How sexist.... I am offended.
When was the Male Founders Conference again???
Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
161–170 of 295 posts
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#162Can males attend this conference? I do see an option for Male in the drop down but I figured it's best to ask...
We want to give priority to women, since we have limited space.
You may want to be aware of what you might face on the transactivism front; here is one account of an event that tried to prioritize women: http://radfemriseup.wordpress.com/2013/07/12/30-women-meet-f...
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#163I'm assuming some HNers are soon to arrive saying things like "why does it matter that a founder is a female?", "why make an excluding event? isn't it sexism all the same", "imagine if someone make a 'male founders conference'?" I would like to ask you to think for a moment, before raising this concerns (I am not bothering here to debate with haters, only with those who are genuinely concerned that this might sexism…
Great comment. If anyone would like to learn more about feminism, I can't recommend highly enough the book "Feminism is for Everybody" by bell hooks. I find a lot of commenters here and on other sites form (strong!) opinions about feminism and sexism despite not understanding basic concepts like privilege, oppression, and intersectionality. That book is an accessible primer on those topics.
I have a very high opinion about feminism (and absolutely agree with the top comment on all points; events like this are great and necessary), but this high opinion is not at all shared with concepts like privilege, oppression, and intersectionality.
And I particularly don't like how people who treat feminism as some kind of a subset of a broader "social justice" movement (and whose keywords you just mentioned) are imposing a very particular interpretation of feminism.
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
Feminists fighting against trans women is a fairly well known phenomenon. Feminist and transphobic are hardly mutually exclusive worldviews. Edit: dug up a few pointer links: http://www.transadvocate.com/unpacking-transphobia-in-femini... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transphobia#Transphobia_in_fem... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_views_on_transgenderi... http://lmgtfy.com/?q=transphobia+feminism
Nice job bringing up one side of the issue. Here's the other: http://againstallevidence.wordpress.com/2011/04/11/cant-we-a... http://culturallyboundgender.wordpress.com/2013/07/07/the-on... http://radfemriseup.wordpress.com/2013/07/12/30-women-meet-f... http://culturallyboundgender.wordpress.com/2013/07/24/shared...
I'm not sure whether your first sentence is meant as snide, but given the quality of your posts on gender issues in general I'll assume you're just taking the opportunity to elucidate the logic behind both viewpoints.
I do have to say that as a person somewhere on the trans* spectrum some of those posts do feel rather hateful towards 'my kind' though.
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#165When is there going to be a conference for male founders only?
- where we sit with legs spread and scratch our balls without females giving us dirty looks
- where we can wear sweatpants and football jerseys and watch sports
- where we can talk about cars and cheerleaders and drink beer all day
- where there's no threat of a sexual harassment lawsuit if some feminist witch overhears you and decides she doesn't like you talking about a "dongle"
There are some things that women just don't get about men, and in a mixed-sex group, we're forced to conceal our true natures. Where is the conference for men only?
(FYI: If you take this post at all seriously, relax. It's a joke, poking fun at both men and women.)
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems you need a bit more than dclowd9901. Perhaps "White Privilege and Male Privilege" by Peggy McIntosh and "Oppression" by Marilyn Frye are good places to start: http://www.iub.edu/~tchsotl/part2/McIntosh%20White%20Privile... http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/tbettch/Frye,%20Oppression...
I graduated from a feminist-oriented humanities department where I engaged with these issues critically for a long time. Rather than linking me polemics from 1988 that don't address my point, consider that I disagree with the fundamental positions on a logical basis. If you'd like to engage the points I actually made in my post, feel free.
I highly doubt you engaged these issues critically if you seriously don't believe that most institutional structures are dominated by men.
Great, student bodies have slightly more women than men. However the vast majority of professors, researchers, and administrators are men. It's the positions of power being dominated by men that makes the institution for men. Much like the positions of power in politics and business are undeniably dominated by men.
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#167I'm assuming some HNers are soon to arrive saying things like "why does it matter that a founder is a female?", "why make an excluding event? isn't it sexism all the same", "imagine if someone make a 'male founders conference'?" I would like to ask you to think for a moment, before raising this concerns (I am not bothering here to debate with haters, only with those who are genuinely concerned that this might sexism…
"Separate but equal" is the problem.
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#168I'm against these, because I'm against gender discrimination. Gender discrimination means that one gender is treated differently from another. It's also interesting to know whether transwomen will be allowed. Some radical feminists only accept 'born as women' to their conferences. And if transwomen are accepted, what's their definition of that.
Imagine you're a woman. The legislature that governs your country is more than 80% male, and that's after a lot of very recent gains by women. You feel this status quo is the direct result of historical as well as current bias against women, and bias for men. Much worse, since this legislature makes the laws and performs checks on the other branches of government, the inclusion or lack thereof of women in the legisla…
[deleted]
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#169I'm assuming some HNers are soon to arrive saying things like "why does it matter that a founder is a female?", "why make an excluding event? isn't it sexism all the same", "imagine if someone make a 'male founders conference'?" I would like to ask you to think for a moment, before raising this concerns (I am not bothering here to debate with haters, only with those who are genuinely concerned that this might sexism…
Did anyone stop to think that woman generally just have differing interests and natural skills than men? Why is there so much emphasis on women being the same as men in everything? I don't see campaigns to get more women interested in auto repair or plumbing.
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nice job bringing up one side of the issue. Here's the other: http://againstallevidence.wordpress.com/2011/04/11/cant-we-a... http://culturallyboundgender.wordpress.com/2013/07/07/the-on... http://radfemriseup.wordpress.com/2013/07/12/30-women-meet-f... http://culturallyboundgender.wordpress.com/2013/07/24/shared...
I'm not sure whether your first sentence is meant as snide, but given the quality of your posts on gender issues in general I'll assume you're just taking the opportunity to elucidate the logic behind both viewpoints. I do have to say that as a person somewhere on the trans* spectrum some of those posts do feel rather hateful towards 'my kind' though.
You specifically posted links equating radical feminist concerns with queer theory/transactivism with "transphobia," cheapening real transphobia, given that the links I posted (have you read them? I recommend them) illustrate that "radical feminist" desired exclusion of transwomen from conferences, etc, is not motivated by hatred, but a gender politics that doesn't have much to do with queer theory/transactivism specifically.
If you think I'm saying bigoted things (or trans*-spectrum-phobic), I'd appreciate knowing where I've done that so I can learn not to.