They are kidding around, trolling, or just not worth your time. This is what I have learned in my time at T-Nation.
I think sexism is a huge problem because it is so widely accepted.
Now don’t get me wrong, I had to take a womens studies class in college and I found it stupid, unscientific and wrong headed in its argument that there are no differences between the sexes but I also think womens way of thinking is an important balance to our stupid shit-kicking way.
Let me see if I can find the study that shows that women are MUCH better stock traders than men because they don’t get carried away on a victory high.
here:
A recent study by Digital Look, who analysed 100,000 portfolios, revealed that ordinary women investors, living all over the country and dealing in shares via the internet, telephone or investment clubs are consistently doing better than highly paid professionals in the city. During the period of the study the average female portfolio rose by 10% compared to just a 4% rise for the overall FTSE index and a 6% increase for that of the average man.
Avoid doing gender studies in English at all costs, it’s the shittest and least interesting subject going. I always felt that all my feminist lecturers needed to get over themselves. The quicker they realise that men and women ARE different and thus are subject to different series of interactions and situations, the better.
I find gender studies pretty hypocritical anyway; they’re female-centric in 99% of cases,and feminist lecturers tend to strive not for gender equality, but for female superiority.
I mean, if women were equal to men and were out there being the driving force of world progress, who’s going to do the fucking dishes?!
Spriont wrote:
For my introductory literature class, I have to write an essay about the unruly tongue, which is “a language that is empowering, maternal, and unique to women writers.” I respect that women had problems before, and that “men stifled women’s evolving literary voice,” but this is, to me, very uninteresting! Why don’t female professors realize that women’s history is interesting to only half the population!
Even in history classes taught by women, I have to always hear about how men screwed women (hehe). I respect that women had it tougher hundreds of years, even 50 years, ago, but the constant complaining just irritates me. As if I have no problems of my own. At least a unisex prompt doesn’t alienate anyone. But my rant won’t change anything. Stupid words for a stupid problem. [/quote]
You should write about Shakepeare’s female characters…they are far from weak and usually hold the power (Lady Macbeth, Gertrude, Desdemona, even his sonnets,). His plays are centuries old, so the idea that “men stifled women’s evolving literary voice” is a bullshit generalization…
If your jack-booted dyke of a professor still insists on a female writer, go for Mary Shelley:
Shelley had a feminist philosopher mother, control over her husband’s work ( who was also an author)… oh, and she wrote Frankenstein…
…Or you could piss her off by writing about all the recent female authors that wrote under a male or androgynous pseudonym for fear of not getting published (e.g. J.K Rowling).
[quote]roybot wrote:
…Or you could piss her off by writing about all the recent female authors that wrote under a male or androgynous pseudonym for fear of not getting published (e.g. J.K Rowling).[/quote]
Now I haven’t read any Stephenie Meyer, but I hear she’s popular as well.
Nah, go with a female comedian and do thorough research that proves there is a direct correlation between a woman’s need to use her menstruation in jokes and her lack of a career. I suggest Margaret Cho as a great starting point.
[quote]roybot wrote:
…Or you could piss her off by writing about all the recent female authors that wrote under a male or androgynous pseudonym for fear of not getting published (e.g. J.K Rowling).[/quote]
Now I haven’t read any Stephenie Meyer, but I hear she’s popular as well.[/quote]
I guess she’d qualify as a feminist writer. Pre-pubescent teenage girls have no interest in boys, vampires or werewolves, but they do like glitter and puppy dogs. Hey Presto! The Twilight franchise is born…
They are kidding around, trolling, or just not worth your time. This is what I have learned in my time at T-Nation.
I think sexism is a huge problem because it is so widely accepted.
Now don’t get me wrong, I had to take a womens studies class in college and I found it stupid, unscientific and wrong headed in its argument that there are no differences between the sexes but I also think womens way of thinking is an important balance to our stupid shit-kicking way.
Let me see if I can find the study that shows that women are MUCH better stock traders than men because they don’t get carried away on a victory high.
here:
A recent study by Digital Look, who analysed 100,000 portfolios, revealed that ordinary women investors, living all over the country and dealing in shares via the internet, telephone or investment clubs are consistently doing better than highly paid professionals in the city. During the period of the study the average female portfolio rose by 10% compared to just a 4% rise for the overall FTSE index and a 6% increase for that of the average man.
