It's all just a globalist psychological operation on the public for their depopulation agenda. The point is to turn men and women against each other, and to be less appealing to one another. It's working. This is why a lot of men are now choosing to remain single and just look out for themselves.

There are many ways in which all kinds of people have been -
and continue to be - objectified, infantilized, and/or fetishized. I'd be curious to know more about what is being covered in your course. Even use of a term like "regular men" could be examined. White, western, heterosexual men who are six feet tall, 180 pounds, and able-bodied? It's unfortunate if the course is focused on man-bashing, without unpacking the concept of "masculinity" and everything it entails. Not just in contrast with or in opposition to "femininity" either. Women's studies shouldn't be an us vs. them narrative.

After women's studies the Tv gets turned on then it's the opposite. Every commercial, sitcom, series is the same vile garbage. One man who has it all surrounded by buffoons. Just idiot males running wild while all the women portrayed are stars without a single issue other than you guessed it meeting "REAL" men or losing weight.

Just sad to see so many self titled intelligent women just eating up the moronic pablum pouring out of every book and show then turning around and saying see the world is full of evil men.....

The best part is I have yet to meet one guy in my forty plus years who is anything like what is portrayed in society same for women. Not even close. IT'S FICTION.

If any of woman's studies or tv shows where actually true this place would on fire and chaos would be on every corner. Stop paying money to sit at a desk and listen to slanted opinions and go outside and look around...

It's great outside your mind.

Were women not in a 'class'? No right to vote, work, drive, own land, to their own bodies etc...
You are right, women can't point fingers at men and hate on them for the past, but they can hold them accountable for dragging these old beliefs into the future. Legally, women have these human rights. Realistically, they are still not treated as equals.

I doubt you are brave enough to challenge the professor or your classmates probably because what you are saying is false and biased.

.. that men are just as objectified and I would warn against drawing false equivalencies. What's the best evidence for this? Look at *how* women in power, whether they are actresses or politicians, are criticized: the instances of their physical appearances or their genders being referenced are substantially higher than for men in power. I'm reading a veiled MRA argument here too - like, lets shift the focus from "men" to "class," which will somehow solve our problems. But as long as men hold the majority of positions of power in virtually every field, the issue of gender will be critical to our understanding. Gender AND class inform power, not one or the other.

A top buzzfeed story was comparing an actor from game of thrones' butt with the golden ratio. true story.

... remember a number of conversations about this with grad students or profs in the "gender studies" electives I took. I was not given any persuasive answer as to why we didn't look at "class." Am I really to believe that I am more "privileged" than Ivanka Trump on the basis of my gender? I grew up in a family that didn't have enough to eat, and I had to work as soon as I was able to provide enough food for myself.

I also met a number of women at University who were quite honest about women having all sorts of privileges that men don't have. I recall one in particular who came from an upper class background. Good home life, gymnast, that sort of thing, so she worked as an "exotic dancer" out of high school, saved enough money to go to University, where her goal was to find some young MD or Law student to marry, so she could have him pay for her kids. She was very blunt about this, and unless I adopt the view that she _really_ only did this because she was abused by the patriarchy, which would deny her agency in the matter entirely, I have to believe that she saw what a woman could do with her body and did it. How many men do you think work as "exotic dancers", then go to marry female MDs after having done an undergrad arts degree? Prob. not as many.

Of course, using extreme cases might not be the best way to reason, but it does disprove the general thesis that "all men are privileged" and that "all women are oppressed." An economic analysis is going to show something very different.

I disagree, tho, that the reason we don't use an economic analysis is some top-down globalist depopulation agenda. More likely is that the globalist agenda is maintaining the economic status quo, and by creating "historically disadvantaged groups," and integrating them into the economic order, rather than remaking the economic order into something more fair, they can maintain the status quo a little longer.

If the state had not over the last 30 years been recast as the "saviour of historically disadvantaged groups, what would it be? The majority would be getting screwed, and they couldn't even say "but look, we're helping out historically disadvantaged groups!" It's a way to create an appearance of "improvement" when things are getting worse for the majority.

...is power.

Powerful people tend to want to defend and expand their power. It is a natural, animal instinct.

Men are physically stronger. So they dominate the domestic sphere with threats and violence.

But men are subject to the violence and domination of groups of organized men. Men are sent to war to die, and if they don't agree, then they are jailed or executed as traitors.

All ethnicities, all religions, all regions have examples of the larger dominating the smaller, the louder shouting down the quieter, using both direct means (aggression) and indirect means (playing on sympathies).

By no means are women's studies incorrect in showing how women have been and continue to be oppressed by masculinity in its more toxic manifestations.

It is not the fault of women's studies if they are not also addressing how, let's say, Myanmar Buddhists oppress the Rohingya, or how wealthiness is the new caste system, etc. etc.

They have a particular focus, is all.

TL;DR. Now back to my angry feminist man hating.