“Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t … If You’re a Girl,”

42 posts / 0 new
Last post
Pondering
“Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t … If You’re a Girl,”

The double standard is not only alive and well it is thriving:

http://time.com/2897003/teenage-girls-sexting/

If you’re asking an adolescent boy, a teenage girl is “insecure” or “slutty” if she sexts and “stuck up” or “a prude” if she doesn’t.

“The most striking finding with regard to gender was the extent to which girls, but not boys, were judged for their sexting practices,” the study says. “According to these accounts, then, girls who send sexts are—to use some of our male participants’ words—crazy, insecure, attention-seeking sluts with poor judgment.”

 

If flaunting our sexuality, celebrating our physical beauty, reveling in our effect on men, is so empowering why is it so disrespected?

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

This was a subset of data from a focus group on mobile phone use. The Times in its use of, "If you’re asking an adolescent boy, a teenage girl is “insecure” or “slutty” if she sexts and “stuck up” or “a prude” if she doesn’t " completely distorts what the authors of the study had in mind. They even warned about using the data to make facile conclusions about all adolescents. 

Quote:

Limitations

Some limitations of this study bear mentioning. First, these data are not nor are they meant to be representatives of all adolescents’ attitudes toward sexting. Rather than generalizability, the strength of these qualitative data lies in their ability to provide deeper insights into adolescent sexting in the USA than has been possible through large-scale surveys. Throughout the discussion, we offer theoretical grounding for several areas of follow-up investigation that can be conducted through survey and experimental approaches, but that is not to suggest more qualitative work is not needed. As noted, data for this study entailed written questionnaires administered during focus group sessions. This ensured participants’ privacy and confidentiality, but at the cost of the richness of interactive discussion.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

I remember my teens...We were sexually active when we were 13 and 14 years old...Long before cell phones,smart phones,androids etc..

I'm sure if the technology was available back then we'd all be sexting as well.

The fact that minors are being charged as sex offenders over sexting and pictures is despicable.

BTW,there's nothing wrong with females being sexual,it's natural...Nothing to be ashamed about.

fortunate

I think charging them is appropriate (and consider it is usually a child of distribution of child porn as the subjects tend to be under age), to send a message.  The charge isn't sending a picture of themselves, but when they take photos or take photos sent privately to them, and distribute them in a public way..  The judge can decide how sever the sentences are, but until they get that this form of slut shaming, harassment or bullying is illegal because of the content, they will continue to do it.   

 

There are consequences and age can only protect someone so far.  After that, as in the cases of under 18 year olds pimping out other under 18 year olds, the adult charges still apply regardless of the age of the offenders.    

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

I don't believe it's appropriate.

I guess I'm a sex offender because friends showed me nude photos of their girlfriends back in high school.

It seems that if the Tories had their way,they'd jail boys for having sex with girls...How can a 15 year old be a child molester?

As for photos and texts being shared,boys and girls should use some common sense...But that is the nature of youth...a self centred,inconsequencial,mean and egocentric existance.

You can try to legislate anti-bullying but it's as useless as trying to get teens to stop masturbating...It's the cold facts of adolescence.

cco

alan smithee wrote:

It seems that if the Tories had their way,they'd jail boys for having sex with girls...How can a 15 year old be a child molester?


They already got their way many years ago when the "Tackling Violent Crime Act" passed and raised the age of consent with nary a peep from the opposition.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

cco wrote:
alan smithee wrote:

It seems that if the Tories had their way,they'd jail boys for having sex with girls...How can a 15 year old be a child molester?

They already got their way many years ago when the "Tackling Violent Crime Act" passed and raised the age of consent with nary a peep from the opposition.

Sad.

But the Tory smear machine would paint anyone who opposed their shit as 'child pornographers'

I'm no fan of Paul Martin but when the Tories labeled him a supporter of child pornography,he should have sued for defamation...I certainly would have.

fortunate

cco wrote:
alan smithee wrote:

It seems that if the Tories had their way,they'd jail boys for having sex with girls...How can a 15 year old be a child molester?

They already got their way many years ago when the "Tackling Violent Crime Act" passed and raised the age of consent with nary a peep from the opposition.

 

Well, the age of consent was 14, and now it is 16.   I can't see anyone peeping to say hey, why can't 14 year olds continue to have sex with 19 year olds without repercussions!!   

