What is Modern Feminism about?

nota bene said:

No, sir. I am a feminist, and I never stood for the treatment of Palin. Please don't confuse feminists with "feminazis," a tiny but strident minority. And don't forget that it has only been within our lifetimes, that women working outside the home and having careers and earning equal pay for equal work has become acceptable. Dammit.

Click to expand...

Consternate all you like, ma'am, but the "feminists" went after Sarah Palin like sharks in a feeding frenzy. The "movement" is nothing more than political activism designed to win votes for the Left Wing party.

Bodhisattva said:

No offense RM... but damn boy! What a hissy fit! :lol:

Click to expand...

He doesn't like me because I disagree with him on almost everything. He must not be aware that I disagree with everyone on almost everything.

Bodhisattva said:

They are distinctly different from one another. I claim that they are all delusions, not that they are the same.

Click to expand...

how are they distinctly different? do you think trans people should be medicated in a similar fashion to bi-polar people and schizophrenic people? maybe some of that good old conversion therapy they use on teh gayz

Bodhisattva said:

I am pretty objective, as far as people go and the "credential" argument? In general that works but not in this case and not in all cases. I am not a lawyer yet I have self-represented and won against lawyers twice now. So much for those lawyerly "Credentials"

Click to expand...

i dont care for your anecdotes. they are about as useful to me as it would be to you for me to say "i know a psychologist who believes trans people arent delusional"

Bodhisattva said:

Even though there are some observable changes nothing is conclusive as many men born with the same neurological changes remain men and do not think of themselves as women.

Click to expand...

do you have a link or any proof for this?

Bodhisattva said:

Great. Thanks for the Red Herring.

Click to expand...

he didn't have to mention the government. he said i was against free speech, but i have no ability to control speech nor would i find it useful to stifle it. the government on the other hand...

instagramsci said:

no, you didnt. but someone's free speech isnt being restricted because someone is mocked in the media. it would be if the government was suppressing someone's ability to speak freely

Click to expand...

Allowing people to speak their mind and beating them on the merit of their ideas is how a society weeds out bad ideas. Just shutting people up doesn't make you right or your ideology worth putting into practice.

instagramsci said:

maybe some of that good old conversion therapy they use on teh gayz

Click to expand...

Are you homophobic and a bigot?

how are they distinctly different? do you think trans people should be medicated in a similar fashion to bi-polar people and schizophrenic people?

Click to expand...

How are they distinctly different? Do you think they are the same then?

i dont care for your anecdotes. they are about as useful to me as it would be to you for me to say "i know a psychologist who believes trans people arent delusional"

Click to expand...

My anecdote was my way of saying that your misunderstanding and reliance on credentials is meaningless and useless... glad we are on the same page now...

do you have a link or any proof for this?

Click to expand...

Nope. It is an argument by our resident psychologist Captain Courtesy. He has links that he thinks are "proof" though. He is also on your side regarding this. His arguments are simply guesses...

instagramsci said:

he didn't have to mention the government. he said i was against free speech, but i have no ability to control speech nor would i find it useful to stifle it. the government on the other hand...

Click to expand...

Shouting people down is clearly something you endorsed when you spoke of Palin.

instagramsci said:

he didn't have to mention the government. he said i was against free speech, but i have no ability to control speech nor would i find it useful to stifle it. the government on the other hand...

Click to expand...

Your ability to control it is irrelevant to you being against free speech...

Henrin said:

He doesn't like me because I disagree with him on almost everything. He must not be aware that I disagree with everyone on almost everything.

Click to expand...

I don't know... you and I are aligned on a few things. I disagree with RM on a LOT.

Henrin said:

Allowing people to speak their mind and beating them on the merit of their ideas is how a society weeds out bad ideas

Click to expand...

then does libertarianism still exist? :mrgreen:

Henrin said:

Just shutting people up doesn't make you right or your ideology worth putting into practice.

Click to expand...

im not making them shut up. they can continue to express whatever they want but im not against them being mocked

Henrin said:

Shouting people down is clearly something you endorsed when you spoke of Palin.

Click to expand...

what do you think free speech is?

instagramsci said:

then does libertarianism still exist? :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

The only reason it grows at all anymore is because some people want to be free and they talk to each other about it.

im not making them shut up. they can continue to express whatever they want but im not against them being mocked

Click to expand...

Mocking people is many times used by those that lack an argument or want the opposition to shut up. If you're opposed to her ideas on abortion then challenge her to a debate and show the world that she is wrong. Use her popularity against her instead of just calling her names because she's pretty.

Bodhisattva said:

Are you homophobic and a bigot?

