 
Support Wrong Planet Awareness!
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Dantac
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 22, 2008
Age: 31
Posts: 618
Location: Florida
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:39 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
I support gender equality but not feminism.
Feminism is nothing but an ideology that tries to achieve equality while maintaining or gaining special privileges due to their gender.
That is why it is disastrous.
A few simple examples:
Abortion rights: The man has no say. Period. Last I checked it was 50% of his DNA too. When legislation was tried to be passed that stated that if both parents wanted abortion it could be done, that if the mother wanted abortion and father did not then the mother would be obliged to bear the child and thereafter have no legal claim to the child (father is responsible)... and likewise when the mother wanted the child and the father did not. Legislation failed because of the 'woman choice' issue not due to the abortion.
Maternity Leave: The guy gets screwed as legally he doesn't receive time to be with his newborn child and wife. I believe some European countries do have this but not the USA.
Child Support: In most states the law will not prosecute women who fail to pay child support. However all states prosecute men who fail to pay child support.
Minority status: Women are legally held as minorities in the eyes of the law. Yet... they are 50% of the population.
Employment: By law companies must hire a certain % of minorities (the highest % being gender not ethnicity) which force companies to accept under-qualified female employees where there is a highly qualified male for the same position. Please note this is because of the MINORITY status and set laws.
...amongst others. The feminist movement in the 60's through the 80's pushed a lot of these laws and regulations into writing.. and when some are brought up to be amended it causes a media uproar where you have everything from Ellen to Oprah to the starbucks coffee waitress screaming to have their unequal privileges upheld while at the same time whining about gender inequality.
Its a crazy world >< |
|
| Back to top |
|
HH
Deinonychus
Joined: Oct 29, 2009
Posts: 316
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 3:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ROFL. Yet another dude terrified of not being specially protected against facing actual competition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
WhiskeyInTheJar
Blue Jay
Joined: Oct 24, 2009
Posts: 83
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thank heavens I have a Thai lassie!
_________________
"God is dead". Nietzsche
"Nietzsche is dead". God |
|
| Back to top |
|
WhiskeyInTheJar
Blue Jay
Joined: Oct 24, 2009
Posts: 83
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| HH wrote: | | Your tagline made me laugh out loud. |
That's the beautiful thing about the Thai. They respect a man.
_________________
"God is dead". Nietzsche
"Nietzsche is dead". God |
|
| Back to top |
|
techstepgenr8tion
that chatty American
Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Age: 30
Posts: 7167
Location: The fine world of insomnia and coffee
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just to add two more cents - equality is a good aim, some amount of specialization though we may not want to remove (such as that there are female dominated fields as well as male dominated fields - I do think that's healthy to an extent in that it takes advantage of natural skill sets that differ across gender, the only one of these of course that I sometimes worry about is teaching, guys have a difficulty growing into 'men' without good role models).
While both genders should be taken with equal wait and value/consequentiality as human beings, I do think its a problem lets say when a well known professor at Harvard is fired over offending some in the audience for saying in so many words in an address that men and women are different. The problem - breaking from reality, when philosophical leaders of a culture feel like they need to overstear their policy and claims into non-reality for the sake of rapid or more impressed corrections - the people they're trying to serve in quickening the pace of that movement may or may not be able to see between the lines. When they can, they're likely annoyed by it, when they can't and lets say with certain brands of feminism buy the idea that gender is completely cultured and that men could play with dolls and women with trucks and simply program children out of gender identity - they're dangerously naive views and what that ultimately does for someone who believes it, they're tactics in dealing with the world around them are rendered ineffective because what they think is reality - isn't. Thus, either gender, if they don't get what's going on they're apt to slip and fall quite hard.
Ultimately feminism seeking equality was a good thing - though on some larger cultural angles its fallen on a lot of epistemic problems when its made attempts to completely sanitize the concept of gender or claim that there is absolutely no inherent differences between the sexes. I'm hoping that given another ten or twenty years when the 1960's are that much farther back and the environment of equality is much more matured - that this kind of thing will stabilize out on its own. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Goren
Butterfly
Joined: Nov 07, 2009
Age: 27
Posts: 11
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lol, I always thought that aspies, of all people, are the ones one would expect to be especially good with rigorous definitions and logical constructions based on those definitions. But what do we see here? Almost three pages of discussion, yet the subject of discussion is not even defined! What exactly do you mean under feminism? Whom exactly do you call feminists? It appears that you are all talking about different things, no wonder that discussion is going nowhere!
