NT, what are your thoughts on women's studies?

2,216
13
Joined Mar 17, 2006
I am curious to know what your thoughts are on women's studies, and the people who preach it.

I have two co-workers who are currently women's studies majors at Long Beach State. They jump at every opportunity to call men chauvinist pigs. They arehot tempered, feisty, and irrational. One playful joke and they are at your throat.

I am all for women's studies, and for that matter, I'm all for equality (gender included). I just personally feel that sometimes the proponents gooverboard, preaching female superiority and the like. I even reach the point that I feel like these two just flat out hate men, even though they aren'tlesbians, and both have boyfriends.

I know I shouldn't let these two skew my perception of all women's studies majors, but in my limited exposure, I detect a lot of zeal for this cause,and it often times comes across as bigotry.

Am I the only one the feels this way? I wish they offered men's studies at universities.
 
1,930
10
Joined Jun 13, 2006
Let me tell you something from a little experience.

They are still in school so you should keep that in mind. When I started learning about African American history, I was angry, so so angry, about what thetruth of our situation is. the same can be said by many people in the beginning stages of any social curriculum, but over time that angry transformed to hope,encouragement, and a much more in depth understanding of the human struggle. So basically, I would bet that even though they come off that way now, itwon't always be the case. There is a lot of growing that occurs when you take these course if you take them seriously. The learning doesn't end justbecause your college experience did.

The radical feminist is a rare breed. Know that the majority of us are not "man hating lesbians".

Lastly, you can date men, be strait and still hate men. The same can be said for men. I know we have all heard about the guy who tells his wife that she isinferior to him, and all she is good for is making babies and cooking. Just because he hangs out with females doesn't mean he doesn't hate women. Thatis the image most people see when they think of feminism. It isn't the case.

I've studies both gender equality/women's studies and African American studies so of you have any other questions, I'd be happy to answer as best Ican from my experience..
 
92
10
Joined Dec 18, 2007
Originally Posted by That Valles Dude

[color= rgb(0, 153, 153)]A great way to improve your mack game[/color]


I'm trying to take women's studies next semester, I bet I'm gonna be the only dude in that class, too easy.
 
87,022
26,885
Joined May 31, 2004
Originally Posted by sole leisure

Originally Posted by That Valles Dude

[color= rgb(0, 153, 153)]A great way to improve your mack game[/color]


I'm trying to take women's studies next semester, I bet I'm gonna be the only dude in that class, too easy.
you'll be surprised. they know the real reason you're taking the class and what your intentions are. they're not dumb
 
10,489
223
Joined May 2, 2001
Originally Posted by sole leisure

Originally Posted by That Valles Dude

[color= rgb(0, 153, 153)]A great way to improve your mack game[/color]


I'm trying to take women's studies next semester, I bet I'm gonna be the only dude in that class, too easy.
being the only dude in the class...be prepared to do a lot of participation as the sole representative to speak for your gender.
 

darthska

Staff member
31,604
9,370
Joined Apr 30, 2004
Way to be, Fanatic.


Personally, I can understand both sides.

Misogyny and inequality (against women) are both so prevalent, man. If I were a woman, I'd be pissed, too. So many studies have shown that a man and awoman with near-similar credentials (nearly the same age, nearly the same degree from like schools, near-similar family situations, and of the same race) willnot be respected the same after being hired by near-similar companies, or sometimes even the same company. A white, 30-yr. old, married male with 2 kids, freshoff of finishing his PhD will be more respected and will receive more and better job opportunities than a white, 30-yr. old, married female with 2 kids, freshoff of finishing her PhD. That's not at all an assumption or a guess or an estimate. So I can see their side of things.

But on the other hand...

Not all men are responsible for the misogyny and inequality in this country; heck, some women are responsible for both dynamics. When I say that a man withsimilar credentials as a woman will be more respected, some of the people respecting him over his similarly-credentialed female counterpart are women!

Basically, I understand being pissed off of about it, but I don't understand assuming every man is evil, or being pissed off at all men. Heck, I didn'tdo it.
 