So now 14 and 15 (and i suppose 12 and 13) year olds are able to have sex with those in their same ages, but if a 19 or 20 year old wants to have sex, they will have to get a GF/BF who is at least 16.     

Another thing i don't really have a problem with, and if you don't know me, I am a pro-decriminalization feminist sex worker, so about as open minded as you will find, but i have always disagreed that laws made it OK for 14 year olds to have sex with 19 year olds (age of consent age range is based on 5 years difference)     Before 14 could choose, now they cannot.   I don't think they are capable of choosing to pursue a relationship with someone 18 or 19.   

Pondering

You guys are too much. This study is about the double standards facing young girls who are pressured to sext then condemned for it. 

Reaction number one is to proclaim the study too limited to suggest that this is widespread. Amanda Todd committed suicide over being pressured to sext then bullied for it. I'm sure she was told she had nothing to be ashamed of too. Trust me, it's not rare. The double standard for girls isn't something women are unfamilar with nor is it a new phenomenon. All indications are that this study does not represent an anomaly in the way women experience life from early adolescence and even sooner. 

Reaction number two is to proclaim we have nothing to be ashamed of and teens shouldn't be arrested over sexting even if they broadcast nude pictures of girls without their consent. Oh, and female sexuality is natural. 

The study said nothing at all about arresting anyone. It is revealing the double standard girls face and that they are pressured into it. That is not an expression of natural female sexuality. It is an expression of sexuality that is forced on us.

This comment is loaded and offensive "BTW,there's nothing wrong with females being sexual,it's natural...Nothing to be ashamed about."

I am so over women being told we are repressing our sexuality when we resist male pressure to fit their ideal of female sexuality. Girls are not resisting pressure to sext because they are prudish or ashamed. 

To recap, the thread is about female sexuality and the double standards we face when we are sexual and when we resist being sexual. 

It's about what girls face when they first hit puberty and giving them a chance to develop their own sexuality without being under constant pressure to meet unrealistic male expectations. 

It's about slut shaming and prude shaming. 

Pondering

fortunate wrote:

cco wrote:
alan smithee wrote:

It seems that if the Tories had their way,they'd jail boys for having sex with girls...How can a 15 year old be a child molester?

They already got their way many years ago when the "Tackling Violent Crime Act" passed and raised the age of consent with nary a peep from the opposition.

 

Well, the age of consent was 14, and now it is 16.   I can't see anyone peeping to say hey, why can't 14 year olds continue to have sex with 19 year olds without repercussions!!   

So now 14 and 15 (and i suppose 12 and 13) year olds are able to have sex with those in their same ages, but if a 19 or 20 year old wants to have sex, they will have to get a GF/BF who is at least 16.     

Another thing i don't really have a problem with, and if you don't know me, I am a pro-decriminalization feminist sex worker, so about as open minded as you will find, but i have always disagreed that laws made it OK for 14 year olds to have sex with 19 year olds (age of consent age range is based on 5 years difference)     Before 14 could choose, now they cannot.   I don't think they are capable of choosing to pursue a relationship with someone 18 or 19.  

We are on the same page on this and you certainly can't be called a prude! 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

fortunate wrote:

cco wrote:
alan smithee wrote:

It seems that if the Tories had their way,they'd jail boys for having sex with girls...How can a 15 year old be a child molester?

They already got their way many years ago when the "Tackling Violent Crime Act" passed and raised the age of consent with nary a peep from the opposition.

 

Well, the age of consent was 14, and now it is 16.   I can't see anyone peeping to say hey, why can't 14 year olds continue to have sex with 19 year olds without repercussions!!   

So now 14 and 15 (and i suppose 12 and 13) year olds are able to have sex with those in their same ages, but if a 19 or 20 year old wants to have sex, they will have to get a GF/BF who is at least 16.     

Another thing i don't really have a problem with, and if you don't know me, I am a pro-decriminalization feminist sex worker, so about as open minded as you will find, but i have always disagreed that laws made it OK for 14 year olds to have sex with 19 year olds (age of consent age range is based on 5 years difference)     Before 14 could choose, now they cannot.   I don't think they are capable of choosing to pursue a relationship with someone 18 or 19.   

I hear you..But it's delusional naiveity that teens are pure as the driven snow...They're having sex,like it or not.

But I think the days of 14 year olds with 20 year olds are over...Pop culture,young girls like young guys like these Boy Band types.

I think when I was a teenager,pop culture was more mature,making 'matured' males desirable.