Click to expand...

nope. i am actually almost as gay as gay can be. im saying that gays were also once accused of being delusional. its not much different in this case

Bodhisattva said:

How are they distinctly different? Do you think they are the same then?

Click to expand...

i dont think they are the same. i think they are different because i dont believe in biological essentialism

Bodhisattva said:

Nope. It is an argument by our resident psychologist Captain Courtesy. He has links that he thinks are "proof" though. He is also on your side regarding this. His arguments are simply guesses...

Click to expand...

i havent seen you post anything that supports your "side". just accusations of delusion and comparisons to bi-polarness and schizophrenia

Feminism is a crock. The world was a better place when women were women and didn't try to act like men.

Giving women the right to vote was a mistake.

Family law is a joke and for the most part, totally favors women and does nothing to actually strengthen families.

Employment laws that force employers to hire women over other candidates who might be better qualified is a crock.

Basically, we've gone backward since the 1950's and it would be nice to see us go back to a more traditional way of viewing the genders.

Peter Grimm said:

Feminism is a crock. The world was a better place when women were women and didn't try to act like men.

Giving women the right to vote was a mistake.

Family law is a joke and for the most part, totally favors women and does nothing to actually strengthen families.

Employment laws that force employers to hire women over other candidates who might be better qualified is a crock.

Basically, we've gone backward since the 1950's and it would be nice to see us go back to a more traditional way of viewing the genders.

Click to expand...

^ This is the type of guy that leads women to become mysandrists . . . just in case anyone hadn't realized that.

Such behavior is antiquated. Yet it's prevalent and women have to deal with it often. I suppose it's like black people still being called nigger by the bumbling redneck racists in the world. Modern day trash spewed from lowly mouths and empty brains.

cpgrad08 said:

So what does everyone think about Modern Feminism?

I personally think it is not about about equal rights for women but more a movement to bring down men and make women superior to men in the eyes of the law.

Click to expand...

Who wants that and why?

It makes no more sense than keeping any other group of people down...bad for society overall. However when people are used to a certain status quo (is that redundant?), they often resent...sometimes not even recognize...what they see as entitlement being challenged.

Similar to some whites view of equal rights for blacks.

Aunt Spiker said:

^ This is the type of guy that leads women to become mysandrists . . . just in case anyone hadn't realized that.

Such behavior is antiquated. Yet it's prevalent and women have to deal with it often. I suppose it's like black people still being called nigger by the bumbling redneck racists in the world. Modern day trash spewed from lowly mouths and empty brains.

Click to expand...

Tsk. So much name-calling, so little substance.

Whereas I can back up every claim I made with facts and data. At the end of the day, voting should be limited to one vote per pair, family law should be rolled back to where it doesn't ENCOURAGE divorce and bad behavior, and employees should be able to hire the most qualified candidate without having to meet arbitrary quotas designed to artificially prop up certain demographics.

Peter Grimm said:

Tsk. So much name-calling, so little substance.

Whereas I can back up every claim I made with facts and data. At the end of the day, voting should be limited to one vote per pair, family law should be rolled back to where it doesn't ENCOURAGE divorce and bad behavior, and employees should be able to hire the most qualified candidate without having to meet arbitrary quotas designed to artificially prop up certain demographics.

Click to expand...

So single women shouldnt vote? Or women 18 before marriage? Do these single women need to own property first too?

(Gonna be fun with mail in votes...whoever picks up the mail that day votes! Or does it have to be the male's signature?)

Yes, I would like to see all that backed up by facts and data.

Peter Grimm said:

Feminism is a crock. The world was a better place when women were women and didn't try to act like men.

Giving women the right to vote was a mistake.

Family law is a joke and for the most part, totally favors women and does nothing to actually strengthen families.

Employment laws that force employers to hire women over other candidates who might be better qualified is a crock.

Basically, we've gone backward since the 1950's and it would be nice to see us go back to a more traditional way of viewing the genders.

Click to expand...

wow dude... those are some ugly words.

you oughta put some deep thought into them .. cuz' that **** ain't right at all.

Aunt Spiker said:

^ This is the type of guy that leads women to become mysandrists . . . just in case anyone hadn't realized that.

Such behavior is antiquated. Yet it's prevalent and women have to deal with it often. I suppose it's like black people still being called nigger by the bumbling redneck racists in the world. Modern day trash spewed from lowly mouths and empty brains.

Click to expand...

I don't share all the poster's opinions, but I agree with some of what he said. And I don't think that means I am spewing trash, or that I have either a lowly mouth or an empty brain. I also don't think I suffer from antiquated behavior, unless (maybe so!) it's now seen as antiquated for a man to be attracted only to women.

