Women Are Not A Monolith!

Okay I feel like I have posted a lot of hot takes in the forums lately (swear I'll stop LOL), but I had to say this one somewhere.
~~

In the forums (and society to be honest) its so frequent to see people clumping women into one monolith, or perhaps even a few arbitrary categories to describe them. Often this is accompanied by quite frankly, bizarre and negative judgments (like women manipulate men, they’re obsessed with attention, they cheat because men throw themselves at them and they are so vain about the attention). This makes absolutely no sense and it makes the person doing it appear absolutely hypocritical (at least in my eyes).

If a person were to say, clump all men into one group, attribute a bunch of negative stereotypes to them, like: all men are pigs and dogs, they have no loyalty, if you marry one they’ll just manipulate and cheat on you, knock you around, and sit on the couch in a dirty T-shirt and drink beer all day (LOLOL!! Just for clarification, this is just a hypothetical description, not what I think at all!), these same men would appear out of nowhere saying: “not all men,” “we’re not all like that,” “that’s so ignorant that you would just believe that,” “I can guarantee you, that’s simply not true and only a small number of men.”

Like, huh? What in the logic?

It’s illogical to me that they are against doing the same thing to men, that they do to women all the time. Either they do not realize their hypocrisy, irrationality, and complete double standard, or they are literally completely fine with dehumanizing women, ignoring their individuality, and prefer to stay set in their own prejudices than actually questioning them.

There are over 7 billion people living on earth today, roughly half of them are women (whether cis, or trans), and you’re telling me they can easily be shoved into one or a few categories? You can’t even do that with plants or insects, bacteria, or types of cars (this is not a comparison btw, just a aid to show how ridiculous this is).

Also, as a sidenote, I’d like to talk about how irrational these books/ebooks/youtube channels are that claim to be able to teach you “the real secret on how to get women (to respect you/to fall for you/yadda yadda).” Women are clearly not a monolith, but these guys make money off that male societal assumption and rip people off with these bizarre, and frankly stupid gimmicks on how to “get women.” If these supposed secrets were any good or the “real truth”, then why are there so many conflicting opinions on how to get the “real woman!” If you read anyone of these books and compare it to another, they literally either borrow from each other, or completely contradict, leading to the real conclusion that there is no real secret to understanding or getting women to like you, because (drum roll), women are all freaking different individuals.

Hell, if you wanna make a lot of money, write one of these books. I promise you, you’ll, at the very least, make $100.

Honestly, yes, I know a lot of people will say, most porn perpetuates this. And yes, that’s completely true, but at the same time, everyone knows they’re watching a fantasy, something that isn’t real, but rather acted out. So there’s a clear connection there that the whole gimmick isn’t real, but rather a performance. So in real life, why would these same concepts apply?

Okay, that’s all, thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.

(*prepares for the pitchforks*)

 

Ah, omg how did you find out? That was a very secure secret.

Okay, I'm following you a little bit. I guess yeah, in that case having misconceptions about one group of people would be very difficult to overcome. But, it also seems kind of interesting to me to be able to lump a massive group like that still. It still doesn't make sense logically to justify it. Like, wouldn't you be afraid of a specific type of person/group, and not all people (unless it was a very extreme case)?

So for example, I had a rough run-in with a chihuahua when I was a kid LOL. Yes, I know they're small, but I'm not even lying, that dumb chihuahua's name was Timone and he was pure evil, born from hell. So now, I really despise chihuahua's, like seriously. (They're not even that cute--they look like fat rats). But I love pretty much any other type of dog. Like I haven't completely associated all dogs with pure evil and hatred, nor do I think they all will attack me. (dogs and people is a hilarious comparison, I'm so sorry for this LMAO).

 

Okay, fair enough. Though I only agree with you a teensy bit. I refuse to come down from my metaphorical soapbox LOLOL!!

Nah, that wasn't my point at all. Sexism is too nuanced for a cut and dry assertion like that. Sure yeah, people who say these things have sexist beliefs, but that's only a fraction of what bothers me about them. It just seems really lazy/ignorant/childish to me to just attribute stereotypes to a whole category like that (excusing those, who as you pointed out, have been "burned" per say--but not everyone has that excuse).

 

Ahhh, someone who agrees with me! Nice to meet you friend!

 

LOL! Glad I could make you laugh . Gotta say, I did crack up too when someone pointed that out. It would be even funnier if this thread was actually about how women aren't Monoliths (the furry kind).

Girl nah, you're fabulous! Though if you are, you probably could get a nice job at a museum or something.

 

That is a very vague statement... I feel like this sentence could be its own Ted Talk LMAO

 

LOLOL! Yay! Someone found it funny!

Okay, ngl, I am shook LMAO, but I guess if you dehumanize everyone, you're not actually being hypocritical. Which also means, you technically don't count LOL! This is purely for one-sided assertions like, "WOMEN EAT YOUR SOUL, and men are saints," and vice versa, I don't discriminate. At least you dehumanize equally... (*tries to decide if this is good or bad LOL*).

Also, pshaw! Naive? Me? LOL

Good talk, good talk.

 

Ooh omg that's such a good description for it! I'm stealing that one.

Yep I definitely agree, it goes both ways! And lol, I'm honored to be one of the few LOL. Nah, don't retire!!

 

First of all, I want to say I'm so sorry that happened to you. And I also wanted to let you know that I believe you! It is not your fault and you didn't do anything wrong! More importantly, no matter what anyone does, anybody who justifies such awful, unbelievable things is completely disgusting and immoral to me.

Second of all, you make really valid points. I appreciate your input.

 

Okay, I gotta say something here. Now granted, I don't speak for all women, but I definitely don't feel that in my daily life there is pressure to go outside of "my nature" and be masculine. First of all what do you define as masculinity and femininity? It sounds like you think femininity means submissiveness, softness, and a pleasant, sweet nature. I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and say you think masculinity is the complete opposite, which would be dominance, assertiveness, outspoken (in a good way), a healthy amount of aggression perhaps, and a problem-solver?

So, going outside of my nature as a woman, doesn't make sense, because I was always, and am, a pretty dominant, logical-thinking individual--though I am also, very empathetic (I think thats the word), prefer very girly colors and clothing, and am softspoken.

Am I going out of my nature? Nah, I was just born that way with that personality. Now where I do agree with you is that society encourages individuals to suppress or exaggerate parts of themselves in order to say, fit in with the norm (whether unconsciously or consciously). So if a guy has a pretty "feminine/slim" figure, he's going to try and bulk up in order to appear more "masculine." If a girl has a feature that appears more "masculine", she's going to try and make it appear more "feminine." In doing this, both parties prove that masculinity and femininity is a subjective concept based on the culture you live in and what they determine to be one or the other. There is no "nature" per say, but a societal determining of what one does to be considered feminine, and what one does to prove their "masculinity".

So in the cultures you mentioned, it's not that women are forced to be masculine or feminine, and are therefore going against their nature, it's how they're responding to what society believes to be the norm.

 

No I haven't seen that film. That is a very interesting scenario that you've laid out though.