Methodical Management

Staff member
Co-Founder
6,347
20,471
Joined Dec 8, 1999
The image of the angry, man-hating lesbian women's studies major serves only to marginalize and undermine the field as a whole. I fail to recognize anyaccuracy in it. Fanatic has done such an outstanding job of explaining the frustration factor that can accompany thegrowing knowledge and awareness of those who earnestly engage women's studies or feminist literature, and it's important to point out, as she has, thateveryone comes from a different place. To hold up someone who's spent a couple of semesters as a women's studies major as a representative of theentire field is patently unfair, to say the least.

I've met and taken classes with a number of women's studies majors at both the graduate and undergraduate level, I have friends who teach women'sstudies courses, and suffice it to say I think the stereotype resembles what some men would LIKE women's studies scholars to be as opposed to who theytruly are. Someone uninterested in gender/sexual equality would love for all women's studies majors to be hateful, to be unreasonable, to presentillogical arguments and irrational perspectives - because that's easy to dismiss. If you were to actually explore the literature, take a women'sstudies class with an open mind, I believe you'd find that stereotype grossly incongruent with reality.
I wish they offered men's studies at universities.
Honestly, do you feel that male perspectives have been overlooked in other courses? The reason women's studies is necessary is preciselybecause "men's studies" would be so superfluous.
It's just like saying "Why isn't there a WET?" The answer, of course, is that there IS a "WET:" Fox News, CBS, NBC, ABC, and so on.You can be assured that your history courses, government courses, even science courses will express male perspectives if for no other reason than due to theandrocentric histories of these disciplines. It's not always the case that women's perspectives are adequately conveyed.

In the same fashion, even "feminism," in its generic sense, does not represent all women, a point emphasized in works like Black Feminist Thought by Dr. Patricia Hill Collins. To make sure these perspectives aren't undervalued oroverlooked, areas in which minority groups hold a dominant or hegemonic influence are necessary.

It's worth noting, too, that efforts to engage any form of science as particular and local bear a distinct feminist influence, so in many respects thedevelopment of feminist ideologies has benefited us all.
Not all men are responsible for the misogyny and inequality in this country
Virtually all men derive privilege and benefit FROM misogyny and gender/sexual inequality in this country. "Blame" is a loadedinterpretation; "accountability," however, seems appropriate.

Let's say, hypothetically, that you received 20% more than you expected as part of your tax rebate this year. You spend your windfall on sneakers,electronics, tuition, whatever. Afterwards, you learn that you received part of someone else's rebate check. You're up, they're in the hole. It's not your "fault" in that you didn't directly create this inequality. Now that you're aware of it, however, what are you going to doabout it? Often times, people hide behind the line "it's not my fault" to continue to benefit from ill gain.

All men aren't directly responsible for gender/sexual inequality, but virtually all men benefit from it and all COULD be part of the process of advancingthe cause of social justice. That so many choose not to, some because they feel it's not "their fault" and thus they bear no responsibility orobligation, is part of the reason why inequality persists.
 
2,216
13
Joined Mar 17, 2006
Originally Posted by Method Man

The image of the angry, man-hating lesbian women's studies major serves only to marginalize and undermine the field as a whole. I fail to recognize any accuracy in it. Fanatic has done such an outstanding job of explaining the frustration factor that can accompany the growing knowledge and awareness of those who earnestly engage women's studies or feminist literature, and it's important to point out, as she has, that everyone comes from a different place. To hold up someone who's spent a couple of semesters as a women's studies major as a representative of the entire field is patently unfair, to say the least.

I've met and taken classes with a number of women's studies majors at both the graduate and undergraduate level, I have friends who teach women's studies courses, and suffice it to say I think the stereotype resembles what some men would LIKE women's studies scholars to be as opposed to who they truly are. Someone uninterested in gender/sexual equality would love for all women's studies majors to be hateful, to be unreasonable, to present illogical arguments and irrational perspectives - because that's easy to dismiss. If you were to actually explore the literature, take a women's studies class with an open mind, I believe you'd find that stereotype grossly incongruent with reality.
I wish they offered men's studies at universities.
Honestly, do you feel that male perspectives have been overlooked in other courses? The reason women's studies is necessary is precisely because "men's studies" would be so superfluous.
It's just like saying "Why isn't there a WET?" The answer, of course, is that there IS a "WET:" Fox News, CBS, NBC, ABC, and so on. You can be assured that your history courses, government courses, even science courses will express male perspectives if for no other reason than due to the androcentric histories of these disciplines. It's not always the case that women's perspectives are adequately conveyed.