But there is a double standard..A 14 year old boy with a 20 year old girl?..He'd be a hero amongst his peers.

The only thing I find 'wrong' about a late teen boy and a 13 or 14 year old girl,is what do they have in common?..Not much.

My main objection is the criminalization of teen boys who are sexually active...What about a 17 year old and a 14 year old?...I don't see what the problem is.

fortunate

The problem is still that she is 14, and unable to give consent.   

 

And it is the same with sexting, transmitting nude selfies over the internet, that can then and have been dispersed to more than the intended recipient, has to conform to the distribution of child porn.  A nude pic of a 15 year old is still underage, regardless of it just being  high jinx or not.    There is no controlling how/where it goes from there.  A polaroid of a naked girlfriend shown to 4 or 5 buddies was completely different.   He's still an asshat, but he can't put it up on facebook for her grandma to see.    And it can't be taken from FB by a pornographer who then resells it to guys over the internet.    

 

On the topic, peer pressure and not wanting to be labeled prude or whatever is nothing new to teenage girls.   I think sexting is just the new version of putting out, just more public.  It will be clear did she or didn't she, (provide nude pics) whereas with the lockerroom rumour, she can still deny having 'put out' for the boys (one or all)

 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

I agree that posting unconsensual pics on the internet should be illegal.

But as much as a 14 year old 'can't consent' another 14 year old may not realize he's committing a crime.

So what do we do?

Label a teenager a sex offender for being sexually active?

I think it would be more effective to educate kids at a young age about social media and sex.

You can't stop kids from being kids.

fortunate

But a 14 year old is perfectly and legally able to consent to sex with another 14 year old.  That's the point.  The minimum age was raised so that they would not be legally able to consent to sex with someone who is more than one year older, as in they wouldn't be able to hang out with or date a 19 year old.  Which begs the question, as to why does an adult, which they are at 18, need or want to date a 14 year old who is barely moved on from wearing a training bra to a full sized one?   

And we aren't talking dating, but sex.   The law intention is to take away their ability to consent, for the situations where they didn't consent but can't prove that they didn't, to prevent exploitationn of youth, etc etc. 

The law is 

The Tackling Violent Crime Act raises the legal age of sexual consent in Canada to 16 from 14, the first time it has been raised since 1892. But the law includes a "close-in-age exception," meaning 14- and 15-year-olds can have sex with someone who is less than five years older.

Pondering

alan smithee wrote:
My main objection is the criminalization of teen boys who are sexually active...What about a 17 year old and a 14 year old?...I don't see what the problem is.

Why are we debating age of consent laws that were put in place years ago?

You brought the law into this discussion and your focus is on protecting men and the male point of view of who should be sexually accessible at what age. 

This is the feminist forum and the thread is about the double standards women face. This is the most frustrating feminist forum ever. 

Men just feel completely free to focus on themselves and their concerns. 

fortunate should get the last word on this not you. If you want to debate age of consent laws please take it somewhere else. 

 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

So there's nothing illegal about a 19 yr old being sexually active with a 15 yr old.

Again.I don't know what they'd have in common but it's not as offensive as a 14 yr old with a 40 yr old.

Although I did know a girl who got pregnant at 14 by a man who was 40...

I just do not believe that sex between teens is a big deal..It's reality...It's not going anywhere.

 

Aristotleded24

alan smithee wrote:
How can a 15 year old be a child molester?

It certainly is not unheard of.

Sex isn't the only issue at play here. Nobody suggested that we should deny or repress teen sexuality. Consent and power dynamics are at play here. Just as teens need information about mechanics such as birth control and preventing STIs, they also need information about things like consent, and they also need to be armed with how to recognise and respond to being coerced. A teenager wanting to have sex is one thing, but (s)he has no right to impose that decision on someone else, and the sexist aspect is also applicable, given the double standard girls face that was used to open this thread. And after cases like Amanda Todd and Reteah Parsons, I wouldn't be so cavalier in shrugging off the devastating impact of widely circulated pictures.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Pondering wrote:

You guys are too much. This study is about the double standards facing young girls who are pressured to sext then condemned for it. 

Reaction number one is to proclaim the study too limited to suggest that this is widespread.

My point was that this is not a study about the double standards facing young girls who are pressured to sext then condemned for it. My post merely pointed out that the stupid article was inconsistent with the focus group itself and is merely a piece giving an opinon that is not even supported by the paper's author. 

