Feminism & MBTI

I think holy shit that's probably the shortest hypothesis I've known someone to make on this forum.

 

Mm, I wouldn't say that's necessarily so. I think NF women in general are more "causists" because it's an emotional fight to be free. I think some T women won't pull punches, but I feel the F women are the ones who care more.

Maybe it depends on what you mean by "feminist." I consider myself to be one, but I'm not burning my bra or shouting out at a rally. Really, I think you'll have to explain what you mean, and maybe provide examples of feminism, in your opinion.

 

Why might Ts be more apt than Fs?

 

Regardless of wanting things to be fair or feeling the need to show the world you're as smart and competent as any man, people who call themselves feminists are in it for the same reason: They want to define themselves, and not live by anyone else's definition of what they are or what they are capable based on their sex.

You don't have to be an NT or a T to be intelligent enough to know that you're getting the short end of the stick just because you've got a vagina--and that there's really no rational reason for it.

 

The word feminism does suck because it seems to exclude men who do not want to be defined by conventional gender roles and stereotypes. But really, feminists aren't only interested in liberating women from these things but men too.

 

I am offended both by the fact that women in the U.S. are paid, on average, about 76% of what men are paid for doing the exact same work and the fact that my mother thinks I cannot assemble furniture because I am a girl and should practice cooking and cleaning instead.

I don't quite follow your reasoning. I am an NF and very much a feminist, as long as you are speaking of a real feminist, which is a woman who only desires to be respected and valued just as much as any man. I don't want anyone making any preconceptions about me based on my gender. Regardless of how much I do or don't fall in line with society's view of femininity, that's completely absurd.

You don't have to be a T type to be a CEO, either. Being an F type doesn't make you any less intelligent or intellectually capable.

I think it is similar, and this is certainly an interesting topic.

I just don't know if the diction was quite right. Feminism is so broad for the specific phenomenon that you speak of.

 

I have no comment on weather its a T/F thing. I just wish feminism would let go. Humanism needs to replace it. As I'm sick of seeing only half the human race supported. The feminist back lash has been harsh on many who never even committed the crime. So bring on Humanism. Then I won't care who is more what, I'll support it.

 

-sigh- These post always get into politics. There are a million things I could argue for and against this point, but most of them are invalid to the members of this forum because some people actually believe MBTI exist in a way that you can measure where people's beliefs lie. MBTI is a tool, not a system.

NOT a system!

The answer to this question is: NO

Types are merely thinking processes. You could imply, that perhaps one type is more likely to be able to this job easier or inclined to this type of work, but Feminism is not the same thing as a carpenter's skills vs a spokespersons skills.

Feminism, for the most part, is a belief. It is part of activism. It is not something that one type is more inclined to do than others due to better eye hand coordination or intra-personal skills.

This thread is a complete blanket statement, which I could go for- it's called generalization, sure. But it's

#1. Not explained throughly enough
#2. Inconsistent to MBTI and it's practice.

Also. No such thing as masculinism? There is a movement for men, and it is growing stronger. Society recognizes that men deal with problems that are the same as women do in the sense of social inequality; we have stereotypes for males that often, very often, leave them on the short end of the stick.

Take divorce and parenting for example. Custody is almost ALWAYS granted to the mother unless she is proven unfit. There exists this stereotype that females are maternal and men are strong protectors with no interest in child raising. Men are often discriminated against in family court cases and their children are taken away. An example of progress made to change this? http://www.fathersrightsinc.com/ More and more websites and law offices are popping up like this. Fathers4justice is a particularly popular one. Fathers are being given offed and people are stepping up to change that. I think it's starting to make an impact, and we are starting to see in television shows; stay at home dads started making a real show in the late eighty's to early nineties. A great example of this is the show "Full House".

Just last year, the equal rights amendment, which would protect men from discrimination in the sense that it advocated that what one sex is required to do the other must do the same; one part of this being compulsory military sign up for men being changed to both men and women. This motion was denied but people are still trying to push it in.

There is also male abortion rights, which I've discussed on a quite controversial thread which is still floating around if you wanted to take a bite of that.

On word of sexual abuse which I saw a thread about the female condom and was particularly distraught about (I may end up posting on that thread later) there is what we call a stigma surrounded around male sexual abuse. If a male is sexually assaulted by a female, especially at a young age by an older woman, he is supposed to have 'felt lucky' that he had that sort of experience because by society's standards, he would have wanted it, for men are always craving sex and also, there is the myth that a man cannot become aroused unless he is enjoying something. Stimulation the male genitals will create an erection no matter who is doing in if there is no male erectile dysfunction involved, and so it is a common misconception that if a male becomes erect or ejaculates during abuse that they 'liked it'. Also, male on male sexual abuse is also rather taboo and not talked about much. Men who are sexually abused by other men, even as little boys, are assumed to be gay, and may question their sexuality later on in life. The few men who do have these experiences who are actually gay may end up feeling their orientation was caused by the incident, even if they saw signs they were gay well before the sexual assault. There is a movement to remove the shame and stereotype associated with males. Since, a man is a man society assumes if they didn't like it they could have fought it off, because men are strong and are expected to be this way even as little boys. Here is a website that is a social support group for survivors of these types of crime, proof, that a movement is occurring: http://www.malesurvivor.org/

