Talk:Different but equal
If this is inspired by "separate but equal" in the To do list, I think it also applies to racism.--ZooGuard (talk) 18:22, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
- I've actually got a serious start in my sandboxes. but i need to get busy here and finish the draft. I get distracted. heh.
Godot She was a venus demilo in her sister's jeans 18:26, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Possible merge?[edit]
This might be better off as a section on the Separate Spheres ideology page. It's basically the same idea. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 23:32, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
- More like the other way around, as "separate spheres" seems to be a sub-group of this sort of idea, a specific ideology, much like complementarianism is a religious justification of the more general "different but equal".
sshole
10:27, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
- I think it would better be merged as a section/paragraph under separate but equal; as ZooGuard points out above, "different but equal" is to sexism as "separate but equal" is to racism. It doesn't seem as much something to shoehorn into a particular misogynistic group.
-
-
22:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
- I think it would better be merged as a section/paragraph under separate but equal; as ZooGuard points out above, "different but equal" is to sexism as "separate but equal" is to racism. It doesn't seem as much something to shoehorn into a particular misogynistic group.
Difference feminism?[edit]
Is this the same as/the underlying idea of "difference feminism"? wp:Difference feminism, see also for example this description by Ophelia Benson.--ZooGuard (talk) 10:20, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Vaguely, though the trouble is that the idea of 'men and women are fundamentally different, but their roles are equal' can be reached by many routes. By a theological route. By a anti-sexual-corporatism route. By a gender roles preservation route. Difference feminism is when this philosophy is applied in the sphere of feminist thought (and it's by NO MEANS the mainstream or even a widely accepted idea; much of contemporary feminist thought regards strong gender roles as hierarchical and very much not 'equal' in how society ranks gendered traits), rather than being the same thing as this philosophy. It's very possible to believe in seperate, equal gender roles but not be feminist in mindset. Also, that Wikipedia article isn't written very well... just as an aside. Not a criticism of you, that article just needs work. ±
KnightOfTL;DRmore at 11 15:19, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Vaguely, though the trouble is that the idea of 'men and women are fundamentally different, but their roles are equal' can be reached by many routes. By a theological route. By a anti-sexual-corporatism route. By a gender roles preservation route. Difference feminism is when this philosophy is applied in the sphere of feminist thought (and it's by NO MEANS the mainstream or even a widely accepted idea; much of contemporary feminist thought regards strong gender roles as hierarchical and very much not 'equal' in how society ranks gendered traits), rather than being the same thing as this philosophy. It's very possible to believe in seperate, equal gender roles but not be feminist in mindset. Also, that Wikipedia article isn't written very well... just as an aside. Not a criticism of you, that article just needs work. ±
Is This Worth Entering?[edit]
I remember watching this documentary a while back called "Hjernevask". Episode 1 was on "The Gender Equality Paradox" and focussed on "Why do girls tend to go into empathizing professions and boys into systemizing professions? Why does the labor market become more gender segregated the more economic prosperity a country has?" Anyone wonna watch it and give me some input, because from what I remember it's worth a mention. Hobby (talk) 13:24, 27 March 2014 (UTC)