In the same fashion, even "feminism," in its generic sense, does not represent all women, a point emphasized in works like Black Feminist Thought by Dr. Patricia Hill Collins. To make sure these perspectives aren't undervalued or overlooked, areas in which minority groups hold a dominant or hegemonic influence are necessary.

It's worth noting, too, that efforts to engage any form of science as particular and local bear a distinct feminist influence, so in many respects the development of feminist ideologies has benefited us all.
Not all men are responsible for the misogyny and inequality in this country
Virtually all men derive privilege and benefit FROM misogyny and gender/sexual inequality in this country. "Blame" is a loaded interpretation; "accountability," however, seems appropriate.

Let's say, hypothetically, that you received 20% more than you expected as part of your tax rebate this year. You spend your windfall on sneakers, electronics, tuition, whatever. Afterwards, you learn that you received part of someone else's rebate check. You're up, they're in the hole. It's not your "fault" in that you didn't directly create this inequality. Now that you're aware of it, however, what are you going to do about it? Often times, people hide behind the line "it's not my fault" to continue to benefit from ill gain.

All men aren't directly responsible for gender/sexual inequality, but virtually all men benefit from it and all COULD be part of the process of advancing the cause of social justice. That so many choose not to, some because they feel it's not "their fault" and thus they bear no responsibility or obligation, is part of the reason why inequality persists.




I agree wholeheartedly with everything you said, and I feel it helps explain the perspective of these two that I work with. Perhaps they feel empoweredwith the few courses they have taken, but I feel like they are missing the point. Just today, I made the comment that some of our employees "mannedup," to which she corrected me, they "womaned up." (The people in question were 2 women and a gay man). It is these kind of comments thatinfuriate me. Maybe the curriculum of their school just touches on certain subjects, but I just feel like they've taken all of these courses, and learnednothing from them. I don't know if the school is to blame, (it's a Cal State), or they are just too dense to absorb the subject matter and trulyunderstand, but I refuse to believe that standing up for the ability to correct someone over a
stupid phrase so the word woman is included is what they learned in their women's studies courses.
Thank you for your input, I just wish I could meet more of these women (and men) that you speak of, who actually have a desire to learn and understandwhat women's studies has to offer, instead of coming away with a man hating attitude.
 
4,773
8,894
Joined Jun 28, 2004
There really are people who can talk, there are people who can actually do things that require real quantitative thinking/math, those who can do none and thoselucky few who can do both.

The first group go into the soft socials in school in school, many stick around an get graduate level degrees to make up for their poor quantitative reasonabilities and need a masters and PhD to feel educated. They go into occupations where they can constantly blame their failures on others and/or not have theirresults even forced to be held up to scrutiny. The most popular locations are academia and politics. These people often time have good intentions but haveusually bad society, as whole, worse off then if they had stayed home and done nothing.

The second group takes on the hard majors. Some get advanced degrees for the purpose of improving their skills do just so they can demand that people addressthem as "doctor." These people go into occupations where they have to produce results. If their business losses money, if their investments are bad,if the bridge they design falls down, they failed and they cannot blame others or blame other enough to save their skins and escape all blame. Even if thesequantitative thinkers go into academia, their results can be tested and disputed based on reason and logic and the academic who is debunked cannot escape andsave face by insulting his peers and/or playing a game of slippery semantics. These people slowly but surely make our lives better and if they make a modestcontribution they go unnoticed and if they make a big improvement in our collective welfare, they are usually vilified for making too much money.

The third group are usually idiots who major in the softest major that they can find. They may not contribute like the first group but unlike the first groupthey tend to not enjoy the sound of their own voices or playing little tin gods on city planning commissions or college admissions committees so they are sotof neutral in their contribution to society. More of them will enrich society with their creativity.

