Capitalism = Sexism - the family oppresses women

[RedCeltic]

Dispite all the advances woman have made in this capitalist society, women still recieve less pay than men for the same amount of work. Woman bear the brunt of child rearing and housework. The media habitually portrays women as sex objects rather than human beings.They continue to be victoms of abuse, from verbal harassment to domestic violence and rape.

The reproductive rights of women are restricted. In the past few decades, working class women have experienced a backlash through the restricted access to healthcare.

Many people wrongly believe that these problems will not go away while men still exist. Somehow believing that they are inherent, and natural. That women have always and always will, be second class citizens in a world where they outnumber men.

Archaeology and anthropology has shown that most hunter-gatherer societies where in fact egaliterian, and division did not exist between sexes. Rather than a sexual division of labor, women tended to do the jobs that took them further afield: hunting. Women, as child bearers, tended to do the work that kept them nearer to the home base: gathering foodstuffs, preparing hides and clothes, and cooking. But this did not confer lower status on women.

The role of women in these societies was central to the suvival of the band, because it depended on the goods they could produce. Not only where there societies where men and women exersized equal power, but also those where women exersized the ultimate decision powers. Even to the extend in some cases of divorcing the husband just by placing his belongings outside the home.

The rise of a class society caused sexual division of labor to take on an opressive dimention. This was the rise of the agricultural community, when overpopulation caused the worker to work longer and harder, and when a handful of men became controllers of the agricultural surplus.

So, the reason why women's oppression persists is clearly because capitalism benefits from the unpaid domestic labor of women. Private families are burdened with the task of raising the next genration of workers in a capitalist society, rather than being taken on by society as a whole. This is plainly the reason that simply because women have entered the workforce they are not liberated.

Because this capitalist society still expects women to bear the brunt of domestic labor, women's liberation from their opression is iseperable with the fight against capitalism. Therefore the struggle of the female is bound up with the struggle to socialize the process of child rearing. Today, it means fighting for equal pay, free and available health care and access to abortion, and fighting for more day-care centers.








(Edited by RedCeltic at 5:53 pm on Sep. 25, 2002)

[PunkRawker677]

Red, that was great! Post this in the 'Team' section, because it could definitly go towards an issue.

[American Kid]

People oppress women.

It's on their own consience if they choose to act ignorant and cheavunistically (sp?) To blame it on the system is a cop-out.

After all, we all know how Engels "got around." :)

-AK

(interpret- PLEASE- this as an honest beginning for a "debate", not an evil cappie assault on your rights and/or beliefs. I believe we all have it within ourselves (with a few exceptions) to now argue maturally, clearly and concisely)

(and civilly)

(It's a sad day when I'm forced to explain myself, while attemping to explain myself)

[RedCeltic]

I'll work on it a bit more if you want it as an article. :) I'll add some to it and you'll probobly see it there sometime this weekend.

[RedCeltic]

Quote: from American Kid on 6:01 pm on Sep. 25, 2002
People oppress women.

It's on their own consience if they choose to act ignorant and cheavunistically (sp?) To blame it on the system is a cop-out.

After all, we all know how Engels "got around." :)

-AK

(interpret- PLEASE- this as an honest beginning for a "debate", not an evil cappie assault on your rights and/or beliefs. I believe we all have it within ourselves (with a few exceptions) to now argue maturally, clearly and concisely)

(and civilly)

(It's a sad day when I'm forced to explain myself, while attemping to explain myself)


So women are oppressed because men are pigs? However as I've already pointed out, society has not always been this way. If men are inherently sexist, than how could some men in hunter gatherer groups allow themselves to be equils, or even ruled by women?

