Good evening friends. I have a very interesting thought to discuss briefly with you all regarding our upcoming debate in tomorrow's class.
Let me in an unbiased manner ask, should we venture to do as Mrs. Counselman says? Should we men take the female side on this debate?
While I do find it to be a fun and interesting viewpoint considering that it is not one of my own, I don't really agree that I should take it because let's face it people: I AIN'T NO WOMAN! And I do not know what it is like to be one, I can only infer what I have heard from my friends of the female sex. With this in mind, what presuppositions should we maintain while in preparation for this debate, or even while reading Wollstonecraft? Should I make myself like the man of the time period and criticize and ridicule every 1-inch margin? Or, should I simply be myself? I vote the latter. Here's why:
In being myself, I am the most comfortable and willing to discuss with others. I believe firmly the things that I believe, and I do believe that my views, should they be truly proven wrong in multiple instances, can be changed- not so easily that you may perceive me as naive, but strong enough to hold against that.
In taking the position of the female sex, I believe I must acquire the following presuppositions:
1.) Understand the opinions of the women of the time period.
2.) Understand the opinions of the women of today.
3.) Understand the extremist side and the conservative side.
4.) Understand the faults and advantages of each.
5.) Change my perspective, and found it upon the female perspective, or at least- the best perspective
I can have as a real-life male.
With this being said, I am for Wollstonecraft's form of feminism. She does not wish for any drastic change to come about, just for men to better understand that women need reason and knowledge just as much as men do, and with an equal balance of knowledge between both sexes; that they, in turn, would be more compatible than before. However, knowing how her personal life turned out really shows that she was living in fear. She, while being conservative for our time, was an extremist in her time, and that showed immensely in her own life. I believe that women should never have to fear a man or being with a man or living their lives in fear according to the men of their past. I stand that if love is going to be love, then let love be love. (Of course, true love can only be between a man and a woman.)
I disagree strongly with the extremist modern feminist because there is a difference between respect and equality. I think that if we, being men and women, were to respect each other, we would see balance and compatibility. Respect will bring about equality, and accompanying equality, harmony and balance. However, the "equality" that women of the modern age seek today is not equality, but an exaggeration of an unrealistic expectation, creating double standards. Women should be treated as women, not as men. Therefore, when the extremist desires for equal pay, we see that more of a desire for respect, not "equality". The extremist that wants "equality" cannot expect chivalry or any kind of special (especially romantic) treatment from a man, because if she does this then she will simply be seen as "one of the bros" and not the female her heart desires for her to be.
There are many other instances in which this "equality" raises issues, but I am simply writing a blog post, not a novel. Until next time, sisters.
*Drinks most white girl drink possible*
I commented on Gray and Cody's posts.
Let me in an unbiased manner ask, should we venture to do as Mrs. Counselman says? Should we men take the female side on this debate?
While I do find it to be a fun and interesting viewpoint considering that it is not one of my own, I don't really agree that I should take it because let's face it people: I AIN'T NO WOMAN! And I do not know what it is like to be one, I can only infer what I have heard from my friends of the female sex. With this in mind, what presuppositions should we maintain while in preparation for this debate, or even while reading Wollstonecraft? Should I make myself like the man of the time period and criticize and ridicule every 1-inch margin? Or, should I simply be myself? I vote the latter. Here's why:
In being myself, I am the most comfortable and willing to discuss with others. I believe firmly the things that I believe, and I do believe that my views, should they be truly proven wrong in multiple instances, can be changed- not so easily that you may perceive me as naive, but strong enough to hold against that.
In taking the position of the female sex, I believe I must acquire the following presuppositions:
1.) Understand the opinions of the women of the time period.
2.) Understand the opinions of the women of today.
3.) Understand the extremist side and the conservative side.
4.) Understand the faults and advantages of each.
5.) Change my perspective, and found it upon the female perspective, or at least- the best perspective
I can have as a real-life male.
With this being said, I am for Wollstonecraft's form of feminism. She does not wish for any drastic change to come about, just for men to better understand that women need reason and knowledge just as much as men do, and with an equal balance of knowledge between both sexes; that they, in turn, would be more compatible than before. However, knowing how her personal life turned out really shows that she was living in fear. She, while being conservative for our time, was an extremist in her time, and that showed immensely in her own life. I believe that women should never have to fear a man or being with a man or living their lives in fear according to the men of their past. I stand that if love is going to be love, then let love be love. (Of course, true love can only be between a man and a woman.)
I disagree strongly with the extremist modern feminist because there is a difference between respect and equality. I think that if we, being men and women, were to respect each other, we would see balance and compatibility. Respect will bring about equality, and accompanying equality, harmony and balance. However, the "equality" that women of the modern age seek today is not equality, but an exaggeration of an unrealistic expectation, creating double standards. Women should be treated as women, not as men. Therefore, when the extremist desires for equal pay, we see that more of a desire for respect, not "equality". The extremist that wants "equality" cannot expect chivalry or any kind of special (especially romantic) treatment from a man, because if she does this then she will simply be seen as "one of the bros" and not the female her heart desires for her to be.
There are many other instances in which this "equality" raises issues, but I am simply writing a blog post, not a novel. Until next time, sisters.
*Drinks most white girl drink possible*
I commented on Gray and Cody's posts.
Comments