Feminism

CorporateWhore

Where early feminists like Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton supported simple ideas like voting rights, today's feminists speak on any number issues of the woman's experience. The woman's role in the family is denigrated by modern feminists as a ball and chain - not as a leader of the basic family unit. Modern feminists see marriage as one of the most detrimental institutions to women's rights. Why? I am confused by this.

Is there anyone who can explain to me why feminists are so negative toward marriage and procreation?

qtegirl

CorporateWhore wrote:

Is there anyone who can explain to me why feminists are so negative toward marriage and procreation?

I think you're trying to paint all feminists with a very wide brush. The feminist movement is complex and cannot be defined using just a few labels and catch-phrases.

I know many feminists that are not against marriage or procreation. What they are against is limiting a woman's potential. As many advances as there have been, women are still lagging behind in many different areas. Women are inderectly penalized for being the cornerstone of families, as you put it. When a woman re-enters the workforce after caring for children, she makes, on average $0.85 for every man's dollar.

Also, if you look closely, many feminists fight for mandatory maternity as well as paternity leave.

VictoryGin

a ha hahahahhahahah.

your girl susan b. anthony was a well-known advocate of singlehood.

maybe you should do some research. here's a tip: feminism is about political, social, and economic equality. because there are so many feminists, there are disagreements about how to achieve those things or sometimes what they entail.

another tip: look up 'coverture'. that's a good start.

CorporateWhore

qtegirl wrote:

I think you're trying to paint all feminists with a very wide brush. The feminist movement is complex and cannot be defined using just a few labels and catch-phrases.

I know many feminists that are not against marriage or procreation. What they are against is limiting a woman's potential. As many advances as there have been, women are still lagging behind in many different areas. Women are inderectly penalized for being the cornerstone of families, as you put it. When a woman re-enters the workforce after caring for children, she makes, on average $0.85 for every man's dollar.

Also, if you look closely, many feminists fight for mandatory maternity as well as paternity leave.

Why do women want to re-enter the workforce? What's the great thrill in that?

Is a woman's potential limited when she cares for children? Doubtful. That is one of the most difficult jobs there is.

CorporateWhore

VictoryGin wrote:

a ha hahahahhahahah.

your girl susan b. anthony was a well-known advocate of singlehood.

maybe you should do some research. here's a tip: feminism is about political, social, and economic equality. because there are so many feminists, there are disagreements about how to achieve those things or sometimes what they entail.

another tip: look up 'coverture'. that's a good start.

So essentially, feminism is bullshit. It's just a polyglot of squabbling women who have no idea what they feel but they sure know that a psychiatrist and some midol will fix the problem?

a ha hahahahhahahah

Abookamongstthemany

CorporateWhore wrote:

Why do women want to re-enter the workforce? What's the great thrill in that?

Is a woman's potential limited when she cares for children? Doubtful. That is one of the most difficult jobs there is.

How about just letting them decide what they want.

Abookamongstthemany

CorporateWhore wrote:

So essentially, feminism is bullshit. It's just a polyglot of squabbling women who have no idea what they feel but they sure know that a psychiatrist and some midol will fix the problem?

a ha hahahahhahahah

People don't all fit into these nice little boxes of singled mindedness as you'd like to believe.

hippiemom

CorporateWhore wrote:

Why do women want to re-enter the workforce? What's the great thrill in that?

Good question. Why do YOU want to enter the workforce?

VictoryGin

CorporateWhore wrote:

So essentially, feminism is bullshit. It's just a polyglot of squabbling women who have no idea what they feel but they sure know that a psychiatrist and some midol will fix the problem?

a ha hahahahhahahah

well this speaks volumes. it seems ignorance is bliss.

CorporateWhore

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

How about just letting them decide what they want.

Hell, I'm all for a woman deciding what she wants to do. By all means, don't get married at all. But if she gets married, I think the best decision is for her to take care of the kids until they're ready to go to school. That's best for kids. Kids need moms when they're little, not dads.