[canikickit]

AK,
RedCeltic makes reference to women's place in advertising. This can be blamed on the system. A system where a fast euro is more important than the values of humanity and the values of individuals.
The advertising strategy seems to be: put in scantily clad women. Do you think Britney Spears would be as "popular" if she was 300 pounds? Or even just unattractive? Or perhaps only average looking?
NO!
I hate that cow. She has not got half the talents that she is sold on. Most of the time its not even her singing. All she can do is dance and look sexy (she can do it well, I'll admit). To me, Britney Spears is more depraved than hardcore porn. "Sex sells", I don't know who was the first to say it, but it sure is true.
Sex sells cars, sex sells holidays, sex sells cinema tickets, sex sells music, sex sells coffee, sex sells America's so-called "War on Terrorism", sex sells the weather reports, sex sells phone company's.....And prostitution is illegal! What a joke.

Aside from the media, how many women do you think get jobs based on their looks? I'd say quite a few, secretaries, typists, receptionists. And how often do women get turned down because they are women, because they might become "emotional"?
Unfortunatly there are not any real statitics on these subjects. But AK, I'm sure you will admit this happens. You know it, I know it, Stormin Normin knows it, Capitalist Idiot knows it.
You can blame this on capitalism, because the women are expected to take on the brunt of the "household duties" while the guy "brings home the bacon" in todays society. In todays system. In capitalism.

Engels might have done this and Engels might have done that. It doesn't matter. Bush did this and Bush did that. I know (hope) that you are above Stormin normin type retorts. The past actions of some guy are not important. The ideas and theories which will save this planet from going down the tubes are.
Anyway, I think this is the longest reply I've ever written and no one seems to read most of what I post. But that is what I think.

(Edited by canikickit at 12:35 am on Sep. 26, 2002)

[American Kid]

Because, by chance, the men, all those years ago, who ended up in positions of power, happened to be okay guys, who were not:

ignorant

sexist

stupid

and as a result treated women equally.

It's, in my opinon, a case by case basis. I'm sure there are just as many hunter gatherer tribes where women are treated like shit.

And yeah women are oppressed because men are pigs. And it goes the other way too, as I've been discriminated against because women are pigs as well.

And they can be.

A good example could be: I've been out with my friends before, and when it's closing time, we get invited to after-hour parties. At these parties, sometimes girls talk to me. Sometimes they don't, and talk to my handsome friends.

It's all based on looks. How the opposite sex treats each other, I think, has nothing to do with the social trickle-down effects of the ecomonic system underwhich they were raised, but instead on the ways we look and feel to each other. Maybe even pherenomes, if you will.

Like I said, we're all pigs.

Now, that's a social example. I realize we're also talking work-place type stuff. I can think back to every girl I know, and I don't think one of them has ever complained about being treated unfairly, based on their sex. And the majority of them are rather successful, accomplished young ladies, whom, if they were dicriminated, would stick it right back in the motherfucker whose discriminatiing's face, and go out and, wisely, find someone to work for with the good sense to treat them how they DESERVE to be treated.

Namely, with respect.

I know at my work, we've never (and I'm part of management) treated the girls any different from the guys.

Like I said, case by case basis.

-AK

(and on the party-not-being-talked-to-by-girls-thing, when that happens, usually I just take my shirt off and draw a pentagram (upside-down, mind you) and start dancing like a moron) :)

want proof? I can provide links, you know :)

[Tkinter1]

"Dispite all the advances woman have made in this capitalist society, women still recieve less pay than men for the same amount of work."

if women feel they are being mistreated at work they have the right to complain and they often win. btw Wheres the sources?

"The media habitually portrays women as sex objects rather than human beings."

sex sells. It has nothing to do with the fact that women are inadaquate. Men are often portrayed the same way in calvin klein and swim suit commercials. And the women that do those shots becuase they want to do them, they aren't forced to.

"The reproductive rights of women are restricted"

Your thinking of china.

"In the past few decades, working class women have experienced a backlash through the restricted access to healthcare."

Any charts or credible sources to back you up.

"Many people wrongly believe that these problems will not go away while men still exist. Somehow believing that they are inherent, and natural. That women have always and always will, be second class citizens in a world where they outnumber men."

Many people believe this, not all and not the majority.

"So, the reason why women's oppression persists is clearly because capitalism benefits from the unpaid domestic labor of women."