Only an idiot would suggest that we don't live in a misogynist culture but that does not mean that one has to swallow the MSM shit that seeks to sell ads with a sensational title and zero academic content.  I found the article interesting so I read the paper it was based on and found that the article was crap.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

cco wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

It seems that if the Tories had their way,they'd jail boys for having sex with girls...How can a 15 year old be a child molester?

They already got their way many years ago when the "Tackling Violent Crime Act" passed and raised the age of consent with nary a peep from the opposition.

Bill Siksay stood alone in the House in voting against the criminalization of gay teen sex.

Jacob Two-Two

alan smithee wrote:

It seems that if the Tories had their way,they'd jail boys for having sex with girls...How can a 15 year old be a child molester?

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say, by molesting a child.

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:
My point was that this is not a study about the double standards facing young girls who are pressured to sext then condemned for it. My post merely pointed out that the stupid article was inconsistent with the focus group itself and is merely a piece giving an opinon that is not even supported by the paper's author. 

 Only an idiot would suggest that we don't live in a misogynist culture but that does not mean that one has to swallow the MSM shit that seeks to sell ads with a sensational title and zero academic content.  I found the article interesting so I read the paper it was based on and found that the article was crap.

Right, and that is the important point to you, that the article is crap, not the information about why girls sext or how boys perceive the ones who do and those who don't. 

But hey, you guys have a good talk now.  Sorry for interrupting your discussions. 

(I just had this thought, women see things from a different perspective than men! I think I'll start a movement called womanism and it will be all about empowering women and we will have a message forum where we can share our thoughts about what the world looks like from our perspective so we can hear our own thoughts. cool idea eh!)

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Pondering wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

My point was that this is not a study about the double standards facing young girls who are pressured to sext then condemned for it. My post merely pointed out that the stupid article was inconsistent with the focus group itself and is merely a piece giving an opinon that is not even supported by the paper's author. 

 Only an idiot would suggest that we don't live in a misogynist culture but that does not mean that one has to swallow the MSM shit that seeks to sell ads with a sensational title and zero academic content.  I found the article interesting so I read the paper it was based on and found that the article was crap.

Right, and that is the important point to you, that the article is crap, not the information about why girls sext or how boys perceive the ones who do and those who don't. 

The sample size of a few teenagers in US cities is irrelevant to my granddaughter on Vancouver Island. Americans also believe in god more and they love their wepons more and did I mention that this was a subset of questions from a focus group and the authors main caution was don't draw conclusions from this paper but instead these are areas that need more study.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

It seems that if the Tories had their way,they'd jail boys for having sex with girls...How can a 15 year old be a child molester?

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say, by molesting a child.

 

Isn't a 15 yr old a child?

Anyway I was referring to teens.

Is a 15 yr old a child molester if (s)he has sex with a 13 yr old?..

Where do we draw the line?

My point is that it's absurd to criminalize teens for being sexual with other teens.

6079_Smith_W

There were some fairly reasonable lines drawn in the 2006 proposals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_reform_in_Canada

And while there are sometimes abuses of the law, and obvious grey areas, I'd say there's a pretty clear difference when it involves two young people of similar age, and the difference between abuse consent and abuse (notwithstanding that a minor cannot give LEGAL consent)..

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

6079_Smith_W wrote:

There were some fairly reasonable lines drawn in the 2006 proposals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_reform_in_Canada

And while there are sometimes abuses of the law, and obvious grey areas, I'd say there's a pretty clear difference when it involves two young people of similar age, and the difference between abuse consent and abuse (notwithstanding that a minor cannot give LEGAL consent)..

Except for specific types of gay sex which were not subject to the same regime of age differences. That is the main reason Bill had to vote against it.

6079_Smith_W

I know, and good point. I mentioned it because there actually is a framework for recognizing legitimate relations between young people

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:
The sample size of a few teenagers in US cities is irrelevant to my granddaughter on Vancouver Island. Americans also believe in god more and they love their wepons more and did I mention that this was a subset of questions from a focus group and the authors main caution was don't draw conclusions from this paper but instead these are areas that need more study.

I don't recall anyone claiming it was relevant to your granddaughter on Vancouver island but I would argue that it is unless you are saying she shouldn't know what is going on in the States amongst some of her peers? Do you think she is too young to find out about sexual coercion? 