The forth group, the one that can play the game of words and can handle quantitative data are the one in a million Milton Friedman types, who can literallylift billions out of poverty by helping to end decades of bad public policy because of their insight and eloquence.


Of course, this a major simplification and exceptions do exist. However, this pattern is pretty consistent.

I will not name specific majors or individuals in this post but I think we can place ourselves and those around us in one of these four categories.
 

Methodical Management

Staff member
Co-Founder
6,347
20,471
Joined Dec 8, 1999
Often times, people make unsubstantiated, unfair assumptions about disciplines like women's studies without even taking the time to so much as engage theliterature. It's sad, really, and there's no need to hypothesize about why this is so, whether a result of fear, arrogance, insecurity, or otherwise,the end result is a lack of understanding and, truth be told, we're enriched whenever we broaden and challenge ourselves. This post will, hopefully,present an opportunity to problematize some of those assumptions - and to challenge people to explore women's studies and feminist perspectives forthemselves.

The illusion of modernist objectivity maintains all the currency of a geocentric universe. Today, many practitioners realize that all of our scientificendeavors represent specific, rather than universal, traditions and feminist perspectives have proven tremendously influential in this regard. I'drecommend checking out some of Dr. Donna Haraway's work, especially Simians, Cyborgs, and Women andPrimate Visions. She's been highly influential in the field of women's studies, but her backgroundincludes a Ph.D. in biology from Yale. She discusses how scientists transpose their biases upon their studies and, thus, their subjects, citing, as anexample, Robert Yerkes' famous study of masculinity and femininity in chimpanzees. It's of critical importance to unveil the latent biases that havebecome so interwoven within various "objective" disciplines, as well as within various cultures, if we are to achieve any progress with respect togender/sexual equality or, more broadly, social justice.

Now, Haraway's work may be a bit daunting for those without a solid grounding in biology, but I still consider it a great place to start for thoseinterested in the intersections between women's studies and the physical sciences. (though, of course, physical and social overlap when you get in tofields like primatology.) While it may not be the most immediately accessible work in the world, unfortunately women's studies scholars and, too often,women in general find themselves placed in a double bind situation. If their work is not dense and technical, it's considered insubstantial and devoid ofintellectual or methodological rigor. If their work is "too" complex, then they're faulted for being out of touch, too specialized, beholden tothe ivory tower. It is, however, an excellent example of work in the women's studies rubric that defies stereotype, challenges attempts to marginalizewomen's studies as somehow "lesser" academic work.

It's sad that people continue to assail upon fields like women's studies. Our conception of society as a whole improves as we analyze it from a widervariety of perspectives, just as one cannot gain a complete view of a building by leafing through photographs taken from a single vantage point. Everydiscipline has something unique to offer the world. For years, economics and psychology were considered "soft" disciplines, but the world needs morethan just biologists, engineers, and so on. Fields are, often, resistant to the neat conceptual boxes people attempt to shoehorn them into. There arecountless areas of overlap and intersection, like Implicit Analysis Tests someone mentioned earlier in this thread, for example, that combine elements fromfields like psychology, sociology, computer science, statistics, women's studies, african american studies, and so on. There's much to be gained fromsyntheses like this, and combining qualitative and quantitative reasoning is hardly a rarity in this day and age. Yes, some individuals or even academicdepartments attempt to segregate themselves - but often those with an interest in practicality and real world applications can scarcely afford to resistinterdisciplinary approaches. The world is simply too complex to engage otherwise.

Just today, I made the comment that some of our employees "manned up," to which she corrected me, they "womaned up." (The people in question were 2 women and a gay man). It is these kind of comments that infuriate me. Maybe the curriculum of their school just touches on certain subjects, but I just feel like they've taken all of these courses, and learned nothing from them. I don't know if the school is to blame, (it's a Cal State), or they are just too dense to absorb the subject matter and truly understand, but I refuse to believe that standing up for the ability to correct someone over a
stupid phrase so the word woman is included is what they learned in their women's studies courses.
Thank you for your input, I just wish I could meet more of these women (and men) that you speak of, who actually have a desire to learn and understand what women's studies has to offer, instead of coming away with a man hating attitude.
Well, I won't speak for these students but what it appears they're reacting to is the gendered nature of the languages and cultures in oursociety. There is an assumption in "man up," isn't there? We associate certain qualities with being "men" as opposed to"boys." So, to say that someone should "man up," meaning "accept responsibility," does have some negative ramifications withrespect to women, does it not? Yes, it's "just a phrase," but it's the sort of thing that we constantly and, often, subconsciously referenceand reinforce. Another great example, with Earth day recently behind us, is "mother nature," or "mother Earth" and the associationbetween women and passive nurturers. It may irritate you, at first, to have people call attention to examples like this - but I think you'll agreeit's important to be aware of them, just as it's important to be aware of racial stereotypes that are so frequently invoked on a tacit, "raceneutral" basis - like calling something "ghetto" - or heterosexism expressed by using the word "gay" as a pejorative. It may comeacross like someone hates men when they "correct" something you've said, but it could very well be that what they're reacting to isn'tyou as a man, but the sexism that so often goes unchallenged in our society. Rather than taking that as an attack on you personally, you could consider it anopportunity to think critically about the hidden meanings in our everyday conversations.

It may seem like a "stupid phrase," but how many stupid phrases are like that? I'm sure you can recognize the cumulative effects of embeddingsexism in our languages and cultures. Perhaps the two individuals you've encountered aren't being effective in how they're raising these issues,but it may be that they're well intentioned and they're just hoping to try and share some of the awareness they've gained with others. Rather thanwrite them off as obnoxious or disrespectful, you may want to consider showing interest in the subject and talking with them about it. It may surprise them toknow that you are considerate, concerned, and conscious of gender/sexual inequality. Again, I think you'd also find it valuable to take a women'sstudies course yourself or read some of the literature. In addition to Haraway and Collins, you might get quite a bit out of Judith Butler, who writes aboutthe performative aspects of gender in Gender Trouble. Deborah Tannen is more of a linguist, but she'sdone some fascinating work on gendered communication styles that prove relevant in the situation you cited, so she's someone to consider looking up aswell. There's a lot out there, and familiarizing yourself with it will certainly give you a better idea of what's to be gained from women'sstudies as a discipline. Certainly, someone with more expertise and experience with women's studies than I would be poised to offer a broader range ofsuggestions.

I'm a heterosexual male, but I know I've benefited immeasurably from my exposure to women's studies, feminism, and q ueer theory. They havecountless applications in everything from biology and psychology to public policy, economics, and law. Beyond that, there's obviously a great deal ofutility for this material in our everyday personal lives as well - how we relate to others. I know it's somewhat en vogue for people to bash women'sstudies for a variety of reasons, but those who give it a chance will emerge stronger as a result. I'm not at all concerned about some of the talentedyoung women I've met who majored in or have taken women's studies classes. They may despise sexism, but they don't hate men. Some have gone onto Ph.D's in public policy, others were adept at economics and statistics. So, again, when people hold up these stereotypes I can't help but shake myhead - because they bear no resemblance to the strong, brilliant women I've been privileged to meet, befriend, speak with, and read, who, to me, representwomen's studies with aplomb.
 
189
10
Joined May 29, 2006
I've taken a women studies class. It was Latin American Women in Literature and Film. Great class. It was 15 women and myself. I spoke up a lot and neverreally had a problem. It's a literature and film class about women. I'm sure it would be different if it was an intro Women studies course.
 
2,216
13
Joined Mar 17, 2006
Originally Posted by Method Man

Often times, people make unsubstantiated, unfair assumptions about disciplines like women's studies without even taking the time to so much as engage the literature. It's sad, really, and there's no need to hypothesize about why this is so, whether a result of fear, arrogance, insecurity, or otherwise, the end result is a lack of understanding and, truth be told, we're enriched whenever we broaden and challenge ourselves. This post will, hopefully, present an opportunity to problematize some of those assumptions - and to challenge people to explore women's studies and feminist perspectives for themselves.