First of all, feminism has not, and never had, anything to do with equality. The movement for equality is called egalitarism. Feminism, as the name implies, is movement for women and in interests of women. Otherwise, there would be no reason why it wouldn't be called masculism, for example. I find the definition found in wikipedia most appropriate:
| Quote: | | The term Feminism can be used to describe a political, cultural or economic movement aimed at establishing more rights and legal protection for women |
Let's stick with this. Thus, the function of feminism is to try to gain more rights and legal protection for women than they already have. So the question basically boils down to whether they need more. In my experience, in most developed countries women already have more rights and legal protection than men. Some examples are already given in Dantac's post, and there are many more if you dig around. If you think otherwise, counter-examples are welcome. Meanwhile, I see no reason why giving the privileged gender even more privileges would be in any way beneficial to any individual or the society as a whole. |
|
| Back to top |
|
MissConstrue
Has left WP.
![]()
Joined: Feb 05, 2008
Posts: 16635
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
The definition for th word feminism I got is...A doctrine that advocates equal rights for women. and The movement aimed at equal rights for women.
I agree I don't think women should get special priveledges but what special priveledges are we talking about here?
At a time women were not allowed the same rights as men so it sometimes confuses me whenever I hear women getting special treatment or having it her way. What is this special treatment you guys talk about?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Goren
Butterfly
Joined: Nov 07, 2009
Age: 27
Posts: 11
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The definition for th word feminism I got is...A doctrine that advocates equal rights for women. and The movement aimed at equal rights for women. |
Equal to whom? Can't you see that this definition is incomplete: something can't be just "equal", equality is not a property, but a relationship. You can say A=B, but not just A=. Do you mean that feminism is the movement for equal rights for men and women? Most certainly it is not, otherwise there would be no feminists in US, Europe or any developed countries for that matter. Or is feminism, in your opinion, a movement, that aims that all women have equal rights as in any woman has the same rights as any other woman? It is certainly not about this either, and mostly feminists do not concern themselves with problems of social inequality at all.
I think, for once people in Wikipedia have got it right. Feminism is just what it is saying: the movement that aims more rights for women. Not "equal" to anything, but more than they have now. And the whole question is whether it is beneficial to society to give women more rights. There were, and still are, some situations, where women have less rights than men, and in those situation giving them more would be a good thing. For example, somewhere in Iran or Afghanistan I would totally support local feminists. But, as I said, now in most parts of developed world it is not the case. In most parts of Europe, US and here in NZ women already have more rights, privileges and legal protection than men. In those parts of the world feminists just add to inequality. There's nothing good about this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Yagaloth
Deinonychus
Joined: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 348
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 10:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
"I've half a mind to join a club and beat you over the head with it." - Groucho Marx
The term "feminism" is such a broad umbrella right now, it's difficult to talk about it rationally without devoting an entire book to clarifications and special cases.
I think that since the 1960's, the movement was infiltrated by communists who were using it as a wedge to divide nations using such notions as "all sex is rape", "all men are rapists", "marriage is slavery", "happiness can only be gained by acting like the worst men", "the sexes are not equal, but rather identical", "past problems can only be repaired by gaining as many special privileges as possible", and so on. There's a point where what gets called "feminism" stops helping women, and starts doing them a disservice by creating more damage than it repairs.
It's not just feminism, either - I can see the same sort of problems come up from time to time on WrongPlanet, but substitute aspies for women: "all social interaction is coercion", "all NT's are sadistic members of a mob or swarm", "relationships are slavery", "happiness can only be gained by acting like the worst NT's", "we need special accommodations and privileges just to get by in school and work", and so on. I don't think this sort of over-reaction is healthy for aspies any more than it has been healthy for women, and I can see a time coming where, if aspie activism is carried out to its logical conclusion, it will only deepen and fortify the gulfs between "us" and "them", and actually weaken our credibility as individuals worthy of being treated as equals. |
|
| Back to top |
|
techstepgenr8tion
that chatty American
Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Age: 30
Posts: 7167
Location: The fine world of insomnia and coffee
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 11:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Goren wrote: |
I think, for once people in Wikipedia have got it right. Feminism is just what it is saying: the movement that aims more rights for women. Not "equal" to anything, but more than they have now. And the whole question is whether it is beneficial to society to give women more rights. There were, and still are, some situations, where women have less rights than men, and in those situation giving them more would be a good thing. For example, somewhere in Iran or Afghanistan I would totally support local feminists. But, as I said, now in most parts of developed world it is not the case. In most parts of Europe, US and here in NZ women already have more rights, privileges and legal protection than men. In those parts of the world feminists just add to inequality. There's nothing good about this. |
I think its really in denouement right now, as in women who were passionate about this are looking for ground to step out onto. I think the case needs to be made though that societal currents don't start easily or quickly, nor do they die that quickly either. The 1960's were technically, although before I was born, very much a blink of an eye ago in a historical sense. Its because of that I think that its been tapering down slowly since the 1970's and its still there in forms but its definitely not what it was, primarily because of what you and Yagaloth have both pointed out - its achieved most of its goals and possibly then some.
