How far we haven't come in four decades....

[MorganGrayson]

The local news was recently all aflutter with the new San Diego Fire Chief, an eminently qualified individual who I believe has been "in the biz" for like 20 years.

A woman.

Had women come as far as we like to think we have, the news of a female Fire Chief wouldn't cause such a stir. I believe they said she's one of four female Fire Chiefs of "major cities." (They didn't mention any "minor cities," "towns," or the like.)

They also felt the need to mention that she was single. I'm trying to remember if the marital status of the last "new guy" we had - I think it was either Police Chief or County Sherrif - was mentioned, but I can't remember. (I didn't care about their marital status any more than I care about hers. She *is* a whole lot hotter, though. One "open individual's" opinion. ;))

Segueing away from real life to television, I'm a big fan of the TNT show "The Closer." They had the usual strife between Kyra Sedgewick's character and her "team," based partly on the fact that she's a woman, partly on the fact that she was brought to LA from the South. They get a lot of play out of a classic: the "dimwitted appearing Southern law enforcement person who ties bad guys into knots." It worked in Mayberry with Andy Griffith and it worked when he was Matlock.

This is all leading up to an ad hoc question for the females: have you noticed a shift in your own equality over your lifetime? In other words, do you find yourself more equal to your opposite gender in both business and personal issues?

Any gentlemen who'd like to jump in with their own opinions are more than welcome. This is an "equal opportunity thread." :)

[Bhelliom]

Oh sweetheart I love you... You're setting off all my hot spots today.

Before I get into this... I want to make clear that I am a feminist at heart and fully believe in equality between the sexes.

If you don't want to read the whole thing... read the next paragraph and then skip to the last two paragraphs on this post

In fact... fuck it... .I'll just quote this directly from a gentleman that I feel sums it up nicely. Background on this. The gentleman is Tucker Max, He is one of the foremost writers of something the media is calling "fratire" essentially he's writing about being a man. He writes about drinking and picking up. He is not a misogynist as many call him, but actually worships women for simply being women. He DOES however, refuse to be emasculated by feminism and is simply talking about being a guy.


"To understand why current culture is at the point where men being men is considered a radical notion, you need to understand how we got here. Feminism came in three "waves"; 1st Wave, which was suffrage (the right to vote), 2nd Wave, which was the 60's and 70's sexual and social revolution fought for inclusion, and 3rd Wave, which is what we have now. It emphasizes freedom of choice for women regardless of what decision they make, and it endorses everything from porn to girly culture.

Of course, First Wave feminism was a substantial human advancement. Aside from universal suffrage, only the rule of law and the scientific method have done more to advance the human condition. Second Wave feminism was also necessary at the time it began. It threw off the stifling societal bonds limiting women's ability to be who they wanted to be and advance in fields they choose. However, Second Wave feminism went too far in some ways. While many women did want to take advantage of the new paths available to them and become scientists or CEO's, many did not, and they didn't enjoy feeling like failures simply because they chose to be stay-at-home moms or strippers or whatever.

The same was true for their sexuality. Because the Second Wave feminists fought for sexual equality against a patriarchal system that objectified them, as a result they sought to hold women to a standard of acting in accord with the gains they had won. But the Third Wave feminists did not want another set of rules, they wanted personal freedom, and some of them preferred the option of alternate sexual mores like bi-sexuality and sluttiness. This is why Third Wave feminism arose; it was a reaction against the oppression of the Second Wave. Plainly put, the Second Wave feminists were Jane Pauley and Gloria Steinem, and the Third Wave feminists were Britney Spears, Suicide Girls and Margaret Cho.

Why does any of this matter? Because feminism did not evolve in a vacuum. It interacted with and affected masculinity. Entire books could be written about this, but in short, men--especially in the media--reacted to Second Wave feminism by emasculating themselves and adopting a PC attitude that apologizes for nothing more than men being men. This attitude peaked in the early 90's (around the same time that Third Wave feminism started). The idea that men had to pay not only for the sins of our fathers, but had to suffer for simply being a man became pervasive in mainstream media.

When any pendulum swings too far to one side, it eventually has to start coming back. The first major player to refuse to buckle to this trend was Howard Stern. The demand for such a voice was so strong that by simply refusing to kowtow to the PC police, he became the "King of All Media." This is where fratire comes in. While Maddox and I are not Howard Stern, we do represent some of the first internet players in this anti-PC revolt, and fratire as a genre represents the non-mainstream literary reaction to the feminization of masculinity.

Masculinity is starting to slowly coming back in vogue, but the fight is only beginning. The fact is, at this point in entertainment history, the Second Wave feminists are the gatekeepers of media. The women who grew up in the 60's are now in charge, and they quite literally run shit. By itself that is not a problem, but these 50-year-old women who hold so many positions of power in media companies have personal preferences that do not reflect many American attitudes. Fratire exists as a genre because people are hungry for someone to tell it like it actually is instead of how these women (and men to some extent) want it to be. There is a large and untapped segment of the American populace that want men to act like men, but the MSM, which is run by Second Wave feminists, doesn't get this yet. They aren't in touch anymore. "


To summarize. Feminism has come a long way. This is still a predominantly male dominated society, and even the women in power now are an older generation and feel the need to show off other women in power. It's not that they're knowingly setting back equality and women's rights... its that the women and men in power THINK They're doing just the OPPOSITE.

By advertising that a woman is now in fire cheif and by mentioning that she's single.. they THINK they're supporting womens rights by showing that she's worked hard and hasn't needed a man to do it etc etc. But waht they're really doing is driving a wedge between the sexes by not giving her the same courtesy they would give a man... and that's to say.. he's the best so he got the job.. end of story.

[Evil Chris]

Segueing away from real life to television, I'm a big fan of the TNT show "The Closer." They had the usual strife between Kyra Sedgewick's character and her "team," based partly on the fact that she's a woman, partly on the fact that she was brought to LA from the South. They get a lot of play out of a classic: the "dimwitted appearing Southern law enforcement person who ties bad guys into knots." It worked in Mayberry with Andy Griffith and it worked when he was Matlock.

Morgan you lost me here....

The local news was recently all aflutter with the new San Diego Fire Chief, an eminently qualified individual who I believe has been "in the biz" for like 20 years.

A woman.

Had women come as far as we like to think we have, the news of a female Fire Chief wouldn't cause such a stir. I believe they said she's one of four female Fire Chiefs of "major cities." (They didn't mention any "minor cities," "towns," or the like.)

They also felt the need to mention that she was single. I'm trying to remember if the marital status of the last "new guy" we had - I think it was either Police Chief or County Sherrif - was mentioned, but I can't remember. (I didn't care about their marital status any more than I care about hers. She *is* a whole lot hotter, though. One "open individual's" opinion. ;))

This is all leading up to an ad hoc question for the females: have you noticed a shift in your own equality over your lifetime? In other words, do you find yourself more equal to your opposite gender in both business and personal issues?

Any gentlemen who'd like to jump in with their own opinions are more than welcome. This is an "equal opportunity thread." :)

The fact they'd mention the new fire chielf's marital status is unnecessary of course, and the reason why they would mention it is probably defined by a general condition of society that I have no qualification to even attempt to address.

I had a conversation with a friend years ago about just this profession (fire-fighters) and how women should/could be invloved with it in consideration of feminism and equal rights etc etc...
Now, I am a believer in equal pay and equal rights for men and women but ask yourself one question. If you or your child were in a burning building and you could not find your way out, would you prefer a burly man to whisk you out of danger? Or would you prefer a woman? It should be understood that they both have the same qualifications etc..

Most people would say the man. I know I would.