That said, I could be a stay-at-home dad if that's what it took. If women want to work that badly and see out their own potential, fine! I'll sit at home, wrestle with the kids, feed them, watch ESPN, and drink beers. During naps I could ride my mountain bike.

Feminism just seems very selfish to me. It's all about what women want and not what men want too.

qtegirl

CorporateWhore wrote:

Is a woman's potential limited when she cares for children? Doubtful. That is one of the most difficult jobs there is.

You can take my words and twist them around as much as you want.

I didn't say anything like that in my post, go back and read it.

A woman's potential is hindered when she sees her male coleagues making more money than her for doing the exact same job.

It is hindered when she can't or won't put 12 hrs a day of work because she wants to be home with her children.

It is hindered when her family takes a huge financial hit because her work as a mother and wife is not compensated.

CorporateWhore

VictoryGin wrote:

well this speaks volumes. it seems ignorance is bliss.

You just referred me to a word and the internet. You should explain more or I won't bother looking up words.

I've already looked it up on wikipedia. I'm looking for a more personal take on the issue.

CorporateWhore

qtegirl wrote:

You can take my words and twist them around as much as you want.

I didn't say anything like that in my post, go back and read it.

A woman's potential is hindered when she sees her male coleagues making more money than her for doing the exact same job.

It is hindered when she can't or won't put 12 hrs a day of work because she wants to be home with her children.

It is hindered when her family takes a huge financial hit because her work as a mother and wife is not compensated.

Well, sure, I agree if a woman does equal work, she should get equal compensation. We're heading in that direction. Still, is that the only issue for women left? After that, will feminism no longer have a purpose?

CorporateWhore

hippiemom wrote:

Good question. Why do YOU want to enter the workforce?

Well, after I have kids, that decision would be up to me and my wife. I'd want to re-enter the workforce if I could make more money than her. If she could make more than me, then she'd re-enter the workforce. It's a purely financial question. Someone needs to take care of the kids, though.

hippiemom

CorporateWhore wrote:

Well, after I have kids, that decision would be up to me and my wife. I'd want to re-enter the workforce if I could make more money than her. If she could make more than me, then she'd re-enter the workforce. It's a purely financial question. Someone needs to take care of the kids, though.

Excellent! And after other people have kids, that decision will be up to them, and they will base it on the criteria they find most important.

That was easy, wasn't it?

CorporateWhore

hippiemom wrote:

Excellent! And after other people have kids, that decision will be up to them, and they will base it on the criteria they find most important.

That was easy, wasn't it?

What other criteria would they possibly use?

Emotional?

Hahahahaa

hippiemom

CorporateWhore wrote:

What other criteria would they possibly use?

Emotional?

Hahahahaa

I know that you don't honestly believe that every family is exactly like yours and should base their decisions on the exact things you do, and reach the same conclusions that you do.

You DON'T believe that, do you?

surferdude

My only gripe with feminism, but they are very upfront about it, is that they aren't for equal rights. They are for equal rights for women where women currently get the short end of the stick. In general, there seems to be no interest in equal rights where women have the upper hand.

CorporateWhore

hippiemom wrote:

I know that you don't honestly believe that every family is exactly like yours and should base their decisions on the exact things you do, and reach the same conclusions that you do.

You DON'T believe that, do you?

Certainly not, but EVERYONE needs a job. Everyone has an income that must provide for the welfare of their family. Why should a woman work if the man makes more? Why should a man work if the woman makes more?

angelica

surferdude wrote:

My only gripe with feminism, but they are very upfront about it, is that they aren't for equal rights. They are for equal rights for women where women currently get the short end of the stick. In general, there seems to be no interest in equal rights where women have the upper hand.

Could you give me an example, please? So you are saying they are for empowerment of one whose rights are not on par with others. And that they are not as much for infringing on people's empowerment?

CorporateWhore

angelica wrote:

Could you give me an example, please? So you are saying they are for empowerment of one whose rights are not on par with others. And that they are not as much for infringing on people's empowerment?

Hooters.