| Yagaloth wrote: | | I think that since the 1960's, the movement was infiltrated by communists who were using it as a wedge to divide nations using such notions as "all sex is rape", "all men are rapists", "marriage is slavery", "happiness can only be gained by acting like the worst men", "the sexes are not equal, but rather identical", "past problems can only be repaired by gaining as many special privileges as possible", and so on. There's a point where what gets called "feminism" stops helping women, and starts doing them a disservice by creating more damage than it repairs. |
Communism tried to get into the racial civil rights movement as well, the worst travesty is that African Americans went from slavery to Jim Crow to then, when they were gaining ground for their equality - having snake oil salesmen, like Saul Alinsky, start influencing their ranks. Thankfully though, in the case of both feminism and the racial equality movement, it only went so far - socially right now there still is somewhat of a political lockstep in political party affiliation (though it is slowly starting to erode), at the most there's a taste for European stateism in these groups, I'd like to think that another twenty or thirty years will give the situation that much more improvement. |
|
| Back to top |
|
MONKEY
Mermaid fanatic
Joined: Jan 04, 2009
Age: 16
Posts: 2314
Location: The moon
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
They did good with equality, now men and women are pretty much equal nowadays, but it seems this era's feminists are the radical ones that go beyond the equal rights feminism and into the realms of saying women are actually superior and all that. I'm female and the modern feminists are annoying in my opinion, I like the old ones though, they're the ones that actually made a difference where as the 21st centrury feminists are just wasting their time since inequality in the western world has pretty much passed. What they should be focusing on now is middle eastern/asian countries where men are aloud to beat their wives just because it's what the kuran told them.
And there still are some women now that do want to look after the kids at home but the radical feminists throw b***h fits about it.
_________________
... Maybe he thought you were ugly |
|
| Back to top |
|
makuranososhi
Purple Monkey Dishwasher
Joined: May 13, 2008
Posts: 4718
Location: Transitional
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yagaloth wrote: | "I've half a mind to join a club and beat you over the head with it." - Groucho Marx
The term "feminism" is such a broad umbrella right now, it's difficult to talk about it rationally without devoting an entire book to clarifications and special cases.
I think that since the 1960's, the movement was infiltrated by communists who were using it as a wedge to divide nations using such notions as "all sex is rape", "all men are rapists", "marriage is slavery", "happiness can only be gained by acting like the worst men", "the sexes are not equal, but rather identical", "past problems can only be repaired by gaining as many special privileges as possible", and so on. There's a point where what gets called "feminism" stops helping women, and starts doing them a disservice by creating more damage than it repairs.
It's not just feminism, either - I can see the same sort of problems come up from time to time on WrongPlanet, but substitute aspies for women: "all social interaction is coercion", "all NT's are sadistic members of a mob or swarm", "relationships are slavery", "happiness can only be gained by acting like the worst NT's", "we need special accommodations and privileges just to get by in school and work", and so on. I don't think this sort of over-reaction is healthy for aspies any more than it has been healthy for women, and I can see a time coming where, if aspie activism is carried out to its logical conclusion, it will only deepen and fortify the gulfs between "us" and "them", and actually weaken our credibility as individuals worthy of being treated as equals. |
Godwin's Law gets invoked often; it was curious to see McCarthy's Law put to use.
M.
_________________
He thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
From my heart and from my hand, why don't people understand my intentions...?
Wrong Planet Moderator |
|
| Back to top |
|
Larnad
Emu Egg
Joined: Nov 07, 2009
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ack, this is painful. But I'm not going to waste my time arguing with myopic babies.
Just keep this in mind: Feminism is a social movement, not a best friend or a mother. It does not have to say nice things to you or nurture your interests. It is only there to liberate and give voice to women. Just like the gay rights movement is to gays and the civil rights movement is to racial minorities... feminism is to women. I'm male-identified and I can see and accept that without feeling threatened.
Feminists are amazing. I'm proud to be one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Yagaloth
Deinonychus
Joined: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 348
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| makuranososhi wrote: | Godwin's Law gets invoked often; it was curious to see McCarthy's Law put to use.
M. |
Only a Marxist would accuse me of using McCarthy's Law, which proves my point: McCarthy was a Communist agent! 
Seriously, in my experience the folks who have outright identified themselves as socialists, communists, and marxists have been the most likely to insist on the model of "all normal human relationships are oppression" and "the only response is to annoy everyone else". I'm pretty sure the point is to make as big a mess out of things as possible, to set things up for communism to fix all the problems its supporters have caused. I used to be a rank-and-file communist and listened to way too much of that nonsense  |
|
| Back to top |
|
Goren
Butterfly
Joined: Nov 07, 2009
Age: 27
Posts: 11
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 7:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Feminism is a social movement, not a best friend or a mother. It does not have to say nice things to you or nurture your interests. It is only there to liberate and give voice to women. |
So, this goal is achieved. Women are liberated and have a voice - at least, more voice than men, that's for sure. Why does it stay there? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
