Very cool, if true

In your opinion (and obviously, nerd culture helps), do you think men have broader 'tastes' in women than women do in men?

Just in your experience. Dunno if there's a paper on this.

From:

I'd find it really hard to generalise there.

I've certainly know enough men who would have relationships with women (and love them) they didn't consider beautiful.

From:

Definitely.

I suppose I'm thinking of women who assume that because they were glasses, no-one will find them attrractive. Or who are pale or freckled or short or whatever. Nerd culture often prizes these qualities, which I suppose helps to an extent.

But I've known a few who are gobsmacked that those qualities might be desired. Makes you wonder where the pressures come from, exactly.

From:

Makes you wonder where the pressures come from, exactly.

That's a rhetorical question, right? The answer is obviously The Evil Media And Those Who Buy Into The Standards It Sets.

The answer to who's to blame for nearly everything is The Evil Media.

From:

Heh.

Well, yes.

Well, sort of.

I get thrown when I'm talking to people about sexism and conformity, and they clumsily point at the mythical boardroom of men (with cigars, obviously) ticking lists of fashions, standards, hemlines and recommiting to ensuring how awful bras are.

Hell, here I am in a children's charity, where I'm one man for 5,000 women. It's been run by women for 80 years. They're in charge. Except that there's something they're buying into. All this power and responsibility, and we give out teddybears with pink t-shirts for prizes. It really gets to me.

From:

I think the Patriarchy is to blame for setting the standards, across the board, no question whatsoever. But just because it's called the Patriarchy doesn't mean that all the movers and shakers are men.

From:

My issue with the phrasing of "the patriarchy is to blame for setting the standards" makes it sound like there's an actual organisation deliberately setting standards, which is clearly nonsense.

Something like "the patriarchical slant of society causes the standards to be the way they are" would seem less conspiracy-minded to me.

From:

I don't thi-

Nevermind. This is so not an interesting road to go down.

*wanders off muttering to self* Avoid semantics, avoid semantics, avoid semantics.

From:

But semantics are important. They affect people's understanding of what you're saying.

If you're saying "The Patriarchy set our societal standards!" then a reasonable sized chunk of the population are going to look at you as if you were saying "The Communists are in charge of the Media!" or "The Lizard People eat our children!".

If you say "The patriarchal slant of society affects our standards" then you've got a more nuanced statement which doesn't push people away so much.

IMHO, of course.

From:

But I'm not discussing this with a reasonable sized chunk of the population. I'm discussing it with people I expect to understand that I'm not a crazy conspiracy theorist, and that I only need to say once "When I say 'the patriarchy' I'm not talking about the mythical cigar-smoking boardroom." I then expect to be able to use shorthand and have people remember that.

From:

I'm not actually 100% clear what you do mean by it though, because we've never discussed it, and I've picked up my (vague) understanding of what people mean by it by being involved in internet "discussions". Do you mean "the slanted way in which society tends to provide better outcomes for men"? Or something else?

From:

You know, I've never done this before, but I'm getting bored with tolerating derailing behaviour and have decided not to bother. The longer this goes on the more sarcastic and less interested I'm going to be, and so it's better I don't continue. This was not the argument I became involved in - not every discussion that takes place, even on your own journal, is a reason for you to chase around expecting people to clarify and qualify and define everything they say for your benefit.

When I say The Patriarchy, I mean The Patriarchy. I'm not using some mysterious personal definition. Go look it up yourself. One last time, I've done it for you:

Within feminist theory, patriarchy refers to the structure of modern cultural and political systems, which are ruled by men. Such systems are said to be detrimental to the rights of women.

(no subject)

From:

andrewducker - Date: 2010-06-23 01:41 pm (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From:

marrog.livejournal.com - Date: 2010-06-23 01:44 pm (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From:

andrewducker - Date: 2010-06-23 01:45 pm (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From:

marrog.livejournal.com - Date: 2010-06-23 01:45 pm (UTC) - Expand

(deleted comment)

From:

Because it reinforces a system in which men do better.

From:

(sorry, wish there was an edit function via the web :) )

From:

There is - if you're a paid user you can edit your comments.

From:

I don't pay Russians nothin'.

From:

But why is it a *patriarchy* if some of it is women setting standards for women?

Elsewhere, I'm having a conversation about how I'm likely to want to stay home and raise the hypothetical kids. Both women and men have told me that's weird. In one case, that I was probably a paedophile.

If I'm getting it from both ends, so to speak, why is it a patriarchy?

From:

Because it, in the large majority of the cases, it means men do better. Sure, men get caught on the wrong side of things too, but on average, men do better.

From:

How are you measuring 'better'? :)

Because if we're talking average salaries, sure.

If we're talking childrearing, or primary school teaching (I broke off a friendship with a girl over that one - 'male primary teachers just aren't natural'), or paternity leave, not so much. If we're talking those roles even being valued, then not so much.

That's why 'patriarchy' is a harmful term. It obscures who's penalised.

From:

Se my comment to marrog as of about 2 minutes ago.

Because I basically agree with you. I know _why_ it has the name it has, but I don't find the general phrasing of it very useful.

(no subject)

From:

broin.livejournal.com - Date: 2010-06-23 01:36 pm (UTC) - Expand

From:

Oh, the anecdotes are coming out! Run and hide!

From:

That's not a terribly useful response. He's asking a question which a lot of people do.

And it highlights what I was saying in my other comment - if you're going to engage with people online then then they aren't going to know what you mean, or what your background is, etc. So using terms that are ripe for misunderstanding and confusion is going to make life harder.

From:

?

That's not helpful. I'm asking to learn.

From: