Sororities and Feminism

[33girl]

Originally Posted by DubaiSis

I don't see how a gay person or a woman could be a Republican, but if you can compartmentalize the parts you disagree with and be happy with the party as a whole, then great. But you are definitely part of a small and shrinking minority and you might want to ponder the reasons for that. I mean, you might be able to compartmentalize "legitimate rape" but when those comments start accumulating onto a 2nd or 3rd hand, isn't it time to reconsider your loyalties? The same would be true on whether or not you think you are or should be a feminist.

AND THIS IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. The Republican Party was not founded to politicize abortion, gay rights, etc....it was founded on the concept that less government = better. But nowadays way too many people take DS's attitude because the nuts (who are probably 5% of registered Republicans) have taken over the party and made themselves the spokespeople. Same with feminism.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by DubaiSis

I don't see how a gay person or a woman could be a Republican, but if you can compartmentalize the parts you disagree with and be happy with the party as a whole, then great. But you are definitely part of a small and shrinking minority and you might want to ponder the reasons for that. I mean, you might be able to compartmentalize "legitimate rape" but when those comments start accumulating onto a 2nd or 3rd hand, isn't it time to reconsider your loyalties? The same would be true on whether or not you think you are or should be a feminist.

AND THIS IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. The Republican Party was not founded to politicize abortion, gay rights, etc....it was founded on the concept that less government = better. But nowadays way too many people take DS's attitude because the nuts (who are probably 5% of registered Republicans) have taken over the party and made themselves the spokespeople. Same with feminism.

[adpimiz]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

Why do you think you have this association? Have you ever seen a woman say/do something like this?

I'm not sure how to multi-quote on my iPhone, but my answer to this would be what 33girl just said. The crazy feminists make themselves the loudest. Just like some people think that republicans = crazy religious, crazy anti gay, "legitimate rape" comments, etc., some people think that feminists = crazy women who hate men.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by adpimiz

I'm not sure how to multi-quote on my iPhone, but my answer to this would be what 33girl just said. The crazy feminists make themselves the loudest. Just like some people think that republicans = crazy religious, crazy anti gay, "legitimate rape" comments, etc., some people think that feminists = crazy women who hate men.

Please cite one who as any sort of platform as large as, say, Todd Akin.

[adpimiz]

Is there a particular reason that you have to play Devil's Advocate on everything I say? Jeez. We clearly have different political views, but that's no reason to be snarky.

I honestly can't think of one off the top of my head at the moment. There ya go.

[DubaiSis]

Originally Posted by 33girl

AND THIS IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. The Republican Party was not founded to politicize abortion, gay rights, etc....it was founded on the concept that less government = better. But nowadays way too many people take DS's attitude because the nuts (who are probably 5% of registered Republicans) have taken over the party and made themselves the spokespeople. Same with feminism.

I agree. As a Democrat, I don't think it's my job to fix the Republican party (I'll let them implode on their own), but when they turned away from government and economy and toward invading your personal life, it was the beginning of the end for them. The good news (for them) is that the 2 major political parties swing in a pendulum. Most of what Democrats believe today is what Republicans of 30 years ago believed. They'll come around and the Democrats will end up having to find a way to re-define themselves.

I think "feminists" (in quotes because I am guessing what many people mean by the word) are having to shout from the mountain tops because basic rights that many of us thought was a done deal YEARS ago are back in play. I mean seriously, birth control? What else are they going to want to take back? Oh wait, voting rights is back in play too, so who knows what other basic freedoms are at risk.

[DubaiSis]

The last time the Equal Rights Amendment was up for vote in Iowa the ads were about eliminating single sex bathrooms. Now how on earth does someone correlate toilet use with equal rights? Did anyone actually advocate that? Of course not. But it successfully scared people against it. Gender equality =/= gender sameness.

Where gender equality has to do with mom being able to stay home with kids, I think it also has to mean mom goes to work and dad stays home if that is what is best for their situation. Where staying at home is not feminist is when it is not realistic or practical in that family for mom to stay home, but you do it anyway because that's the woman's place. And I think this is where sorority and college life in general can be very feminist, in showing women their potential and providing options in life. Wanting to be a wife and mother isn't anti-feminist. Needing to be a wife and mother because you are a woman and that's all you get to be is anti-feminist and should be shunned by any sorority woman.

[RushTaleAccount]

Originally Posted by BAckbOwlsgIrl

Totally resenting that comment.

Not sure what you school you went to nor where you got notion of "slutty clothing" for serenades, but, I have never heard of any such a thing. We serenaded fraternities. It was fun. And even in the god awful heat and humidity, we NEVER wore "slutty clothing." Never once did I feel objectified. We laughed, they laughed. What we supposed to wear burqas? After pledging in the summer's heat and monsoons, it is hot!

The women that I serenaded with are now members of prestigious neonatal clinics, lawyers, mothers, world travelers, decorated district teachers, professionals and more.

