blogs_blog_217

You do not know why a woman wears makeup. Okay, repeat after me: you do not know why a woman wears makeup.

It could be -

• Because it makes them feel comfortable
• Because they have blemishes they're embarassed of (many men wear make-up for this reason as well - and the others!)
• Because societal/advertising pressures make them feel obligated to
• Because they enjoy the art of it
• Because it makes them feel empowered
• Because they like the way it looks
• Any number of other reasons, none of which have to do with attracting you or any other man

Yeah, there are exceptions to anything, but generally speaking, makeup is NOT a show put on by women, for men. I could name a number of people on this site who have tonnes of eyeshadow and nail polish and lipstick in tons of beautiful colours and they wear this because they love it! None of them is looking for a boyfriend (one of them is married).

 

Makeup is no different than a hairstyle or a pair of pants - it's just part of an outfit! It's not for you, or for me; it's for the person who is wearing it. Trust the person who's got a bigger makeup box than most people would ever fathom of having, haha.

 

VOUCHING FOR THIS AS SOMEONE WHO WEARS MAKEUP DAILY

 

I wear makeup because it is a chance to do art that I'm pretty good at every morning, it is fun, and I like how I can mix it up and make all sorts of different looks. It's a fun, daily challenge, and I always feel very upset and offended when people try to wave my hobby off as "doing it for a man". I have never done this to try to look good for a man, or anybody else for that matter. Rob, my husband, will just come up and hug me and tell me I'm beautiful and smart and funny no matter what my hair or makeup looks like at the time. That's because we're in a relationship where we're in love with each other, not simply each others' looks. Though he is pretty hot ~

 

Anyway, I honestly believe this is how it should be, and that's why I shared that. Also because I have Real Life Experience or something.

I absolutely love your views. It warms my heart to see such passion. Your dedication is extremely commendable. And it's so nice a change to see someone who realises that misogyny and sexism is something women go through every day and not an isolated incident.

 

That said, I agree with BioGio's point as I understand it - that people are more willing to listen if you do not attack them personally.

I will never say that activists should not get angry about the abuse women endure. I will never ask a fellow feminist to "calm down". Because they have reason to be angry and frustrated and their fury stems from being ignored, insulted and thwarted in their attempts to empower women.

What I do request is that the feminists who represent us try to inspire people to action rather than attack them for their apathy.

We are fighting to change the world. We need every helping hand we can get and cannot afford to alienate anyone by making them feel personally insulted. Challenging their assumptions is absolutely necessary but in talking with feminists and others, I've found it's more effective to do so in a way that lets them retain their pride. We don't need to scorn their beliefs for them to realise their folly. We need to help others understand why they should be as passionate about it as we are.

 

God bless your compassionate soul. And thank you for the hope you have given me today.

 

@Spink: Kissu :* BTW please tell me you're coming to the 'Fair this year so I can give you a hug.

 

 

I wish I'd be able to, but this year I chose to go to Italy instead D:

 

(btw all your posts and the posts of others like Pumpkin and JiMing are beautiful and articulate all of my thoughts like 1000x better than I ever could)

Too be honest, I'm inherently suspicious of revolts. I've always been the type to say 'reform' not 'tear down'. The problem I find with tearing things down is that, very often, there's nothing cohesive to replace it. To quote A Man for All Seasons 'I'd give the devil the benefit of the law for my own safety.' This post gave me an inherent smell of revolution, which always puts me off, despite being an ardent Les Mis fan. But then, it's just a sense: I could easily be wrong abvout this. *shrugs*

 

Moreover, I frankly believe that one should be, simply put, a philosopher: that is what all of us, regardless of gender, race, religion or other factors are called to be. That is, we're called to pursue wisdom. Now if we pursue wisdom, whether on our own or with the aid of a religious or philosophic view, then we will start forming various views about ourselves and the world around us: in short we will have some roots to come from when addressing issues such as these.

 

Now it must be granted that if a person's mind is screwed up enough, or if the ideal they go by it twisted enough, their philosophic outlook is undoubtedly wrong: one must view this carefully however, as it could be that the judger's viewpoint is off. But that's a side tangent. My main reflection on this article was simply this: pursue wisdom and everything else falls into place.

 

The only point in your article I can disagree with is the idea of fury. I do not support fury in anything. From personal experience, I hate it: I feel it often whenever I read about or hear about injustice, whether it be of people, religions or any other actions I find abhorrent.

 

I don't like it. It tries to rob me of all prudence, and I don't think it's a good idea.

 

However, I will allow that you could mean more zeal than fury, which would make sense: we have to have a fire burning in our bones for what is right, rather like Jeremiah, but we also need to keep prudence in our sight at all times or, well, rationality kind of dies.

 

Also, to make one last point: people are hurt every day, regardless of race, gender or any other factor. If we only focus on particular groups, we lose the big picture: it's like sending spiritual and physical aid to third world countries while ignoring the physical and spiritual poverty of our own countries.

Becca, as always, your perspective is essential and impeccable. You go, girl.

 

Naina, your post is perhaps the most sensitive and beautiful thing I've read in a very long time. I'm thoroughly touched and thank you for sharing your thoughts.

 

Spinkles, you're wonderful and I'm so sad I won't get to see you this year. STOP BY HERE ON YOUR WAY BACK!!

 

Grantaire, your philosophical ideals are lofty, even admirable in the abstract, but as I've suggested earlier in this topic, keeping things int he academic/intellectual/philosophical realm ignores the reality and emotion of the situation. I want to save the world, and that can only be done through action. I don't believe I've advocated physical violence here (indeed, strictly speaking, I'm a pacifist). I'm advocating ACTION and REVOLUTION and CHANGE. I'm sorry if it makes you uncomfortable, but that discomfort is a small price to pay for freedom and equality.

 

As for your distaste of fury, that's all well and good. I can understand not enjoying the feeling of anger. But don't dare suggest it isn't right to feel it - we DESERVE to feel angry. We have every right to be livid. We SHOULD be amped about these issues - that adrenaline will push us to victory.

 

All in all, I understand how you feel, but philosophy alone won't end oppression. Wisdom AND action are required. You remind me of how I was when I was younger - idealistic, but impractical.

Oh wow, you actually pulled that one out. I've heard that one at least a million times and am sick of it. Objectifying, this, objectifying, that! If women don't want to be objectified in the slighted bit, then why do most of them still wear makeup?

 

I am not objectifying, I am admiring. I am saying they are attractive. Women want to be desired, don't they? I said I want a nice strong woman, not "I would totally bang a strong woman without any emotional attraction to her". This is utterly absurd. How am I supposed to compliment my future girlfriend if she's going to shout at me for 'objectifying her' every time I do so?!

 

Don't make yourself sound like a backwards dunce hick when I know you're not one, Drae. Please.

 

-Tyler

Speaking from personal experience, fury tends to get you more attention then being passive. For example, if someone made a racist comment to me (myself being Asian), teachers would pretend not to notice. If I get angry, then the teachers get up and send me elsewhere where I can finally tell someone how I feel. It's not always positive attention, but at least I can share my thoughts.

 

Also, I agree that we shouldn't focus on the rights of specific groups only. However, certain groups are more accepted by the general public than other groups, which is why their rights are not necessarily debated. We should instead create a society where any person has the rights every human being deserves, without fear of being discriminated by their gender, race, sexuality, religion, or other traits.

 

Also, thanks Princess/Smeag! I was just joking anyways, I'm just happy to share my thoughts.

I have a very strange idea of wisdom, I suppose. To me, it's rather like the virtue that, by nature, is not passive: it requires action. If a man betray himself by not acting when he should, he contradicts his own wisdom, therefore invalidating it. My view regarding philosophy is the same as my view regarding justification: it requires the virtues founded upon a principle of action. I'm sorry if I'm getting a little religious with that comparison, but it is a very comparable idea.

 

I didn't mean we shouldn't feel anger, sorry. I say it should never be the principle of our actions. Let the zeal that proceeds and is abetted by it be so, but making anger in and of itself the reason is, in my view, highly dangerous. A man can be convicted and passionate, and yet rational, prudent and wise. but when he operates from fury, then you have problems. Being livid and being prudently passionate are different things.