Apparently you think that Canada is soooooooo different from the US that social trends here aren't affected by the U.S., that girls from Canada feel completely different about themselves than girls from the US. Your granddaughter isn't going to confide in you when guys try to cop a feel on the bus or ask her for revealing pictures. Girls know that if we confess such things it is our freedom that will be curtailed.  

Do you think the feminists here just blindly extrapolate any data we see as an absolute duplicate of what Canadian data would be, or that we assume that studies are based in Canada? Is it that you think we should ignore studies from other countries? 

If you were really concerned you could have just posted the link to the actual study and a description of participants so we could draw our own conclusions rather than simply dismissing the study as no interest to Canadian feminists. 

I posted a new thread for a fresh start and you had to be the first poster in it and it had to be all about you. Heaven forbid we don't deal with your male concerns before discussing the content of the study from a feminist point of view. 

 

Captain Obvious

Pondering wrote:

If flaunting our sexuality, celebrating our physical beauty, reveling in our effect on men, is so empowering why is it so disrespected?

Because a significant percentage* of men are terrified by female sexuality. And a significant percentage (I'm not sure if the two percentages are congruent) has deep insecurities about their own performance. To allow women to be sexual beings is to allow them to engage in the act as equals, rather than the male participant being "active," and the female "receptive." It casts doubt not only their sense of self and their gender role, but on the nature of the act itself. Who is it FOR? Men with the attitude you describe think sex is for them; it would upset a great deal of their world view to admit otherwise.

Consider: it is a widely held truism that a given sexual encounter is over once the man climaxes. It's hard to see this as other than patriarchal. If the woman has not climaxed yet (or wants to again)...well, what of it? Best case scenario, that gets saved until "next time," or the woman can be characterized as frigid, or her needs simply ignored. To my mind, a given consensual sexual encounter should be over when both parties are happy with how it's turned out. Or they both give up I guess (I'm leaving out cases here where someone changes their mind in the middle of said encounter; then we no longer have consent). But if a man isn't "up" for anything further, and their partner still is, than do something else to make sure your partner is happy.

To admit that women can be equally or more sexual than men is to call these gender roles into question, and for many men, this is emasculating. So, in effect, you have already answered your own question. Female sexuality is disrespected because it is empowering, and many men can't handle that.

*Disclaimer-- I'm framing this in heterosexual terms because of the original question. Also, I don't have any hard figures on how many men hold this views referenced under "significant percentage." I like to think that many have moved on past this double-standard, but it certainly still exists, as does the widespread belief of when sex is "over."

fortunate

@ pondering, keep in mind, if not for all the males posting in this topic, there wouldn't be any replies at all (other than mine, which seems to be sidetracking to why 13 year olds can't consent to a sexual relationship with 25 year olds, or even 16 year olds)   

 

alan smithee wrote:

 

Is a 15 yr old a child molester if (s)he has sex with a 13 yr old?..

Where do we draw the line?

My point is that it's absurd to criminalize teens for being sexual with other teens.

 

Yes, the age gap is too wide for that to be permitted.   And 'children' are upped to adult court or get adult charges all the time.  In fact i do think there is a case of a 15 year old with a toddler charged.    Just as there was a 14 year old charged with pimping out another 14 year old, and recently 15, 16 and 17 year olds charged with also pimping out a few girls under 17.    

Teen is actually a big span of time.    13 is vastly different than 19 for a variety of reasons, and 15 is different from 13.   The criminalization only comes from lack of ability to give consent, not that there is no consent.  (it is kind of like the sex work debate, abolitionists claim sex workers lack the ability to give consent, etc)      it is also like smoking or drinking, under 18 or 19 are not able to consent to buy alcohol or cigarettes even if they may be chain smokers and alchoholics.    The onus is on the seller (the adult) to make sure they (the child) can't get access to these things.   They may consent to drink, but they are not legally allowed to give that consent.   

there may be nothing wrong with a 13 and a 15 year old actually having sex, however to follow thru with the examples, the onus is on the older of the two to ensure the 13 year old is not doing it.    (another case of sex work, it is illegal to see any sex worker under 18, she can legally provide, but no one can pay her and/or see her.   The onus is on the client to not do it, and doing it is a criminal act, so he can be charged with doing it, even if she is over 16 and consents and he is only 20.   

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Teen aged boys (growing into men it remains the same) are going through hormonal change..A lot of testosterone..They tend to think with their dick,an organ that gets stiff from a summer breeze.