Unpaid? are women slaves in the naiton is that what your implying? If women are so oppressed then why do they work the same jobs as men? Why are there women in the senate? Supreme court justices? CEO's, News casters. Military and police officers?

"because this capitalist society still expects women to bear the brunt of domestic labor, women's liberation from their opression is iseperable with the fight against capitalism"

"Today, it means fighting for equal pay, free and available health care and access to abortion, and fighting for more day-care centers."

Women DO earn equal pay. They haven't always though. Health care is available, there are free clinics, and there are groups and charitys for this type of thing. They have access to abortion and adobtion centers and places to in the hospitals to drop off unwanted babys without getting arrested.
There ARE day care centers, baby sitters and camps to take care of the children when the parents can't.

You've made some incorrect statements Plain and simple. Women have progressed an astronomical amount in this passed century and continue to do so!

Groups for womens rights that fight and win:
http://www.whrnet.org/
www.hria.net/womens-rights/
there are many many more!

I can't beleive your underminding all the progress women have made by posting this!

(Edited by Tkinter1 at 12:41 am on Sep. 26, 2002)

[canikickit]

Women do not recieve equal pay.
Men also are posed "sexily" but it is women the majority of time, and for a lot more than just underwear ads (as I already said). Regardless, that doesn't make it right.
Women often complain about how they are under pressure to adhere to a certain appearance. Ask Kate Winslet.
AK, I don't believe that you think no woman has ever been discriminated against in the workplace.


I can think back to every girl I know, and I don't think one of them has ever complained about being treated unfairly, based on their sex.

You are refering to only women you've met, but how is that relevant? None of the Jamaicans I've spoken to lived there anymore, but that doesn't mean no Jamaicans do, does it?


Women have progressed an astronomical amount in this passed century and continue to!

So what? You need to learn how to think (and spell).

[American Kid]

I would never say there's never been a woman who's been discriminated against in the work place. No, not at all. My dilemma is: who's fault is it when it happens?

The individual

or

The system.

And I think the key phrase there, Canickiut, is "selling underwear". ;)

Kate Winslet is quite a fine actress (and I'm speaking on talent, there) who makes more on a single film than I would on ten years-worth of my current salary.

Her "work-place treatment" is the least of my concern these days. ;) But I get what you're saying.

-AK

(Beautiful Creatures is fucking brilliant)

[canikickit]

Can't you spell my name? c-a-n-i-k-i-c-k-i-t
Its not her workplace treatment. She was blasted in the media for not being of supermodel proportions. She fought back and complained about the system causing a lot of pressure on young teenage ladies to have a slight figure.


And I think the key phrase there, Canickiut, is "selling underwear".

This makes me think you either misunderstood or didn't read my posts. Can you explain that? Please? You schmuck?

[American Kid]

CHILL

Seriously, Jesus. First off, realize your name is INCREDIBLY difficult to spell. I don't know why, there's just a lot of "k's" and "c's" and "i's" and "t's" and it's tough. It's not on purpose that I screw it up.

And I know ALL ABOUT Winslet's troubles. I understand what she was talking about, and agree, it's abhorant. It's indicitave, I think, of the caliber of her TALENT (which, as an actress, is all that should matter anyway) that she continues to work.

Hell, she was just oscar nominated for "Iris."

And the underwear thing, I was just busting your balls because you were criticizing underwear ads for making girls look sexy, and to me, well, that just makes............sense.

RELAX.
-AK

(Edited by American Kid at 1:10 am on Sep. 26, 2002)

[Pinko]

I posted this in another thread of similar title. I don't think capitalism equalls sexism, but I do believe they go hand in hand.



[Pinko]
"The capitalist will pay the wage to the person who will be the most productive..."