 

Otherwise face it, what we will have in the issue of sexual morality or suchlike is two sides trying to kill each other because we both have strong beliefs that we feel the right to fight for. If we operate by fury, then co-existence and justice are impossible.

 

Please note, as well, that I'm using prudence in the same way as one would use common sense.

 

Speaking from personal experience, fury tends to get you more attention then being passive. For example, if someone made a racist comment to me (myself being Asian), teachers would pretend not to notice. If I get angry, then the teachers get up and send me elsewhere where I can finally tell someone how I feel. It's not always positive attention, but at least I can share my thoughts.

 

 

I was not condemning fury and indignation in and of themselves, and I'm sorry if I misstated. What I perceived and therefore reacted against was the idea of sole fury. There's a difference between feeling fury and letting it rule your actions: one is fine, the other seems dangerous.

 

As to your second point: yes, I understand. Human dignity is very important, whether for the helpless of various forms (the unborn, the elderly, etc) the derided etc. I will especially agree that the point of objectifying women is most certainly abhorrent, especially when it comes from people whose own beliefs condemn their actions. but i feel often like the entire issue of rights especially is a highly emotionalized and highly dangerous topic, with a billion labels, presumptions, etc. (let's just say that there's a reason I positively hate debating the subject of gay marriage: it's too much of a massive battleground, and I don't like getting caught in the melee)

 

In the end though, a lot of people are going to disagree on certain rights and certain groups, and i really don't see a possible end.

 

And of course I forgot where I was going with that point, and i have to go, but in short: sometimes an overfocus on one particular issue can distort the issue itself, and the people approaching it. And of course it's irksome when people can't settle on a generally agreeing moral view on certain subjects.

 

Also, Dreazath, with no offense meant, from someone who, technically speaking is probably more or less on your side on various issues, I do have to advise you to earnestly consider the entire question of objectification. let's just say that the bit that Tyler quoted up there sounded majorly, majorly wrong.

I just want to say that I love all of you. :3

 

So many things have been said that I agree with, especially because the system is very broken and it has lead to a lot of suffering over the years for many groups of people.

 

Honestly, when people use their power to influence others in a negative way it hurts everyone. Should we fight against people that hurt others and defend ourselves and our friends? Heck yes. No one has the right to discriminate and spread hate about any group, be they gender, race, sexuality, religion, etc. No one has the rights to use those same things to discriminate on anyone else.

 

So you wanna worship the flying spaghetti monster, that is cool with me. If you use your beliefs as a weapon though, then it becomes an issue.

 

As someone who has gotten hatred for being myself it does hurt.

 

I would like to touch on one other thing that was brought up. Sexual assault on males. I'll be honest, when I was little I faced that, from a woman. No matter what gender you are, when something like that happens it stays with you. I still have nightmares from that! As for how it affects my masculinity or femininity? I don't let it define me in the the ways society has created.

 

Something like this hurts, but it doesn't define me, and people shouldn't use sexual assault as a weapon and say they were asking for it. I can tell you I most certainly wasn't. Honestly, I hate that the victims have to go through so much because of the way society treats them.

 

I feel like I've rambled a little bit, but as a feminist and as a person a lot of these issues do make me emotional(I am a very emotional person), and I do want to say that I love all of you.

Princess Grr: Woah, it's like we agree or something. Crazy, man.

 

Gato: Funny, the whole "No. You're wrong." etc. thing was precisely what I thought was appropriate. See, in my experience, calling someone homophobic, sexist, evil, or whatever just assigns an undesirable label, and then the discussion changes from "Don't be hurtful" to an extended interrogation of the question of whether the shoe fits. It just encourages hurtful people to do mental gymnastics in an attempt to avoid that label. I think that we can even see that going on in here.

 

Oh, and I totally understand that "radicalization" (I think that it's the appropriate term, more or less, for what happened) happened. But it's also interesting to note that this trend of radicalism didn't just end at demanding equality more quickly. The civil rights movement rapidly branched out to previously unrelated issues that went beyond racial equality. A lot of civil rights circles changed not just the means with which they worked toward equality but also the ends that they hoped to achieve. (For instance, there were several socialist groups that gained more influence at this time.) Sadly, there was also a growing backlash against the civil rights movement at exactly this time. The 60s and 70s were a fascinating period in our nation's history, and way too complex to get summed up effectively on a LEGO forum.

 

Also,

>dissin' on Vergil

>2013

 

Anyway, I feel like this discussion has kind of reached an impasse (or maybe even a legitimate solution ), so I'll kindly excuse myself from this blog.

I just want to say that I love all of you. :3

 

So many things have been said that I agree with, especially because the system is very broken and it has lead to a lot of suffering over the years for many groups of people.

 

Honestly, when people use their power to influence others in a negative way it hurts everyone. Should we fight against people that hurt others and defend ourselves and our friends? Heck yes. No one has the right to discriminate and spread hate about any group, be they gender, race, sexuality, religion, etc. No one has the rights to use those same things to discriminate on anyone else.

 

So you wanna worship the flying spaghetti monster, that is cool with me. If you use your beliefs as a weapon though, then it becomes an issue.

 

As someone who has gotten hatred for being myself it does hurt.

 

I would like to touch on one other thing that was brought up. Sexual assault on males. I'll be honest, when I was little I faced that, from a woman. No matter what gender you are, when something like that happens it stays with you. I still have nightmares from that! As for how it affects my masculinity or femininity? I don't let it define me in the the ways society has created.

 

Something like this hurts, but it doesn't define me, and people shouldn't use sexual assault as a weapon and say they were asking for it. I can tell you I most certainly wasn't. Honestly, I hate that the victims have to go through so much because of the way society treats them.

 

I feel like I've rambled a little bit, but as a feminist and as a person a lot of these issues do make me emotional(I am a very emotional person), and I do want to say that I love all of you.

 

Joe, you're super awesome, I just wanted to say that. I always like when you share your experiences and pour your heart out for others to see.

I have something only tangentially related, but it does address the misunderstanding i feel there's been among some people about how the patriarchy works. I think it's a tired issue when people assume the patriarchy can't be as bad as it's said to be because "men get hurt too", and I'm reminded of an essay I read a few years ago by George Orwell called "Shooting an Elephant", which is about an experience he had in India during Britain's colonial rule. Essentially, when you read the essay, the point he makes is that colonialism not only hurts the indigenous population, but he found he was held to an unrealistic standard as a colonist, especially as one of the police forces, when he finds himself forced by societal pressures to kill an elephant that wandered into town. I feel like several parallels can be drawn to how the patriarchy affects both women AND me (and non-binary genders, but i dont think anyone's disputing that.)

This sounds really pretentious but I love that essay and the message it has.

EDIT: oh my gosh i'm so sorry how did this post become so long i am too tired for this now

 

*skis back into discussion*

 

I am a cis girl, but I'm also pansexual with a preference for girls. Just getting that out of the way so that you can call me out if need be. Also, if I start describing things really weirdly, it's because I'm autistic and my mind can't really translate all of the things I think into normal people words.

 

From what I've experienced, 9/10 people who have physically intimidated me, touched me inappropriately, invaded my personal space without my consent and verbally and physically attacked me would not have if I was a cis male.

 

Also, let me explain to you a thing. There's something that feminists call Schrodinger's ------- (guess the missing word!). It refers to a man, who could assault you. If you feel the need to protest your innocence, let me explain.

 

Imagine if 45% of the people around you carried a knife. Most were wearing body armour, so they couldn't be stabbed by the others. Quite often, one of the knife-holders - usually part of a group - waved his knife at you and told you that he was going to stab you. You have no armour and no knife, so there is no defence against them. You live in fear of being stabbed, especially when on public transport alone with someone with a knife. One of your friends was stabbed. It didn't kill them, but they still have the scars. They are told that they should have worn armour, despite the fact that even if they did, the only armour they were allowed to buy would have not protected them at all.

 

This metaphor is getting out of hand, so I'll end it here.

 

If it were also a question of not wearing little clothing, then women wearing hijabs wouldn't be assaulted in the way we are discussing.

 

They are.

 

Thing is, ---- isn't about what the woman is wearing or how late out they were; it's about the ------'s power and dominance over the victim. It's not about men not being able to keep it in their pants, as I have found through some statistics that would make me a banned member if I posted them here, because if that were so, men would be the only perpetrators of this crime. Guess what, guys? They aren't, and if anyone tells you so, they're wrong.

 

Feminism is about equal rights. It started as voting equality, and it has evolved somehow into rights for their own bodily autonomy, preventing damaging media photographs that give anyone bad heart feelings. Like the ones when you feel like there's a hole in your internal organs and like you can never be what you are told you must be.

 

I really like wearing short shorts. Short shorts are cool and they make my butt look great. Some people think this means that I must want anybody who touches my butt. I send a message out to them, and that is that my reflex is to punch them in the face. I'm working on suppressing it because people don't mean to do it because sometimes it's their bag and then I feel really bad.

 

I used to partake in shaming people who enjoyed things that they did in the bedroom with other people, but now I realise that if they find it fun and everything is consensual, then they should do it! I mean, I enjoy making clothes and pretending to be fictional characters, and they don't make me feel bad for it. Private things should remain that.

 

ugh where was i even going with this in the first plaice

 

can you tell how tired i am i just typoed a fish

 

*does the worm outta here*

 

EDIT THE SECOND:

 

I just got sent a message asking me to show someone my boobs.

 

Needless to say I blocked them.

 

I'm just so tired of being told that I need to do things to be considered a woman et freaking cetera and ugh I'm too tired for this defecation of male cows.

It's patriarchy fightin' time?

 

Lemme go get my crowbar feminism makes me so pumped

Toa of Pumpkin, "Shooting an Elephant" is literally my favourite thing Orwell wrote. Everybody should totally read it - it illuminates so many critical issues in our society.

 

Neelh, thank you so, so much for that post, which is easilyt he most sobering and arguably important of all the comments in this thread. You don't deserve to be treated that way and I'm so, so sorry you have to put up with that . I don't see how someone could read that and still be confused about why we need to DO something about this as a society.

 

EDIT THE SECOND:

 

I just got sent a message asking me to show someone my boobs.

 

Needless to say I blocked them.

 

I'm just so tired of being told that I need to do things to be considered a woman et freaking cetera and ugh I'm too tired for this defecation of male cows.

Are you freakin kidding me. Was this via BZPower? Creeps like that deserve to be banned and deleted from friggin' LIFE.

 

I'm real mad!! Ugh!!

No, it was another website where people can unfortunately be anonymous. However, when I blocked them (you can see who they are from the ignored users list), I still only had the three I had blocked before, since two of them were being highly misogynistic and the other was just being really immature when it comes to Ninjago.

Hey, I'm back, though with an apology this time.

 

I won't take back everything I said, but I admit that it was out of line of me to just jump right in and declare "I THINK YOU'RE WRONG!" Without enough to back up my claims, to boot. I admit it was pretentious of me, and I was indeed lacking information in multiple areas. I've talked with (several rather scathing) people on [that one blogging site], and gotten my facts straight. Most of the issue was that. The rest was me being incapable of properly saying what I meant.

 

I don't want to renew this debate or anything, but I want to answer the issue about makeup. Yeah, I know women don't necessarily (or even mostly) wear makeup to impress guys. I was being satirical, and in doing so, deviated from the point I was trying to make, that there's a difference between admiration and objectifiation, and that I felt I hadn't crossed the line. I think the main reason why so many thought I did was because of my poor choice of example and words. I was attempting to highlight my praise for strong women, and ended up drawing the focus (mine included) on the lustful aspect of it, which in turn made it sound objectifying. I clarified this a bit more on [that one blogging site], too.

 

So once again, I apologize for trying to sound smart on a subject I truly know little about, and also for my confusing choice of words throughout. I honestly don't know what possessed me to do such a thing, but rest assured that I regret it and have no plans of repeating this mistake.

It's okay. I have read your list of points and, though I disagree with some aspects of them, understand how you were trying to explain and would also like to apologise for not understanding. I get how you were trying to explain, but it really wasn't a good way of going about it and showed you in the wrong light.