shelf group.
Showing 1,601-1,620 of 2,388

For me there's at least one female character in each story that I feel attracted to, in some way. Either I feel the need to protect them, or hang around with them, or just make stuff juveniles do. Or to fight along with them...

utopia: the idea of a better world, which has the ability to transform the life (communism, by this definition, is a utopia, but really the definition of Marx, not what the sowiets defined as socialism/communism)
ideology: it does not transform the world, but rather the opposite, it keeps everything as it is (in medieval times, the idea of a better afterlife didn't transform the way people acted, but rather it kept them acting in the way they did)

There are already some discussions going on in the folder, just look for it. Haven't participated much yet, because I haven't read the book yet, it will take a while until it is delivered.

Why do you think it's sad that they are male? I get your point, but don't you think that the gender/sex of a role model shouldn't be that important?

But isn't it important to show that this is also a possibility, but that it is important to discuss the problems that derive from such a role. And to show that it is good that it should only exist in books, movies etc...?

That's the problem: I didn't read them as rethoric, so, as I said, my fault.
I bet you're clever enough:)

I really like that feminists and people demanding gender equality unite to show Trump that he's not alone.

http://heatst.com/culture-wars/six-wa...
I read this one and actually ask myself what both of ..."
Ashwin wrote: "MeerderWörter wrote: "I have two articles to add here:..."
I'll also wait for the movie before I judge, but since I'm not one of the people who have seen the movie since they were three years old, maybe my opinion about it will differ a lot from the average one. To be honest, I only watch it because Emma stars in it, and for no other reason.
I can't comment much on the first link because I'm not familiar with the people and incidents mentioned. I however think it is unfair to ..."
Now, I definitely agree with you about the second article, and agree with you that is unfair to judge somebody by every word. But as far as I have come across both of them, they are not what I would want feminists to be mainly about. I want to have intersectional feminism, and not some exclusive feminism for some.

I think this is a bit of an exaggerated measure, even though I get the reasoning behind. There is a..."
Wow, I'm not online for a few hours and this mass of material gets posted. Haven't seen such lengthy comments in a while.
Now, Ana, I really have to agree that "living in the wrong body" is definitely not the phrase we should use. It's not correct and also interphobic, so we all should really NOT use it.
I also have to agree with you that the discussion: "they were born this way" is somewhat irrelevant. It's the feelings they have that matter, and whether and how they want to change it.
And to your other point: "Children pretend to be a dog/cat/whatever"; now Mead, a sociologist, calls that period of life "play", in which the person learns the typical roles of others (also when pretending to be a fire fighter, police man, whatever), so it's a part of socialisation. To compare this to transsexuality is really hurtful to read.
You're also right about that we all have to rethink our habits, opinions and actions, because society taught us a lot of transphobia.
Meelie wrote: "To be transphobic is to be actively against transgender/sexuals, as I'm sure you're all aware. This is something that I don't particularly see from Savannah's comments. She herself isn't being tran..."
The problem I see here is not that Savannah herself is transphobic (I know I said so but this topic gave me a lot of thought in the last days and I must say I have figured out by myself that she's not). You refrain from showing us your dissertation paper? But I'd like to read it:( No, seriously, I know that you have to include contradicting and "problematic" resources, and show that they aren't true, currently learning this for a huge test, among other things; the problem is when it comes to my siblings I'm really protective, as you can see above)
It was my error to snap so harsh, I should have given it more thought before responding!
Ross wrote: "actually I like the approach of making an argument like Savannah did where you open a debate using views not your own. it is a good way of opening the discussion without having to defend it a circu..."
That Ross, is wonderful to hear! Do you remember where you read that, I'd like to either. Finally somebody came to the conclusion that male and female brains are the same, that hurts a lot of narrow-minded people, but for me it's wonderful to hear.
Could definitely help both the trans*- and inter*community!
Sascha wrote: "Luana wrote: "well that's it, since we have a transphobic as a moderator, I'm leaving the group"
Please Luana, don't leave! :(
Or at least think twice before you take that decision. I honestly do..."
I second you here, Sascha. Savannah, could you, as we are discussing this topic here, give us some information why you want this topic to be discussed and how you think about it yourself.
Again, I'm sorry to have been so quick to make an opinion about you and the topic of transphobia.
I apologize for my bad temper and hope this turns into a constructive discussion nonetheless.
Luana wrote: "well that's it, since we have a transphobic as a moderator, I'm leaving the group"
If you want to leave the group, please do so. But think about it twice, before you make that decision. Sometimes it's better not to hurry something.

And I also have to agree with you here either. Personal opinion, not a public affair. (Sometimes I really have the impression that it is a public affair)

Thanks for the link Haydee, I'll definitely check it out:)

It's great to see you again too, Ana! And I would agree with you in that we both disagree on the "Because women and the women’s movement figured out a long time ago that being directly, explicitly ordered around by commercials, magazines, and music is dehumanizing."
Maybe the women's movement did, but definitely not women as a whole, as sad as that is.

You're right, but the second article irritates me even more.

http://heatst.com/culture-wars/six-wa...
I read this one and actually ask myself what both of them think feminism is about.
And I read this one and ask myself what SHE (the author) doesn't get right about feminism:
http://heatst.com/politics/emma-watso...
Comparing saying "I'm a feminist" with "I'm wearing Gucci" is just really not the right thing to do.
And the author could really be a bit more settled and not say "like a parasitic Kardashian sister".
She doesn't understand that Emma tries not to push us into a certain way, we need to come up with our own solutions. She tries not to institutionalize feminism, at least I don't think so, which is wonderful!

http://jezebel.com/russian-parliament..."
Do I really need to read this? What's wrong with certain people? They truly lack some empathy...

Exactly. I was watching a documentary about intersexuality lately and there were two experts from the medical field, but they more or less had the same opinion. I'm glad voices of intersex activists were included.

I hope it's also possible to watch outside of the UK. I give it a try...

Definitions are always good to know, aren't they?:=) Otherwise it is very confusing.
Now, about socialization: It is a lifelong process. (One could say that the Austrian saying: "You always learn something new" is kinda a reference to this.)
Now, I'm referencing the sociologist Cooley, who really did great in giving an explanation of socialization, I think:
"Human nature" is a product of communication. The person develeops their self, which makes them a person, through the process of interaction with other people.
Each individual is the product of specific combinations of interactions with other people. The individual is always in exchange with the environment
Now, Cooley says there are two important "socialising instruments", therefore he called them primary and secondary groups. The primary group of one individual are their family, kindergarten friends, the neighbourhood, while the secondary group is more and more important in modern times (speaking of the time after the industrial revolution), they are bigger associations with formalised, impersonalised relationships, because they were created for a reason. One participates only with a part of one's personality. And since they produce contradictory moral concepts.
Don't we want to create a new topic when talking about socialisation, or different forms of feminism?
I can't do that now, but maybe one of you wants to do that.

Oh yes, the outcome would be awful. OUCH!

Should I start something? I have an account at change.org...