Women are less productive than male workers (in the eyes of the capitalist) because they want time off to have children (many of them, not all). Men (in the UK at least) are entitled to far less paternity leave than women are allowed maternity leave. Men are also less likely to take the full alotment of leave. Therefore men will be the prefered employee.
Women on maternity leave are entitled to payed leave (in the UK at least), so an employer has to pay a non-productive worker as well as their temporary replacment.
If a woman admits to wanting to start a family, then her job application is at risk. This is institutionalised sexism.

Edited to make more sense since it is out of its original context.

[canikickit]

Hey! I was only joking. I was busting your balls. Sorry, misunderstanding. On your part, schmuck. No! I was only joking! I know my name is messed up, i often misspell it myself, it's a real ***** when I'm signing checks and shit.

Anyway
I said that women were made look sexy for far more than underwear ads, see my first post. It doesn't really make sense though. Underwear should be comfortable. Mine is. That is all beside the point really. I'd like to hear what you think about the first post.

[American Kid]

I think for the most part your post was well-written.

What you basically did was break-down the strategies and tactics of every advertising agency on the planet.

We just have an asthetic difference. You think this is unacceptable and subject to decisive change.

I think morally maybe it's a bit shady, but is a frivolous distraction from the mundanity of everyday life, and is a daily assault on your senses and behavior which can only affect you------as much as you let it.

Is Britney Spears some great fuckin' artist? Negative.

Is she where she is because she has nice tits and a tight little ass? Affirmative.

But really, what does it matter?
-AK

[Tkinter1]

Yea ok canikickit. sorry if i type fast and dont spell check every little thing like you do.... anyway thanks for addressing non information instead of addressing what i actually said.

"So what? You need to learn how to think (and spell)."

and if i dont agree with you i am incapable of thinking... thats what i get from that.

[vox]

More idiocy spews forth from the AK bullshit-machine.

Rather than talking about social issues, he whines that he's not talked to at a party and equates that with patriarchal discrimination against women. Hell, he denies that there even IS systemic discrimination against women.

I'm going to introduce you to someone, AK. Her name is Andrea Dworkin (http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/OnlineLibrary.html). Get real familiar with her.

That women don't complain to a man about being made uncomfortable, or even outright harrassed, in the workplace shouldn't shock anyone, but it doesn't seem that AK can understand this. Women, everyday of their lives, are harrassed. They are hollered at as they walk down the street. They are bumped and groped in busses and subways. They are made to conform to the male standard of what a woman is, how a woman acts, what a woman wants (and, of course, what a woman wants is to be fucked by all men, all the time).

Even in his make-believe scenario of "what would happen" if a woman he knows was "discriminated against," AK can't bring himself to expect justice for the woman. Instead, she simply has to go find another job. AK doesn't even mention what should happen to the man, that's how deeply embedded the notion that women are somehow second-class and should simply go away and not be a problem is, or at least be someone else's problem.

A great example of the hostility against women was in the early Clinton years, when right-wingers actually made fun of Chelsea Clinton because she wasn't "pretty" enough for thier tastes. That she was a child didn't matter. That she was not a politician in any way shape or form did matter: she didn't have a penis, so the only thing that counted was how pleasing she was to men.

When Paula Jones spoke out against Clinton, what was said about her? She was ugly and "trailer trash," so there we get both the oppression of the class system and the patriarchy. She wasn't pretty enough, she wasn't rich enough, so she was garbage.

THIS is what patriarchal oppression looks like, AK. And women live with it every single minute of their lives.

vox

[American Kid]

I'm sorry, what did you say, canikickit?

-AK

[canikickit]

I think it is not an issue whether women have progressed or not, just that their oppression stops. I think that your thinking needs to improve because of your statement of that non-issue and because of your attempts to de-rail the debate by saying


I can't beleive your underminding all the progress women have made by posting this!

I think this was just an attempt to get people on your side. Perhaps I am wrong, regardless I don't think it is important because I don't think RedCeltics post does actually undermine antthing other than the continued oppression of women.
My comment on your spelling was in reference to your name which seems to be some sort of bastardised version of the word "thinker" which I do not understand. I thought it was humourous (to me) making the reference to your spelling after making a reference to your thinking to which your name refered (I assumed). I'm sorry if my oblique attempt at humour failed miserably. I wouldn't criticise anyone for their spelling on a message board, I know how it can be.


