Feminism

CorporateWhore wrote:

I'll sit at home, wrestle with the kids, feed them, watch ESPN, and drink beers. During naps I could ride my mountain bike.

How naive!

surferdude wrote:

Custody and child support arrangements. The number of shelters for abused women and children versus the number for abused men and children. Possibly the new Ontario ruling that a child may have more than two parents named on a birth certificate.

Overall I believe there is more work to bring women equality than men, but that desn't change the fact that feminism does not seem interested in addressing equality issues where women have the upper hand. Also feminism and the current social structures basically completely ignore childrens' rights.

So your issue is that feminism focusses on it's issue and not on other issues? Isn't your actual issue then that men's groups are not doing enough to empower men?

CorporateWhore wrote:

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?

sometime it's not always about money... who would have a better work schedule? who would have the best commute? who's benefits and vacation plans are better? these are all subjective, like the decision of who goes to work in the first place is. Maybe both parents can work... maybe finacially both parents have to work...

like most issues, it's not as cut and dry or as black and white as you try to make it.

surferdude wrote:

A little of that but I think the idea of equality is lost when you only care about equality when you are the shafted party.

Is that like saying that a focus on helping the poor is giving free reign to oppressors? Isn't helping the poor, or unempowered women good in of itself? In my view, decent productive acts cannot be minimized.

Men have helped women on their fight towards equality because of a belief in equality not because they wanted to get anything out of it other than hopefully a better, fairer society. This idea of equality being the goal is basically lost in feminism as it currently happens.

In my own growth and healing, I've read numerous books on feminism that were about doing what worked. For example, I read books about healing domestic abuse issues that taught ME to own how I contributed to the cycles (which I continually perpetuated in relationship after relationship, fueling the abuse). It was the practical help that taught me how NOT to play victim that helped me actually break the cycles. And this help exists in feminism in a non-blaming-men way. We can't pretend it does not exist. Many of my own interpersonal skills come from this school of thought.

Men's group are definitely not doing enough to fight the battles where men get shafted. But they are not funded by all levels of government either. It is not a fair or balanced battled field.

I'm all for empowering men's issues and for supporting men's groups. As I am for anyone in any situation where they are being treated unfairly. I see it as an entirely separate issue from what is being done for women. I also think discerning where the actual problems are is half of the solution in solving them.

surferdude wrote:

A little of that but I think the idea of equality is lost when you only care about equality when you are the shafted party. Men have helped women on their fight towards equality because of a belief in equality not because they wanted to get anything out of it other than hopefully a better, fairer society. This idea of equality being the goal is basically lost in feminism as it currently happens.

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!

chopitdown wrote:

i have no issue with feminism as long as they don't look down on women who stay home with their kids and not enter the workforce

I agree. I've been frowned upon by many people in society by being a stay at home mom. Not just feminists. But I do get very annoyed when feminists become the enemy to women and attempt to limit choice.

and as long as they're for EQUAL rights.

So you can't accept when they are for women's rights?

angelica wrote:

So you can't accept when they are for women's rights?

What the hell is a "woman's right"? What does the word "woman" add to that?

angelica wrote:

I agree. I've been frowned upon by many people in society by being a stay at home mom. Not just feminists. But I do get very annoyed when feminists become the enemy to women and attempt to limit choice.

So you can't accept when they are for women's rights?

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.

farfromglorified wrote:

Empowerment over what?

Personal empowerment. Being empowered. Authentically. Minus the "over what". Kinda how you like empowerment in your life and dislike being limited by infringing external forces that are not authentically based.

You're barking up the wrong tree on the "rights" thing here. My slant here, is much more psychological and vague by general standards.

cutback wrote:

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

Sure.