It's not up to the 15 yr old to ensure the 13 yr old isn't doing it...It's not realistic..Most teen boys will not refuse sex,they're not going to worry if the person they are about to have relations with is younger.

13 yr olds (not all of them,btw) are having sex and it's not a new phenomenon.

When I was 13,most of my friends were 15,16,17 years old..Were they responsible for what I did sexually or otherwise?

Sure,the age difference is a little more amplified during the teen aged years but at the end of the day,all teens are just kids.

I'm glad I'm not a teenager anymore..I'd be labeled a sex offender these days.

And that is absurd.

 

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Can the gents commenting in this thread keep in mind (again) that this is the feminist forum, which is meant to amplify women's voices. It's okay even if you have something burning to say to just wait a moment and see what women think about double standards being applied to adolescent bodies. 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Pondering wrote:

Do you think the feminists here just blindly extrapolate any data we see as an absolute duplicate of what Canadian data would be, or that we assume that studies are based in Canada? Is it that you think we should ignore studies from other countries? 

I think there are very few feminists on this board who blindly extrapolate from the data they see. I also think that the country of origin is important for analysiing any data set. While misogyny is almost universal in our world it has very different faces in different parts of the world.

I know it is fashionable to be all part of the American culture but I'm an old Canadian nationalist and I still cling to the believe that our culture has not totally been subsumed into the US and that the experience of four boys and five girls speaks to much of anything.

Pondering

I agree we are not as far gone as the States, but you got your numbers wrong:

Downloaded by [70.53.193.239] at 15:59 19 June 2014 The sample offers an even gender ratio with twenty-six males and twenty-five females.

Not a huge sample but this is just one indicator of many. We also have two girls in Canada that committed suicide. It is naive to believe that girls are not being pressured in Canada the way they are in the States, it may be to a lessor extent but it is happening. They are all absorbing the same media. They are all watching and loving Blurred Lines. 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Canada is very much affected by American pop culture.

Canadian teens have to deal with the same issues as the Americans---minus the guns.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Pondering wrote:

I agree we are not as far gone as the States, but you got your numbers wrong:

Downloaded by [70.53.193.239] at 15:59 19 June 2014 The sample offers an even gender ratio with twenty-six males and twenty-five females.

Not a huge sample but this is just one indicator of many. We also have two girls in Canada that committed suicide. It is naive to believe that girls are not being pressured in Canada the way they are in the States, it may be to a lessor extent but it is happening. They are all absorbing the same media. They are all watching and loving Blurred Lines. 

The number I refered to was the number from that sample that had sexted. All together 9 of the 51 subjects said they had sexted.

I don't believe that girls are not pressured in Canada so why would you presume I do? Of course there are presurres on them they live in a misogynist rape culture.

I raised my family in the Burmaby and my grandkids live in a small town on the big island. There is a ton of difference between those worlds no matter whether they all carry the same devices and consume the same MSM. I also believe there is a big difference between Burnaby and the three American cities and that seems to be the biggest dispute you have with what I have posted.

 

Pondering

Aristotle understood the point of the thread. You do not. 

Aristotleded24
Sean in Ottawa

The double standard is very much a factor here. The pressure here is extreme.

I am writing because I don't agree that we should blame US society for the full magnitude of the problem here. That approach will only lead to distraction from the responsibility we have in our own communities to address what is happening to the young women here.

This is not a place nor an issue to be speaking in nationalistic terms. However you define the borders of the culture that is prevalent here, we are part of it and responsible for it as it exists in our communities.

We are talking about a global problem and Canada is not some progressive island. Canadians need to engage this, educate young people about equality and practice it ourselves. We also need to recognize that while technology, in particular social media, has all kinds of wonders it is very much a part of the mechanism of pressure.

As well we as a society need to stop pulling back on the resources young women turn to and start strengthening them.  And we must protest against the cultural cues that work against equality. That does not mean hijacking the discussion for partisan, or nationalistic purposes.

We have to recognize what is going on in University communities and respond to that.

I realize in contributing to this discussion I am not a woman. But I am not speaking here as a man. I am speaking here as a parent. The role parents must play in teaching gender equality to their children is an urgent one and it does not matter which gender the parent is, the responsibility is the same. The role of everyone else is to support that. If you believe a village raises a child then when it comes to gender equality, even without children you have a role.