I've sometimes made women pretty mad at me, but they liked guys far too much for me ever to have turned them into man-haters. And it was not my views on feminism that made them mad.

I don't like women to try to act like men, either. As a normal man, I like women who act like women--i.e. nice people who are pleasant and interesting to be around, like all sorts of girly things that bore me stiff, really like men, have minds of their own--and are not carrying a chip on their shoulder.

Why does the posters' denunciation of laws that force employers to hire women even though male candidates might be better qualified, assuming there are laws which do that, deserve the insults you heaped on his post? Maybe you don't think preferential treatment of women exists. But if you think it does and yet are trying to defend it, you're only proving the OP's point.

There is no question that states continue to favor black applicants in their graduate admissions policies for state schools. I can't prove the same happens with female applicants, or in a private rather than public setting, but what I saw and heard in graduate school and in a couple law offices makes me strongly suspect it.

This poster is hardly the first person to claim that family law in general stacks the deck against men, does not strengthen families, and needs to be reformed. I'd go so far as to say that's pretty widely recognized by people who have studied the matter--including many women.

It would be interesting to recognize that mothers being favored in the courts regarding custody and children's issues is based on tradition in the Western world, not feminism.

And it's worth noting the trend in the courts towards taking father's rights more into consideration regarding those same issues....as they are recognizing the same thing and attempting to rectify things 'despite' feminism and in favor of men. Equality there is recognized goal.

cpgrad08 said:

So what does everyone think about Modern Feminism?

I personally think it is not about about equal rights for women but more a movement to bring down men and make women superior to men in the eyes of the law.

Click to expand...

I don't think modern feminism has any idea what it's about anymore, because it is facing the point in a rights movement that every movement gets confused over: broadening of issues and re-integration of identity.

I know where I'm currently aiming, as a feminist: women's, men's, and LGBT issues need to reintegrate as a gender conversation, focusing on expectation, communication, and responsibility. It seems most of America isn't ready for that conversation, and the anti-feminists even less so than the feminists.

But as far as your "female superiority" BS, no, I don't think feminism promotes that. Most of the mainstream third wave is too busy trying to define femininity to even know where they stand relative to men, let alone plan some kind of hostile take-over. As far as I'm concerned, this is just the standard complaining of socially conservative men who are made uncomfortable by having to compete with women and recognize them as intellectual agents.

And funnily enough, the few areas where women are currently legally superior to men are caused by patriarchy. What, you think feminism came up with the notion that women can't support themselves?

It didn't use to negatively affect men, because women couldn't initiate a divorce in most circumstances. But now that they can, it's becoming an issue.

The solution? Feminism. Specifically, the conversation about responsibilities that come with rights. Responsibilities that only intellectually equal people can ever be expected to uphold, and it's feminism that believes women are such people.

It's easy to forget that it has been only within our lifetimes that women having careers and/or forgoing marriage and children has been optional. I looked last night for the episode of the "Mary Tyler Moore Show" during which Mary discovered that her predecessor had earned more than she had and how "Lou Grant" looked at her as if she were crazy and said (paraphrasing here), "Well, of course. He had a wife and family to support."

So many gains have been achieved that we take for granted little issues such as women no longer necessarily being styled as "et ux" on a mortgage or the active recruiting of women into fields once deemed suitable only for men such as medicine. But I remember in college when I tried to take out a very small loan ($500 in today's money) and my unemployed boyfriend having to co-sign for it.

The idea women gained rights because they work today is silly nonsense. People have the right to trade with those of their choosing on their own terms and who that includes and what they decide to trade in those transactions is not for me or anyone else to say. Cultural acceptance of women working is an entirely valid idea and one I agree with, but I venomously oppose the idea that men or women have the right to tell people what they will trade and who they will trade with. Women or men gaining entry into an industry is not a rights issue, but a cultural issue. Period.

matchlight said:

I don't share all the poster's opinions, but I agree with some of what he said. And I don't think that means I am spewing trash, or that I have either a lowly mouth or an empty brain. I also don't think I suffer from antiquated behavior, unless (maybe so!) it's now seen as antiquated for a man to be attracted only to women.

Click to expand...

Well - clearly we disagree.

Anyone who opposes my rights and privileges as an American citizen and human, to me, all because of my gender and not at all based on my abilities and knowledge, is spewing trash and quite incapable of thought that does not place said self in the center.

Might as well be engaging the Jim Hadar in a sober conversation.

I don't mind calling it how I see it. You can't truly talk down to people and expect them not to step up and prove you wrong. I see antiquated gender views to be like racism - something that we'll always have in small bits and pieces throughout the country but for the most part they'll be less and less influential as time goes by.