But really, what does it matter?

It matters a great, great deal to me. I love my music. Music is like religion to me (and I'm dead serious, not exaggerating in the slightest). I find it highly offensive that MTV can manipulate people into think they like music because of the video. I've seen it happen, its happened to me. It goes way beyond misogyny. MTV is taking music away from musicians.I enjoy seeing those ads, I'll admit it. I wish they didn't exist.

[vox]

RC,

I talked about this a little in the "Prostitution" thread. I, personally, don't think that capitalism in and of itself causes patriarchal oppression, but I do think that the patriarchy can be adapted for many class systems. As I recall, I said that if patriarchal values contradicted capitalist values, they would have long ago disappeared, and some, such as the idea of a women working outside of the home, have largely disappeared. That, however, doesn't at all change the basic notions of women as second-class to men.

Martha Gimenez has a pretty good intro page (http://www.cddc.vt.edu/feminism/mar.html) about Marxist/Materialist Feminisim, though she uses academic shorthand a bit, expecting the reader to be familiar with some of the ideas of feminism already. I used to belong to the M-Fem mailing list, and it was pretty good sometimes.

I'm not sure of the whole idea about unpaid labor being the key. While it certainly plays an important role in the reproduction of labor-power, I can't seem to view it as a cause, but an effect. Of course, it's a rather tricky subject and can't really be summed up in a few words.

vox

[canikickit]

vox, interesting about Paula Jones.
I remember one of the main aspects of the whole Monica Lewinsky deal was the fact that she was fat! At least that was the main media aspect, not in reality.

[vox]

Exactly, canikickit. Women are their bodies in a way that men are not. Hell, just look at all of the overweight Senators who are men! Somehow, though, that's not an issue.

vox

[Tkinter1]

canikickit,

Tkinter is acuatally just a variant of the programming language Python which i was studying. I used it becuase i wanted to seem non partisan to any group when i first entered these forums so i just used the first thing i thought of. Might sound lame but oh well. Anyway im not trying to gain support, frankly i have none. I was just that suprised that he would post that so i said it. Women are slowly becoming more and more eqaul as the years go on, so why do we even need to address an improving issue? If the issue worsens then we should address it.

[canikickit]

I think the issue should be addressed because it is not really improving at the rate it should. I suppose I understand where you're coming from, but I think you are not aware of how vast the problem is. Just because an issue is becoming less of an issue is no reason to attempt to hasten the process.
Does this actually hasten the process? I don't know, I'd say it does, but a very small amount. Every little helps.

[James]

Tkinter is right, its getting better very slowly...so lets just forget about it guys!

Lets talk about TV or something just as productive like that!

[RedCeltic]

American Kid

It's, in my opinon, a case by case basis. I'm sure there are just as many hunter gatherer tribes where women are treated like shit.

You should really take an anthropology course before you discredit the work of people who have made this observation after years of research. Are there hunter/gatherer tribes where women where "treated like shit"... yes there are/where. However, the majority of the time (well over 80%) tribes became less egaliterian, and more class structured and gender biast as they shifted from hunter/gatherer groups to agriculture.

Tkinter1

if women feel they are being mistreated at work they have the right to complain and they often win. btw Wheres the sources?

It's been statisticly proven that women earn 73 cents for every dollar men received. According to the AFL-CIO (http://www.aflcio.org/women/equalpay.htm) it's a simple fact that women who leave work to have children find themselves earning less than women who don't. Monthly Labor Review (http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1995/09/art2exc.htm) The poverty rate is still higher than men, even though both poverty of men and women fell in 1999 according to the US Department of Labor (http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2001/mar/wk4/art01.htm)

sex sells. It has nothing to do with the fact that women are inadaquate. Men are often portrayed the same way in calvin klein and swim suit commercials. And the women that do those shots becuase they want to do them, they aren't forced to. ?]

