Girls don't fight: fact or fiction?

[Ren]

Weird, we do have a paternity leave of 6 months for fathers (which can be brought to 7 if the mother doesn't take more than 4) that can even be taken while the mother is on maternity leave the first months the child is born. If the father is single, the leave is of 10 months, in any case the pay is 80% of the total and can be used even one day at a time.

So you see, it's not unequal :3

[Jake]

So you see, it's not unequal :3

Well, we have paternity leave here, as well - although I don't think it's anywhere near so much as six months. But the point is, most feminists don't seem to campaign for it, they're all about maternity leave. Which is fair enough - they're feminists, not masculinists.

[papillon]

Depends on the feminists.

Reminds me of a discussion I was having elsewhere about some guys getting irritated at certain sexual harassment laws, complaining that being asked not to behave like jerks to women was a demand for "special treatment". To which I pointed out that really, I'd rather you not behave like jerks to ANYONE, thank you.

Similarly, while I appreciate anti-domestic-violence efforts, I don't appreciate campaigns that are all about "you should never under any circumstances strike an innocent woman". I don't want you striking an innocent man either. I don't appreciate the way male-on-male (or female-on-male) violence is depicted as appropriate harmless fun so long as no one gets killed. Punching a man in the face if he was no threat to you is just as wrong as punching a woman in the face who was no threat to you.

Technically, feminism is an equality movement. Now, I agree that linguistically it's a bit confusing, but surely we've had enough conversations about inaccurate terminology on this board to accept that the way a word is used isn't always completely in alignment with etymology.

Practically, feminism tends to focus on raising women up in order to try and reach that balance, and less on men's issues simply because that's not their focus, as you say. And some people get a slightly imbalanced reaction as to what feminists think of men because they wander into forums where women are sharing their experiences as women and without paying any attention to the current subject or history of discussion, yell "BUT WHAT ABOUT MEN'S RIGHTS?" and get their heads bitten off.

(IS there a female superiority movement? I'd assume there'd be one somewhere but I'm not sufficiently well-versed in all my political and philosophical groupings!)

[Jake]

(IS there a female superiority movement? I'd assume there'd be one somewhere but I'm not sufficiently well-versed in all my political and philosophical groupings!)

If there's not a female-superiority movement, there are certainly female-supremacists. As you said, it depends on the feminists.
(Of course, there are male supremacists as well, it's hardly confined to the one sex.)

Feminism is technically an equality movement, but generally I'm pretty sure that's because it originated in a time when females were significantly disadvantaged compared to males. It's always been a pro-female movement, just because promoting the female cause was to aim for higher station, and equality was a higher station than the present one. You know, no vote, considered unreliable witnesses, not allowed to sit at the head of the table, that kind of thing... to aim for female superiority from that position would be rather hypocritical, which would turn many people off their cause.

These days, there are just as many feminists who will say things like "oh, I wouldn't expect anything more from a man", without considering that it's just as sexist as "get back in the kitchen".

[Coatl]

oh believe me, if you piss a girl off even hurt them for something they're passionate about, they go two ways:
either they will argue till they get the upperhand, or they tear you up and don't give a shit.

[dott.Piergiorgio]

ngh..... let's tackle the issue on an astract polemological (that, study of fighting & fighting attitudes, a sort of philosophy of the Art of War) level, with some historical examples in the end:

For a start, the basic phyisical factor is that human males has more burst of energy, females has more stamina (in sport terms, males are natural sprinters when female are natural marathonets)

Then, the main physiological factor is that the genus homo sapiens has a near-unique fertility cycle, monthly instead of seasonal or yearly, without outside signs, and the late stages of pregnacy hamper female mobility and alter their shape to a point that on paper fighting women require a new set of body armour. other species, esp. the felines, don't has this physiological issues (hence the english term "catfight")

Now, the basic human social organization is that the males wasn't only the breadwinners, but also the defenders of the females and the children (every military penal code don't take lightly civilian casualties or war crimes involving females & children, whem on Seas, historically the safety of the females & children have the utmost priority), because of the pysical & physiological factors above.

The recent trend in parity on the battlefield and like situations stems from the better knowledge of these pysical & physological factors, permitting the containment of these limitations (albeit not without inconvenients, esp. in certain environments, mainly Naval environment (suffice to say that are cases of ships returning overseas whose has to replace many female ratings (and even Officiers...) on maternity leave...)

and, on reproductive matters, the 99,9% of the work is that of the female; this is why from a military standpoint, all factors being equal, polygamous cultures has long-term advantages against monogamous cultures, and the survival of 100 women has more value than the survival of even 500 men.

All these, still don't block females from fighting, esp. in emergency or exploiting the former assumption that females are non-combatants by definition (Resistance movements, liberation wars, sieges etc.) Individuals like Joan of Ark, Fiorenza e Dina (the two watchress during the Siege of Messina), Oscar de Jarjaves etc. are always moving in these strategic framework. (notice that these are defensive fighting, whose enhance the basic defensive istincts of the females (everyone whose has haved the unwise idea of petting cubs or kittens in plain sight of the mother understand what I mean)

A major factor during the Italian "Anni di Piombo" (the Lead Years, I'm old enough to remember vividly this awful period) was the acknowledged presence in the ranks and leadership of the numerous factions on the field of female combatants, of at least seven ends KIA.

Best regards from Italy,
Dott. Piergiorgio.

[Ramidel]

Actually, feminism isn't always about equality. Sometimes it's about women being equal in all areas (equality feminism), sometimes it goes for equal treatment in some areas but somewhat different positions in others, reflecting the physical, mental and sociological differences between men and women (difference feminism), and yes, there are plenty of female supremacists (an idea that often gets mixed in with lesbian separatism). The word is almost meaningless.

