One more thing. Rights movements have always been wrongheaded. Rights are simply rights and when one fights for rights they should do so universally. There is no reason for a womans right movement, LBGT movement, a civil rights movement, or even a mens rights movement. Fight for rights universally and forget this nonsense.
No offense RM... but damn boy! What a hissy fit! :lol:
Umm no.
Just because someone supports gender rights [etc] doesn't mean they MUST encompass another issue that's related to things like sexual orientation or even religion and marriage. Someone is permitted to form views that influence one but at the same time don't believe some other element has the same 'rights' [etc].
It's my impression that the feminist movement is going through an identity crisis right now. However, that identity crisis is due to fact that the sexism feminism is meant to address manifests itself differently for women of different classes, races, sexual orientations and gender identities. Because sexism is different for each group of women (whereas in the past women could unite over things like a universally denied right to vote), rifts have formed between "mainstream feminists" (usually White, upper class, straight, non-trans women) and women who belong to marginalized groups, feminism has started to become irrelevant to a lot of women.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.
Why would I move? Just be responsible and pay for the services you want. It's ghastly stuff to pay for your own way in life. I hear parents are evil for not paying for the stuff their twenty year old wants. They're evil people I tell ya.
Well modern feminism is not just equality for men and women but for all genders, there are still many economic and social issues of equality that need to be dealt with.
Alpha Lesbians. Any other questions?
I don't know what modern feminism is all about. I'm not a feminist. I'm equal to men in a lot of ways. I'm not equal to them in some ways. Men and women aren't completely the same.
Every female on debate politics is a feminist even if they don't want to identify with the term [understandable - because of the connotations and other issues].
I have a hard time believing you oppose your right to vote - etc. The basic elements that go into it.
But if it's the social and emotional 'anti-male' and 'anti-family' as well as the 'anti-mother' and 'anti-feminine' elements that bother you, I'm right there with you. I'm a stay at home feminist - apparently that just just peeves people off on both sides of the line. lol
Lesbians are fun to watch.
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.
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.
Courts can only interpret various family laws, not make them. If legislatures are changing those laws to lessen the burdens they impose on men, well and good.
You acknowledge that there is an effort to "rectify things . . . in favor of men," and that the goal is equality. But how could this reform be taking place despite feminism, unless feminists favored the existing bias against men? If they were for equality between the sexes, they would support reforming family laws--even if they had played no part in making those laws.
I don't think any single people should be able to vote, men or women. By the way, that includes me, since I'm not married.
Democracy was never meant to be a free-for-all. Restricting who can vote has a long precedent in the United States, and I believe in having all sorts of restrictions as the common man doesn't really understand politics or know the candidates.
As for the facts and data, just look at how the following things have been affected since the women's lib movement: Divorce rates (WAY UP), out-of-wedlock births (WAY UP) and entitlement spending (WAY UP).
Feminism, seen one way, is an attack on the traditional nuclear family. The traditional nuclear family is the best known model for providing stability and a good nurturing environment for the next generation. For this reason, feminism has done more harm than good.
It's not as if women were oppressed before. Women have always been women, cunning and able to get what they want.
Every female on debate politics is a feminist even if they don't want to identify with the term [understandable - because of the connotations and other issues].
I have a hard time believing you oppose your right to vote - etc. The basic elements that go into it.
But if it's the social and emotional 'anti-male' and 'anti-family' as well as the 'anti-mother' and 'anti-feminine' elements that bother you, I'm right there with you. I'm a stay at home feminist - apparently that just just peeves people off on both sides of the line. lol
I read your response.
That is all I'll have to say to you on the subject; my time is better spent elsewhere.
*Individuals* generally favor laws that are biased towards them. That is common and that is not justice.
And your comment seems to imply that women in general support that bias. Ask around...here, elsewhere. Many do not and a "feminist" could not say she supported that bias.
I don't recall saying I oppose my right to vote. In fact, I don't recall saying I oppose my right to anything.
As if women who wanted laws and policies that discriminated against men while favoring them would be likely to admit it. Next you'll be telling us that black applicants to graduate programs in state universities would probably admit they support discrimination against whites--even though that is the necessary result of admissions policies that favor blacks. If a person gladly accepts discrimination that favors them, their denial that they support that discrimination is not credible.
Exactly. So - you just oppose the social and other connotations that go with the term 'feminism'.