The illusion of modernist objectivity maintains all the currency of a geocentric universe. Today, many practitioners realize that all of our scientific endeavors represent specific, rather than universal, traditions and feminist perspectives have proven tremendously influential in this regard. I'd recommend checking out some of Dr. Donna Haraway's work, especially Simians, Cyborgs, and Women and Primate Visions. She's been highly influential in the field of women's studies, but her background includes a Ph.D. in biology from Yale. She discusses how scientists transpose their biases upon their studies and, thus, their subjects, citing, as an example, Robert Yerkes' famous study of masculinity and femininity in chimpanzees. It's of critical importance to unveil the latent biases that have become so interwoven within various "objective" disciplines, as well as within various cultures, if we are to achieve any progress with respect to gender/sexual equality or, more broadly, social justice.

Now, Haraway's work may be a bit daunting for those without a solid grounding in biology, but I still consider it a great place to start for those interested in the intersections between women's studies and the physical sciences. (though, of course, physical and social overlap when you get in to fields like primatology.) While it may not be the most immediately accessible work in the world, unfortunately women's studies scholars and, too often, women in general find themselves placed in a double bind situation. If their work is not dense and technical, it's considered insubstantial and devoid of intellectual or methodological rigor. If their work is "too" complex, then they're faulted for being out of touch, too specialized, beholden to the ivory tower. It is, however, an excellent example of work in the women's studies rubric that defies stereotype, challenges attempts to marginalize women's studies as somehow "lesser" academic work.

It's sad that people continue to assail upon fields like women's studies. Our conception of society as a whole improves as we analyze it from a wider variety of perspectives, just as one cannot gain a complete view of a building by leafing through photographs taken from a single vantage point. Every discipline has something unique to offer the world. For years, economics and psychology were considered "soft" disciplines, but the world needs more than just biologists, engineers, and so on. Fields are, often, resistant to the neat conceptual boxes people attempt to shoehorn them into. There are countless areas of overlap and intersection, like Implicit Analysis Tests someone mentioned earlier in this thread, for example, that combine elements from fields like psychology, sociology, computer science, statistics, women's studies, african american studies, and so on. There's much to be gained from syntheses like this, and combining qualitative and quantitative reasoning is hardly a rarity in this day and age. Yes, some individuals or even academic departments attempt to segregate themselves - but often those with an interest in practicality and real world applications can scarcely afford to resist interdisciplinary approaches. The world is simply too complex to engage otherwise.

Just today, I made the comment that some of our employees "manned up," to which she corrected me, they "womaned up." (The people in question were 2 women and a gay man). It is these kind of comments that infuriate me. Maybe the curriculum of their school just touches on certain subjects, but I just feel like they've taken all of these courses, and learned nothing from them. I don't know if the school is to blame, (it's a Cal State), or they are just too dense to absorb the subject matter and truly understand, but I refuse to believe that standing up for the ability to correct someone over a
stupid phrase so the word woman is included is what they learned in their women's studies courses.
Thank you for your input, I just wish I could meet more of these women (and men) that you speak of, who actually have a desire to learn and understand what women's studies has to offer, instead of coming away with a man hating attitude.
Well, I won't speak for these students but what it appears they're reacting to is the gendered nature of the languages and cultures in our society. There is an assumption in "man up," isn't there? We associate certain qualities with being "men" as opposed to "boys." So, to say that someone should "man up," meaning "accept responsibility," does have some negative ramifications with respect to women, does it not? Yes, it's "just a phrase," but it's the sort of thing that we constantly and, often, subconsciously reference and reinforce. Another great example, with Earth day recently behind us, is "mother nature," or "mother Earth" and the association between women and passive nurturers. It may irritate you, at first, to have people call attention to examples like this - but I think you'll agree it's important to be aware of them, just as it's important to be aware of racial stereotypes that are so frequently invoked on a tacit, "race neutral" basis - like calling something "ghetto" - or heterosexism expressed by using the word "gay" as a pejorative. It may come across like someone hates men when they "correct" something you've said, but it could very well be that what they're reacting to isn't you as a man, but the sexism that so often goes unchallenged in our society. Rather than taking that as an attack on you personally, you could consider it an opportunity to think critically about the hidden meanings in our everyday conversations.