You can't compare underwear ads for men with rauchy pornography. And, women who choose to display themselves in such a maner do so for capital gain, not for the love of bearing all.

"The reproductive rights of women are restricted"

Your thinking of china.

when women need to make the choice between career and family, their reproductive rights are restricted. Many companies don't pay for, or pay very little for time lost due to child birth. Also see above source on women loosing job and earning status over other women who don't have children.

"In the past few decades, working class women have experienced a backlash through the restricted access to healthcare."

Any charts or credible sources to back you up.

I'm talking about Abortion and family planning. If you live in the US you know what I'm talking about.

Many people believe this, not all and not the majority.

Naturally I'm talking about people who are awaire of these issues.

Unpaid? are women slaves in the naiton is that what your implying?

Domestic Labor. Do you know what that is? Sure women do all those jobs you listed. Also, many go home to do domestic labor in addition.

Women DO earn equal pay.

The latest figures from the US Department of Labor show that in 1998, the weekly median wage for women ($456) who work full-time is only 76 percent that of men who work full time ($598). Meanwhile, a study released in June 1999 by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), found that 89 percent of human resource professionals believe women face barriers to career advancement. Source (http://www.careerknowhow.com/ceiling99.htm)

VOX

I, personally, don't think that capitalism in and of itself causes patriarchal oppression, but I do think that the patriarchy can be adapted for many class systems.

Well the title of this thread is a bit misleading "Capitalism = Sexism" wasn't ment to imply that it causes it. However my argument is that just as capitalism requires inequality of class to exist, it also requires inequality of sex.

Women can never be truly equil as both wage earners, domestic laborers, and producers of population.

Of course, it's a rather tricky subject and can't really be summed up in a few words.

Very true.






(Edited by RedCeltic at 9:57 am on Sep. 26, 2002)

[Moskitto]

The media habitually portrays women as sex objects rather than human beings.

so true, so very true. It also restricts social freedom because everyone will assume that you see women as sex objects even if you don't.

Annother thing the media does in promoting slim women is that it makes up propaganda about female weight lifting to keep it as a masculine activity. Weight lifting actually improves your figure unless you're injecting anabolic agents 3 times a day, not make you look like a hermathrodite.

(Edited by Moskitto at 5:30 pm on Sep. 26, 2002)

[Moskitto]

In hunter gatherer societies women had social and sexual equality with men, however when early settled communities began it all changed.

[RedCeltic]

Moskitto

Annother thing the media does in promoting slim women

that's a point I missed thankyou Moskitto! In promotion of slim women be the money driven media, women begin to develop the idea that their bodies are not natural because they don't look like anarexic models. This is where eating disorders form.

However I assume our capitalist friends here would argue that it's a "Case by case bases" and that women who develop eating disorders in no way reflect the society as a whole.

This is hogwash. These eating disorders are a sympthon of our culture. You don't see people forcing themselves to throw up after eating a healthy meal in other cultures. Even well fed ones.

In hunter gatherer societies women had social and sexual equality with men, however when early settled communities began it all changed.

People became sedentery (stopped moving around) when overpopulation forced them to shift to a more difficult yet more yelding form of labor. (agriculture).

[vox]

"These eating disorders are a sympthon of our culture."

RC, have you heard about the pro-ana movement? Some of them claim that anorexia is a valid lifestyle choice, not a disorder, some promote anorexia, others don't, but they all refuse treatment. It's quite bizarre. A google search for "pro-ana" will bring up a lot of hits. If you haven't heard of it, take a look.

vox

[RedCeltic]

I think D-Day mentioned something about that. It's quite sickening... I've found THIS (http://www.eating-disorder.org/prosites.html) website which has some good information about it.

[canikickit]

How can someone want ot keep a disorder? It doesn't make sense. Especially when on one of the sites it said "if you don't have an eating disorder, you're better off not developing one, so you should leave" (or words to that effect).

[RedCeltic]

What's the matter Tkinter1? Aren't you going to back yourself up?