Males of all orientations are starting to feel more freely to express gender roles that are not male; there has always been a double edged sword where a female can dress masculinely and be perfectly acceptable to society whilst if a man dressed in a very feminine way they would be branded gay and mocked. Part of this is to do with homophobia, but another part would exist even in a completey homosexual-accepting behavior because we have been raised with the belief that men are this way, and yet women can be both ways. I have personally seen a lot of public figures of the male gender wear makeup, and there are a lot of transvestite or cross-dressing figures popular in the media culture, which has started to open up the world to homosexuality as well as gender bending. Take "Jeffree Star" as an example of homosexual portrayal of, I believe he would be crossdressing. Take Kent Furher or 'Jackie Beat' from Dirty Sanchez. One particularly interesting example I found was, someone I'm a fan of, Derrick Barry, whom is a male who impersonates Britney Spears and does an awful good job at it.

Those are only a handful examples of the male revolution I could give you. I actually have to go right now so I'm cutting this a bit short. Hope it helps.

 

Just a repost:

Don't know if this relates but maybe it has more to do with T or F relation to the truth or the understanding of the truth, meaning that the response to the truth is a matter of reason or consequence.

For example:
If Ts approach argument by focusing mainly on the practical logic or implications behind it, then they would reasonably argue that feminism is both right and wrong. They may look at the statements or beliefs implied in "feminist" thinking to determine if they are logically or practically acceptable. On the other hand, An F, may focus more on the effect the beliefs have on the person, society or culture. The effect of acting on gender stereotypes or beliefs and the social/emotional consequences to self and others of believing and acting on those beliefs are more relevant. The focus maybe directed at the cultural expression of equality offered by feminist thinking. But this is just a theory . . .

Our cognitive functions do reflect differences in thinking. Of course, it wouldn't be relegated to intelligence between Fs and Ts. But I think there is at least some belief that we tend to approach problems differently depending on cognitive functions. MBTI is based on this belief in some respects, based on what I understand of it.

Just one perspective.

 

I agree. I personally am really tired of being stereotyped. All stereotypes without a single exception are wrong. Even if the majority of a certain group of people exhibit certain behaviors does not mean that all do, in fact it is ethically wrong and,from some standpoints,philosophically wrong.
Here is how the formation of stereotypes typically works:

Person A does X
Person A is a member of 1
Person B does X
Person B is also a member of 1
Hence those that can be classed as being part of 1 all do X

Even when you highlight how wrong the method of arriving to a stereotype is faulty, lots of people still refuse to even contemplate that the stereotypes are wrong or that it hurts people.

Also I am inclined to believe that a lot of men that view women as inferior do so because people forced the stereotype on them that that is how men are supposed to treat women. Also some men that support women's rights and do not follow stereotypes are likely to not be listened to on the matter.

Also society needs to stop telling people how they should see things or what skills they ought to posses just because of gender.That is a subtle form of " mind control" as your telling someone how they should look at things and the meanings they are to see around them, thus affecting their behavior.

 

This is what feminism is. It isn't about woman's power, or anything like that. It's about all people being respected, appreciated, and represented as just that; people. Feminism fights for woman's rights because they are generally seen as "inferior" to men (in all sorts of arena: economics, politics, education, just about anything), but the main cause of feminism isn't to push women into the field of men. That would be backwards.

Rather, feminism pushes for people to be people, and to have a level playing field for all. If feminism was fighting for women to be respected as men, then it would still be accepting that women and men are different (in more than a biological sense), and that women only deserve such things because men have them.

Feminism is championing human rights. In stopping discrimination against women, all people are allowed to be treated as humans.

 

I don't know about that, I would say NT women tend to be equalists.
Allot of NF women on the other hand that I have meet tend to be feminist. Personally I see no point in me being feminist.
Humans are human despite what gender, race or age they happen to be.

 

MF I respect you a lot but I mist disagree. Feminism is humanism from a womens (or a very specific subset) point of view. Humanism deals with the entirety of the human race and is not focused on one gender or the other.

As a humanist I do uphold some feminist Ideals as do I hold up ideals of its counter part (male rights movements).

But until we accept the genders are different and accept we can't be truly the same or equal but only as equal or the same as our gender allows.

Further at some point gender becomes a none issue.

 

I have to disagree with you, BB - it's more like this: You have to realize when you're treating someone "less than" the way they should be treated before you can analyze whether or not that label should be abandoned. We're all human, yes; but no one can say we're all 100% alike. We have differences, and it's ok to celebrate those differences - whether male or female, Black or White, tall or short, fat or skinny. Not one of us are the same.

Lumping everyone in one category, IMO, takes away what it means to be human.

You can't force anyone to respect another human being. And even a child will notice there are differences between a man and a woman at around the age of four. Saying those differences don't exist is a lie. Those differences should be treated equitably, however. There are things women can do that men can't and there are things men can do that women can't, and there are some things neither does very well.

Acceptance means accepting all there is to that person, and understanding where that person came from, and why they feel the way they do. You don't have to embrace everything, but as long as you understand why things happen, then the more empathic we become as a human race.

Just my two cents, tho'. I can't agree that erasing differences will change a thing; there will still be -isms and class-isms because humans like to categorize and separate. But there are ways of coming together without erasing what makes that person who they are.

 

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