It may seem like a "stupid phrase," but how many stupid phrases are like that? I'm sure you can recognize the cumulative effects of embedding sexism in our languages and cultures. Perhaps the two individuals you've encountered aren't being effective in how they're raising these issues, but it may be that they're well intentioned and they're just hoping to try and share some of the awareness they've gained with others. Rather than write them off as obnoxious or disrespectful, you may want to consider showing interest in the subject and talking with them about it. It may surprise them to know that you are considerate, concerned, and conscious of gender/sexual inequality. Again, I think you'd also find it valuable to take a women's studies course yourself or read some of the literature. In addition to Haraway and Collins, you might get quite a bit out of Judith Butler, who writes about the performative aspects of gender in Gender Trouble. Deborah Tannen is more of a linguist, but she's done some fascinating work on gendered communication styles that prove relevant in the situation you cited, so she's someone to consider looking up as well. There's a lot out there, and familiarizing yourself with it will certainly give you a better idea of what's to be gained from women's studies as a discipline. Certainly, someone with more expertise and experience with women's studies than I would be poised to offer a broader range of suggestions.

I'm a heterosexual male, but I know I've benefited immeasurably from my exposure to women's studies, feminism, and q ueer theory. They have countless applications in everything from biology and psychology to public policy, economics, and law. Beyond that, there's obviously a great deal of utility for this material in our everyday personal lives as well - how we relate to others. I know it's somewhat en vogue for people to bash women's studies for a variety of reasons, but those who give it a chance will emerge stronger as a result. I'm not at all concerned about some of the talented young women I've met who majored in or have taken women's studies classes. They may despise sexism, but they don't hate men. Some have gone on to Ph.D's in public policy, others were adept at economics and statistics. So, again, when people hold up these stereotypes I can't help but shake my head - because they bear no resemblance to the strong, brilliant women I've been privileged to meet, befriend, speak with, and read, who, to me, represent women's studies with aplomb.




My wife always criticizes me for writing long winded, thought out responses to the various threads on NT, and it is responses like these that give mereason. She insists that I am writing to a bunch of teenagers, but there are at least some people who take the time to put out quality posts. I really doappreciate your input, and I'd like you to know it was not in vain, because there is plenty I can come away with from reading it. You have opened my eyes,or at least stimulated thought, to the potential of this field. I will admit, I dismissed it in the past, but would likely not be so quick to if I were torepeat my education. My two choices for my Humanistic Inquiry requirement were Classical Mythology or Women's Studies, and I went the mythology route. In hindsight, I probably would have came away more relevant knowledge pertinent to today's society, and I suppose I could say I regret it. I did enjoyClassical Mythology, but to me what I learned is useless trivia. I've already completed my B.A., but maybe there is a chance I can indulge myself at alocal community college. Thanks again for the attention you've paid to this thread, it's one of the few quality threads I've participated in onthis forum, devoid of the immaturity found in every other thread.
 

Methodical Management

Staff member
Co-Founder
6,347
20,471
Joined Dec 8, 1999
Meth...please tell me you copied & pasted that
I'm afraid not. For some reason, women's studies don't come up very often on NT. Go figure.
Originally Posted by Fanatic15

Meth, let me know if you ever are going to write a book. I'd be trilled to read it
.
It's kind of you to express interest in reading something like that. Most NT members refuse to read anything over 50 words in length, so it's rareindeed for anyone on this board to encourage me to write MORE. (case in point: refer to the standard "cliffs notes" request in this thread)

