No, no. Not like that.

I was telling "The Nerd" (great lady) that I have a real problem with the term feminism; it revolts me on a level I can barely grasp. To think that we, members of the some of the most progressive countries on Earth (most of us), still must deal with SEXUAL INEQUALITY really, really sickens me.

I almost refuse to call it feminism, because its so... inherent.

I shall refer to feminism from now on as: "Duh-ism."

Tags: against feminism, duh-ism

Views: 29

Replies to This Discussion

I was merely, in a comically rousing sort of way, trying to say that is a huge shame that feminism must exist in our respective countries. It seems that it would be such an inherent, well-known fact that man = woman, and woman = man; that it isnt is so revolting and base I can not comprehend it.

Basically, I am mortified it exists at all, that it needs to exist.
It exists because of religion. Religions hate women for some reason.
Now, now. We cant blame religion for everything. There were biological roles, caring, nurturing etc. Hunting was primarily a male-oriented thing way back in ye olde time.

However, a closer biological inspection actually reveals this to be false. Women, when backed into a corner, have larger adrenaline dumps then men do (size/amount ratio, that is), and are much better fighters and almost any mammal female will defend its cubs with suicidal zealotry (something men dont do).

However, he who brings home the bacon... literally.

The point: dont fuck with women. They can hurt you. Bad.

(Also, in a 1992-1998 survey, women were found to do more damage in fights than men; women fought to seriously injure and kill, while men fought to prove a point.

Tribal and biological "taboos" started long before religion in human societies; but, they did evolve into it (religion, that is).

I ramble.
I think the other reason for social roles developing they way they did besides hunter vs. nurturer is that by restricting the freedoms of a woman a man is mating with he can be more certain that the resulting offspring is his own. That way a male can minimize the risk of wasting resources on some other male's genes.
I'm completely generalizing here, but in my view women are worst in a fight because they tend not to physically fight that often, and when they do they mean business. At least that's the way it would be for me. If I am in such a desperate situation where I have to resort to physical combat you better believe I'll be sticking my thumbs in someone's eyes! (yikes! what an image!)
It would be like a person having to call him/herself a non-cannibal. Just shouldn't be.

The best line I've heard in a long, long while.
Feminism as I see it, has both a social component and a civil rights component.

The first part can be handled by education. That - and some of the "old school" thinkers are going to have to die off. I think you can see a lot of this in the current attitudes, that young boys have, towards young girls. They seem more likely than the older generations, to treat the opposite sex equally. That is not to say that social change has been completely successful. In many places it is incomplete. In other places, it has moved backwards. But I believe the overall trend, at least in Western countries, has been more progressive than it has been regressive.

As for civil rights, I think there has been progress made in that area also; at least in Western countries. That does not mean that the work is complete; because by no means is that the case. There are still glass ceilings to contend with. Perhaps the highest glass ceiling of them all, at least in the United States, is the presidency.

No. I did not like Hillary. She came with too much baggage.

I don't have a problem with the idea of a woman herself being president. I just didn't happen to like that particular one. She had too much of the Clinton legacy to overcome. That - and she seemed too tied to the politics of the past. I personally have rejected the politics of fear and division, and will be voting for Barack Obama. He is the better qualified candidate, in my opinion; and better equipped to unite and lead this country.

Another problem that I see, which still continues to exist, is the fact that a lot of women are still not getting equal pay; for performing the same amount and type of work, as their male counterparts. This is wrong, and needs to change. It will never change however, until feminist organizations begin targeting lawsuits in this direction.

The past behavior of businesses, has indicated that those in the upper echelons will never do ANYTHING out of the kindness of their hearts. Nor will they be persuaded because it is the right thing to do. A company only does one thing; and that is to look out for it's interests. It's only reason to exist is to make a profit; and anything which eats into those profits, becomes immediately discouraged; and then becomes completely against company policy.

When feminist organizations begin winning lawsuits, on behalf of women who are discriminated against in the workplace, then company policies will change. At that point, you will see a more level playing field. And equal pay - for equal types and amounts of work - will become a reality. The old types of job discrimination will become a thing of the past. But that will never happen, until the old types of behavior start eating into company profits.

It is here that the law can accomplish several things at once.

First it can be used as a legal tool, to address financial inequalities.

And in the second place, it can be used as a tool of social reform.
Heh, Melody is old. :)

I'm so FOR feminism that I think it deserves what it should be called: civil rights and civil liberty. Equality for all.

If you dont believe in such things, why live in America?
I don't know one feminist woman who thinks that feminism means "enforced similarity" or "female superiority".

I'll be a "gender egalitarian" when men are discriminated against equally as women. I don't want to see anyone discriminated against, but right now there's a vast imbalance in the world.
I certainly didn't feel comfortable with the term. It took uprooting from my family/culture connections for me to build a relationship with the term and declare myself unabashedly a feminist.
It's very hard to see and properly react to misogyny when you have been spoon-fed with it.
I think it has something to do with associations that have been built into the word feminist. A lot of people interpret it to mean someone who is man-hating or associate it with an effort to break down the standard family structure. I've even heard people attempt to use the term feminist used as an insult!
I do use the term to describe myself but I find myself hesitating or needing to explain exactly where I stand because of the way the word feminist has been framed.
Exacta-mundo.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

Latest Activity

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service