Step one is to not nationalize this social problem. Localize it and address it where you are at every opportunity. Yes, your kids will notice.

Pondering

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

We are talking about a global problem and Canada is not some progressive island. Canadians need to engage this, educate young people about equality and practice it ourselves. ……

I realize in contributing to this discussion I am not a woman. But I am not speaking here as a man. I am speaking here as a parent. The role parents must play in teaching gender equality to their children is an urgent one and it does not matter which gender the parent is, the responsibility is the same. The role of everyone else is to support that. If you believe a village raises a child then when it comes to gender equality, even without children you have a role.

Thank-you Sean. I stopped posting in this forum for awhile because it is just too disturbing.  In another thread I asked someone if they agreed that women are oppressed in Canada and was met with silence. That this should even be controversial in a feminist forum stuns me.

We are quick to point our fingers at other cultures  that oppress women more brutally but then use it to minimize the seriousness of oppression in our own society.  Yes folks, it's happening right here in Canada too. I'm very appreciative that I have no fear of being stoned and I don't have to wear a shroud but we still have a long way to go.

Going back to the original issue, I still believe some people don't get it. The girls that get suckered and give in then get slut-shamed are the most damaged as individuals but every girl in the country also learns a lesson. Don't trust your boyfriend. Look sexy but don't be sexual.  This is the sexual coming of age lesson that girls learn in their formative years.

Girls do get boyfriends and do have sex but as women our sexuality is also our vulnerability. We get groped on buses, leered at, propositioned aggressively. It doesn't have to be as invasive as rape to be harmful.

What a wonderful thing it would be if girls could simply let their sexuality bloom naturally at their own pace and without judgement or fear.  Like many things feminists have fought for, men would truly reap benefits just as profound.

lagatta

Yes, unfortunately a lot of men just don't get that. And sadly, there are still the "I am not a feminist" women...

Aristotleded24

[url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUQ2ltrdkTw]Who are you gonna blame? The star of the game or the no-name girl in the freshman class?[/url]

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

We are talking about a global problem and Canada is not some progressive island. Canadians need to engage this, educate young people about equality and practice it ourselves. ……

I realize in contributing to this discussion I am not a woman. But I am not speaking here as a man. I am speaking here as a parent. The role parents must play in teaching gender equality to their children is an urgent one and it does not matter which gender the parent is, the responsibility is the same. The role of everyone else is to support that. If you believe a village raises a child then when it comes to gender equality, even without children you have a role.

Thank-you Sean. I stopped posting in this forum for awhile because it is just too disturbing.  In another thread I asked someone if they agreed that women are oppressed in Canada and was met with silence. That this should even be controversial in a feminist forum stuns me.

We are quick to point our fingers at other cultures  that oppress women more brutally but then use it to minimize the seriousness of oppression in our own society.  Yes folks, it's happening right here in Canada too. I'm very appreciative that I have no fear of being stoned and I don't have to wear a shroud but we still have a long way to go.

Going back to the original issue, I still believe some people don't get it. The girls that get suckered and give in then get slut-shamed are the most damaged as individuals but every girl in the country also learns a lesson. Don't trust your boyfriend. Look sexy but don't be sexual.  This is the sexual coming of age lesson that girls learn in their formative years.

Girls do get boyfriends and do have sex but as women our sexuality is also our vulnerability. We get groped on buses, leered at, propositioned aggressively. It doesn't have to be as invasive as rape to be harmful.

What a wonderful thing it would be if girls could simply let their sexuality bloom naturally at their own pace and without judgement or fear.  Like many things feminists have fought for, men would truly reap benefits just as profound.

I agree with everything you are saying. I think some of this is getting worse. Part of the reason is complacency – a disturbing feeling of comfort and acceptance – and the idea that to resist is to be cast out, that feminism is somehow old fashioned. Retro clothes are cool. Retro furniture is cool. *some* retro music is cool. Retro views about women should never be cool. But the way I hear it, some people talk like they are.

But this is not the same world as when I was a kid. The pressure, the harassment can be all consuming in all kinds of new media. Inescapable.  And permanent. We humans have all kinds of new technology which should help us but this technology plays a role in the oppression of women. We need to recognize how this is playing out with young women. The same old sexism and inequality is here. Some areas may be better, it seems, but technology makes it more dangerous and requires more vigilance. I don't think it is safer for my daughters to be women than it used to be for my sister. This should give us all pause.