Feminism

chopitdown

qtegirl wrote:

Feminists are fighting so that if women do choose to stay home, they are compensated for this valuable work. And if they choose to go back to work, they can find affordable, high quality child care.

i agree, society needs to do something to help parents. We have a generation of kids who really can't be reared by their parents for one reason or another. It's a shame that we as society can't figure something reasonable out.

surferdude

cutback wrote:

Isn't that a personal thing? Can't we all have equal rights and all be empowered?

Sure, just don't look to the feminist movement to provide this or try to provide this. Much like a patriarchal society doesn't provide or try to provide equality, neither does/would a feminist society.

angelica

farfromglorified wrote:

Personal empowerment would mean having power over yourself. And I'm completely down with that as a basic human right. However, some feminists don't want to stop there. They want power over others, as well as themselves. That's where they lose me.

Okay. I'm totally with you about personal power being having authentic inner power. Most or maybe all of the "women's issues" I've had stemmed from not having this inner authentic power. Therefore that's what my focus is about--authentic power.

norm

angelica wrote:

Sure.

I thought that's what you meant, but the post, to me, seemed a little vague.:)

surferdude

qtegirl wrote:

Man, you're really talking from the point of view of the dominant group.

This whole thing that men help women out of the goodness of their hearts, not because they're trying to get something out of it? Really? Is that why it took so long for women to get the right to vote? Is that why it took a WHOLE movement to do it? Men didn't do it out of the goodness of their heart, they did it because women wouldn't be silenced anymore!

Cough, cough,***bullshit***, cough. Feminism can't even speak with a unified voice for themselves but you feel you can speak for all men. Gine me a break.

I have no power over generations of men long dead. So I accept no responsibility for their actions, much like I don't expect women to accept responsibility for ever letting it become unequal.

angelica

chopitdown wrote:

I guess what i was more implying with my second statement was they aren't for hosing men just to get ahead...as men shouldn't be about hosing women to get ahead. I'm all for maternal / paternal leave. I'm all for women's rights; I think we as a society should respect that we have men and women and whether we want to agree with it or not there are certain roles that only one gender can perform and society should support those roles and not penalize people.

I agree. (except for the "hosing" part since it's an expression I'm not overly familiar with. )

VictoryGin

surferdude wrote:

Sure, just don't look to the feminist movement to provide this or try to provide this. Much like a patriarchal society doesn't provide or try to provide equality, neither does/would a feminist society.

feminism is about equality. patriarchy is about the subordination of those who are not male.

farfromglorified

VictoryGin wrote:

feminism is about equality.

Can I see your draft card?

VictoryGin

farfromglorified wrote:

Can I see your draft card?

well we aren't in that feminist society quite yet, eh?

farfromglorified

VictoryGin wrote:

well we aren't in that feminist society quite yet, eh?

Touche

angelica

cutback wrote:

I thought that's what you meant, but the post, to me, seemed a little vague.:)

Yeah, my issue in this debate is that some people seem to be saying that we need to seek equal rights or else being for women's rights is somehow invalidated. I see it's valid to look at the context of women's empowerment without also looking at men's empowerment because there are many contexts where this "look" is needed. And then it becomes another issue looking at men's empowerment, where needed, or human empowerment in general. It depends on the context and any productive movement is valid and constructive in my view.

Abookamongstthemany

farfromglorified wrote:

Can I see your draft card?

Did you sign up at 18? My brother never did.

farfromglorified

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

Did you sign up at 18?

Of course. Many guns assured that I did:

http://www.sss.gov/FSbenefits.htm

My brother never did.

Cool.

lalalalaaaaaaaa

angelica wrote:

Yeah, my issue in this debate is that some people seem to be saying that we need to seek equal rights or else being for women's rights is somehow invalidated. I see it's valid to look at the context of women's empowerment without also looking at men's empowerment because there are many contexts where this "look" is needed. And then it becomes another issue looking at men's empowerment, where needed, or human empowerment in general. It depends on the context and any productive movement is valid and constructive in my view.

I think movements like femenism, civil rights, etc. come about because people are concerned about what is affecting THEM. So it just makes sense to focus your efforts on what affects you the most. Nothing wrong with that, and it makes more sense. You cannot seriously fight against every type of injustice affecting every type of person. You have to focus somewhere, and let other people focus on other areas. That usually leads to some kind of synergy where multiple groups will eventually combine their efforts in some way to help all their situations. The 60's is a good example of this...many players involved there like femenists, blacks, environmentalists, students, etc....and some fairly large changes were made, even though those in power try to downplay their accomplishments in the history books.

angelica

Saturnal wrote:

I think the way movements like femenism, civil rights, etc. come about because people are concerned about what is affecting THEM. So it just makes sense to focus your efforts on what affects you the most. Nothing wrong with that, and it makes more sense. You cannot seriously fight against every type of injustice affecting every type of person. You have to focus somewhere, and let other people focus on other areas. That usually leads to some kind of synergy where multiple groups will eventually combine their efforts in some way to help all their situations. The 60's is a good example of this...many players involved there like femenists, blacks, environmentalists, students, etc....and some fairly large changes were made, even though those in power try to downplay their accomplishments in the history books.

I completely agree.

And that synergy can become an amazing power when people are working constructively and therefore moving in the right direction. Even the synergy within constructive, authentically empowering groups before joining forces with other groups.

miller8966

VictoryGin wrote:

feminism is about equality. patriarchy is about the subordination of those who are not male.

women do rule.......the kitchen

Abookamongstthemany

farfromglorified wrote:

Of course. Many guns assured that I did:

http://www.sss.gov/FSbenefits.htm

They never did anything to my brother.

farfromglorified

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

So you chose to sign for the benefit of owning many unloaded guns.

Hehe...I didn't see that on their list of "benefits". It is nice to know that in exchange for signing over my body to act as bullet fodder, I get to participate in "The Workforce Investment Act" wherein I can learn to be an auto mechanic!

They never did anything to my brother.

Let's hope it stays that way.

Abookamongstthemany

farfromglorified wrote:

Hehe...I didn't see that on their list of "benefits". It is nice to know that in exchange for signing over my body to act as bullet fodder, I get to participate in "The Workforce Investment Act" wherein I can learn to be an auto mechanic!



Let's hope it stays that way.

For a minute there I thought you were saying you had to sign to buy a gun...but then I thought there's no way, so I looked.

Jeanwah

miller8966 wrote:

women do rule.......the kitchen

Obviously trying to start a fight. Obviously a male chauvanist.