So what is this supposed to be shocking. Black people are better at sports, there are a lot of hispanics in baseball and boxing, there are a lot of male chefs. [/quote]
It was kind of in direct response to Enders Drift’s post basically saying that women were inferior.
I don’t think any of us have a point except those that told this kid to suck it up or consider a new major.
And Eli B, I certainly don’t think the way to help sexism is to say that everything people taught you was unscientific and wrong. In fact I’d be interested in why a rational person that can discern something as scientific or unscientific would then at all care about a field he didn’t find scientific. It’s like saying “None of this shit makes any sense or seems remotely valid but damn it I’m going to believe it anyways!”
Thanks for all the advice guys, esp. roybot (agree about lady Mac, but Gertrude seemed pretty passive; don’t know/ haven’t read Desdemona), but this was just meant as an “I’m pissed I have to this” thread. 1000 words with 10 quotes (cited) from a list of esoteric women writers who no one in class has read, unless someone was in Oprah’s book club (Margaret Atwood, Mary E. Wilkins, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, other names you hope never to see). I’m pissed because this is an intro lit class. I’m a biomedical engineering major and if this is what more advanced english lit classes are like, then thanks for the warning! Also, ‘suck it up’ is fine advice!
[quote]Enders Drift wrote:
I don’t think any of us have a point except those that told this kid to suck it up or consider a new major.
And Eli B, I certainly don’t think the way to help sexism is to say that everything people taught you was unscientific and wrong. In fact I’d be interested in why a rational person that can discern something as scientific or unscientific would then at all care about a field he didn’t find scientific. It’s like saying “None of this shit makes any sense or seems remotely valid but damn it I’m going to believe it anyways!”[/quote]
being against sexism is not the same as endorsing academic gender and womens studies. Big distinction.
In fact I think that gender and womens studies being so irrational contributes to the stereotype about women being irrational. However the study I referred to indicates that in areas more important than academia ( in this case finance) women are in fact more rational than men.
I think men and women are different and that the combination of their viewpoints leads to balance.
Gender and womens studies argues that men and women are equal in every way including the way our brains work and that gender differences are purely the product of socialization. This is of course preposterous.
Sociology says the same thing. Combination of their viewpoints? I just barfed. Maybe in some things, Maybe. I think you have to look more at the individual though.
[quote]drewh wrote:
Sociology says the same thing. Combination of their viewpoints? I just barfed. Maybe in some things, Maybe. I think you have to look more at the individual though. [/quote]
This is a highly informed thread! Great work gentlemen.
Seriously OP, you have your essay written for you right here.
Listen to the cat who mentioned Ayn Rand - that woman’s POV is disgusting and yet oh so admirable. Her voice was definitely not stifled, partly, I’d gander, because the subject matter has very “masculine” overtones. And then you can compare it with others like J.K Rowling who decided to use a pseudonym in order to be taken seriously b/c they write about fluffy dumb girly shit. Could be an interesting exercise.
If you’re still doing it, theres only a few key writers you need to write about. Virginia Woolf, Toni Morrison, Charlotte Bronte, Jean Rhys. That should get you started.
If it’s about the narrator’s voice, stay away from talking about powerful female characters in the story, and more about how the narrative voice tells the story. You could compare with prominent male realist or post-colonial writers such as Dickens or Daniel Defoe for good comparisons.
I’d stay away from writers like Stephenie Meyer and J. K. Rowling for now because they’re not part of the canon of English Literature yet - maybe worth a small mention though. Someone mentioned Mary Shelley which is another good one - in particular look at Mathilda, which she gave as a gift to her overbearing father to publish for some money when he was in financial trouble. He didn’t like that, cue everybody getting very pissed off. That’s outside the actual “unruly” narrative though, so don’t focus too much on that. Mary Shelley’s actual narrative isn’t really typical of the writers mentioned in the title of your essay though, you may struggle to find instances in the text.
[quote]Spriont wrote:
Thanks for all the advice guys, esp. roybot (agree about lady Mac, but Gertrude seemed pretty passive; don’t know/ haven’t read Desdemona),[/quote]
That’s the good part: both Gertrude and Desdemona seem to be passive, but they play a vital role in driving the respective main characters to their fates…