I'll be sure to let you know when something's imminent. Goodness knows I have thousands of pages of documents sitting around that could be put tobetter use. It's just a matter of committing to the right project and allocating the time and energy necessary to do it justice. The short term projects(articles, essays) are just so much easier to integrate into a busy schedule.
My wife always criticizes me for writing long winded, thought out responses to the various threads on NT, and it is responses like these that give me reason. She insists that I am writing to a bunch of teenagers, but there are at least some people who take the time to put out quality posts. I really do appreciate your input, and I'd like you to know it was not in vain, because there is plenty I can come away with from reading it. You have opened my eyes, or at least stimulated thought, to the potential of this field. I will admit, I dismissed it in the past, but would likely not be so quick to if I were to repeat my education. My two choices for my Humanistic Inquiry requirement were Classical Mythology or Women's Studies, and I went the mythology route. In hindsight, I probably would have came away more relevant knowledge pertinent to today's society, and I suppose I could say I regret it. I did enjoy Classical Mythology, but to me what I learned is useless trivia. I've already completed my B.A., but maybe there is a chance I can indulge myself at a local community college. Thanks again for the attention you've paid to this thread, it's one of the few quality threads I've participated in on this forum, devoid of the immaturity found in every other thread.
Thanks so much for the kind words. I'm grateful that you found some of the replies in this thread useful, it certainly validates the effort. We'd be better off if more people were as open minded as you.
Honestly, I often run into the same concerns that your wife raised with regard to my own posting on NT - but the prospect of engaging young people in this typeof discussion is precisely what makes it so worthwhile. I may be 10-12 years older than the average NT poster, but that doesn't mean we can't learnfrom one another. It's a great audience to write for and communicate with. I know I've gained a great deal from it, particularly in betterunderstanding people's thought processes. Every now and then you'll find out that you've affected someone in a positive way and that certainlyprovides impetus and motivation to keep going.

I'm glad to hear you're interested in exploring women's studies and, of course, you can certainly do so without taking a formal course. Mythologyhas its value, too, (though I never thought so when we learned, in typical Eurocentric fashion, Greek, Roman, and Norse mythology year after year in gradeschool) and I do think it's still quite relevant to contemporary society, as indicated by the work of Joseph Campbell and others. Not only can we findparallels in fiction, but in stories that serve a similar explanatory function to mythology in filling the gaps between "known" and"unknown." There's a great deal of racial mythology within our society, for example. So, Iwouldn't say that you made the "wrong" choice, because you certainly got something out of the courses and you still have the opportunity to learnabout women's studies as well whether you take a college course or not. Taking a community college course could be a great idea, but I don't want toleave you with the impression that academia somehow holds a corner on the field. In fact, part of the conversation in this area revolves around the privilegeof producing formalized knowledge: who has the power to generate "formal," "objective," or "valid" knowledge - and goodness knowsuniversities are nothing if not dens of privilege. The nice thing about the community college course, though, is that you'll have that built-in communityof students to converse with and a professor who's at least familiar with the literature but, again, there's something to be said for autodidacts aswell. You can plot your own course and discuss the arising issues with others in your life, perhaps including your coworkers. I think the process ofchallenging ourselves with these varying perspectives allows us to relate better to one another. You may find, for example, that you'll better relate toyour wife of your coworkers as a result of the experience. I bet your coworkers could learn a lot from you, too, if you discussed some of the issues together. If nothing else, you could borrow their reading list as a point of reference.

Imagine if you could go from being frustrated by these two women's studies students and summarily rejecting the field because of it to exploring it on yourown and growing as a result. It's difficult to envision a better outcome to this thread than that.
 

ceelo4

Banned
179
10
Joined Jul 19, 2007
A class based on theory and propaganda. One of my friends took the class and all he talks about now is how unfair life is and REFUSES to view it from any otherperspective.
 
9,998
200
Joined Sep 11, 2004
Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

Originally Posted by sole leisure

Originally Posted by That Valles Dude

[color= rgb(0, 153, 153)]A great way to improve your mack game[/color]


I'm trying to take women's studies next semester, I bet I'm gonna be the only dude in that class, too easy.
being the only dude in the class...be prepared to do a lot of participation as the sole representative to speak for your gender.
i took a women's studies course last year and that is the truth
 
628
11
Joined Oct 28, 2004
Not every feminist is a lesbian! And not every lesbian hates women!..I loved my womens studies classes, but I did at time feel like it was man bashing..likeeveryhting else you have to take it and apply it to your life, can't just take it all for truth..
 
Top Bottom
  AdBlock Detected

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks some useful and important features of our website. For the best possible site experience please take a moment to disable your AdBlocker or head over to our upgrade page to donate for an ad-free experience Upgrade now