I support equal treatment; I also support a significant relaxation of our current massively anti-violence attitudes in the modern world. ("Like" fighting? Not sure, but I definitely would like to be able to solve my problems by beating them into submission. Requires far less hypocrisy than any other method.)

[Coatl]

Actually, feminism isn't always about equality. Sometimes it's about women being equal in all areas (equality feminism), sometimes it goes for equal treatment in some areas but somewhat different positions in others, reflecting the physical, mental and sociological differences between men and women (difference feminism), and yes, there are plenty of female supremacists (an idea that often gets mixed in with lesbian separatism). The word is almost meaningless.

I support equal treatment; I also support a significant relaxation of our current massively anti-violence attitudes in the modern world. ("Like" fighting? Not sure, but I definitely would like to be able to solve my problems by beating them into submission. Requires far less hypocrisy than any other method.)

Ok there was some slight contradictions, I think you means that feminism varies...

I believe in equal treatment but men and women have certain needs that do prevent total equality, but at the same time it is practically as realistic as animal equality.

[georgmay]

fiction of course.
it more dependent on the mentality.

[Kuzlalala]

I think it's fiction. There are many female boxers, right. Besides, I myself had fought a lot of times with my boy classmates when I was young.

(Girls could also speak fight, too.)

[LVUER]

Watching a survey conducted by a Japanese Psychology professor, she deducted that most crime (especially ones that involves murder) is done by man/male. Several main reason doing those crimes are: Jealosly and economy. But surprisingly (for me, not for her) the main reason (boasting > 60%) of killing someone for male is ... pride. Yes, useless male pride (ahem, I'm a male too if you want to know). Perhaps this is one of the reason why female doesn't do much crime (esp. the killing) as male does.

For additional info: if there is main reason to commit crime, then what is the main reason not to commit one? The answer is future. The more certain someone's future is, the more that person won't commit any crime.
Ex: if you already know that you are going to be a successfull business man in 10 years, have happy family, and nice life... are you going to discard all those just to teach one guy not to tease your girlfriend?

[vlint]

*launches a flying kick at sciencewarrior* Does that answer your question? ^_^;

Seriously, though - i'm curious... do guys enjoy getting into fights? i mean, i can't speak for all girls, but i don't enjoy fighting. But it's happened, and when it has, i don't back down and i certainly don't like to lose. But i don't go looking for fights to amuse myself.

i always thought it was kinda the same for guys - that they don't go looking for fights, but if one finds them they just give it their all.

In my opinion, and as a guy, I wouldn't exactly say it's the same for guys. Although, I do agree that a large percentage of guys won't go 'looking' for a fight, but I will say that many (if not most) of them do 'crave' a fight (whether or not they actually logically or emotionally want one—and whether or not they avoid them). Many guys who don't look for fights might actually enjoy the exhilaration of being in them (at least, if the opponent isn't overwhelming and they're not that sedentary), although that doesn't mean they enjoy the consequences or the morals of the matter.

Basically the feeling of craving a fight is like craving the feeling of expending unused and potential adrenaline (while you have it). Is this a feeling most girls are familiar with? I don't know, but I'm guessing not as much as most guys are. I will say, though, that it feels good. There are other things than fights to satisfy it, though (even if many of them are just mock-fights, sports, play sword-fighting, etc.)

Having said this, I'm still against immoral violence in games, at least (I try to avoid it altogether, if possible, but that's me).

So, in essence, I do think guys enjoy the actual fighting part of fighting. I don't think they enjoy hurting people with the intent to do them wrong any more than anyone else, though.

[V2Blast]

In my opinion, and as a guy, I wouldn't exactly say it's the same for guys. Although, I do agree that a large percentage of guys won't go 'looking' for a fight, but I will say that many (if not most) of them do 'crave' a fight (whether or not they actually logically or emotionally want one—and whether or not they avoid them). Many guys who don't look for fights might actually enjoy the exhilaration of being in them (at least, if the opponent isn't overwhelming and they're not that sedentary), although that doesn't mean they enjoy the consequences or the morals of the matter.

Basically the feeling of craving a fight is like craving the feeling of expending unused and potential adrenaline (while you have it). Is this a feeling most girls are familiar with? I don't know, but I'm guessing not as much as most guys are. I will say, though, that it feels good. There are other things than fights to satisfy it, though (even if many of them are just mock-fights, sports, play sword-fighting, etc.)

So, in essence, I do think guys enjoy the actual fighting part of fighting. I don't think they enjoy hurting people with the intent to do them wrong any more than anyone else, though.

An excellent point (though, like most, it does not apply to every single person). For reference, see Fight Club.

[rimir]

In my opinion, and as a guy, I wouldn't exactly say it's the same for guys. Although, I do agree that a large percentage of guys won't go 'looking' for a fight, but I will say that many (if not most) of them do 'crave' a fight (whether or not they actually logically or emotionally want one—and whether or not they avoid them). Many guys who don't look for fights might actually enjoy the exhilaration of being in them (at least, if the opponent isn't overwhelming and they're not that sedentary), although that doesn't mean they enjoy the consequences or the morals of the matter.

Basically the feeling of craving a fight is like craving the feeling of expending unused and potential adrenaline (while you have it). Is this a feeling most girls are familiar with? I don't know, but I'm guessing not as much as most guys are. I will say, though, that it feels good. There are other things than fights to satisfy it, though (even if many of them are just mock-fights, sports, play sword-fighting, etc.)

So, in essence, I do think guys enjoy the actual fighting part of fighting. I don't think they enjoy hurting people with the intent to do them wrong any more than anyone else, though.

seconded!!