At our school, serenading is not allowed and that rule is also not followed. Many of the sororities go to the fraternities to present their philanthropies (normal) but unfortunately some serenade their philanthropy with sexual lyrics to promote it. My friend practiced the song in front of me and I told her not to go because I found it so offensive, but at the time she was a new member and was worried she would get kicked out over not doing the song. Another friend from a nearby school had to go from fraternity to fraternity with her pledge class and dance for them. The fraternity members would "rate" how hot they each were. Both of these incidents happened 2 years ago. This case was hazing, not allowed at any school.

I understand that many sororities do not engage in these behaviors. However, it begs the question then if people say "those examples are not representative of the Greek system" that then the great examples of sororities and fraternities could be argued to not be representative either?

I personally believe that, unfortunately, one cannot argue that "sororities" in general help or hurt feminism. I think that the founding principles of most sororities promote feminism and that chapters that follow them also promote feminism. I believe that there are chapters that deviate from the national founding principles and those transgressions are not obvious or significant enough to lead to being shut down. These deviant chapters hurt feminism if their new members feel that they need to be objectified to be accepted and continue to promote that past their initiation, as in the case I stated before. It only takes a few minutes at a national convention, or even regional one, to realize that individual chapters vary from each other and that inevitable some of those deviations will be quite different from their founding principles all together. Therefore, I think that women will find sororities to be feminist dependent on the individual chapter they join or know members from.

[WaterChild]

I graduated in 2011, so my experience is recent.

My chapter strongly emphasized friendship, sisterhood, philanthropy, and strong women. By being an active member of that chapter, I was able to grow as a person and develop leadership skills. I also found friends who supported me as I pursued a major and now a career in a male dominated field. I would say that my chapter as a whole is feminist, and would say that most other chapters on my campus are as well. However, my chapter and every other chapter have had members that don't help feminism.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by DubaiSis

I agree. As a Democrat, I don't think it's my job to fix the Republican party (I'll let them implode on their own), but when they turned away from government and economy and toward invading your personal life, it was the beginning of the end for them. The good news (for them) is that the 2 major political parties swing in a pendulum. Most of what Democrats believe today is what Republicans of 30 years ago believed. They'll come around and the Democrats will end up having to find a way to re-define themselves.

I think "feminists" (in quotes because I am guessing what many people mean by the word) are having to shout from the mountain tops because basic rights that many of us thought was a done deal YEARS ago are back in play. I mean seriously, birth control? What else are they going to want to take back? Oh wait, voting rights is back in play too, so who knows what other basic freedoms are at risk.

You really don't see any meaningful distinction between having access to buying birth control yourself and compelling your employer to help buy it for you? Today's birth control debate seems pretty different to me that historical debate on the issue.

And by voting rights being back in play, you mean that you think that southern states should be under federal supervision forever in this area? Or do you having something else in mind?

Oh, DBB, great thread!

[squirrely girl]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

You really don't see any meaningful distinction between having access to buying birth control yourself and compelling your employer to help buy it for you?

I would agree today's debate on BC is different... but describing this debate as "compelling your employer to help buy it for you" is disingenuous at best. Major medical advisory groups have recommended birth control be considered preventative health care and per the Health Care Reform act, preventative care is to be covered by insurance without copay. Women pay their premiums just like men and it's about damn time their coverage actually met the unique needs of a female body instead of treating men's and women's bodies as "the same" by providing default male coverage for both... in other words, men's needs have been fully met for YEARS while women's needs are considered "extra." That's nowhere near equality. If employers are going to provide health insurance in lieu of wages that coverage should meet the actual health care needs of both sexes... not just one.

By the way, that mandate covers all FDA approved birth control and sterilization, thus men's vasectomies are covered without copay as well... yet interestingly nobody seems to be whining about men getting their snips covered... hmmmm...

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by squirrely girl

I would agree today's debate on BC is different... but describing this debate as "compelling your employer to help buy it for you" is disingenuous at best. Major medical advisory groups have recommended birth control be considered preventative health care and per the Health Care Reform act, preventative care is to be covered by insurance without copay. Women pay their premiums just like men and it's about damn time their coverage actually met the unique needs of a female body instead of treating men's and women's bodies as "the same" by providing default male coverage for both... in other words, men's needs have been fully met for YEARS while women's needs are considered "extra." That's nowhere near equality. If employers are going to provide health insurance in lieu of wages that coverage should meet the actual health care needs of both sexes... not just one.

By the way, that mandate covers all FDA approved birth control and sterilization, thus men's vasectomies are covered without copay as well... yet interestingly nobody seems to be whining about men getting their snips covered... hmmmm...

I suspect it's because fewer denominations object to sterilization as a method of birth control. Catholics aren't going to want to pay for that either.

[Titchou]

While I would - theorectically - be willing to accept that church related entities should not have to pay for birth control coverage for their female employees, the problem is that they don't object to paying for vasectomies for males nor viagra. You can't have it both ways. You have to give up both or none in my book. And that's why I think it's disengenuous for them to just now get in an uproar about female contraception products.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by Titchou

While I would - theorectically - be willing to accept that church related entities should not have to pay for birth control coverage for their female employees

What if it's prescribed for something other than birth control? It's really between a woman and her doctor if she needs to take daily hormones, and for what reason.

[Titchou]

Not in those cases....it's called a medical treatment so they shouldn't be able to opt out of that for any reason.