Feminism seems to be either praised - or slammed - depending on one's point of view, I suppose.

When I read terms like "those feminists ...", I wonder if more people than I realize feel that the feminist movement over the past few decades has had a negative impact on our societies.

Do you think the changes have been an improvement? Or perhaps the opposite?

Nice topic MaraM!

I think some of the changes have been extremely beneficial. Now, there seems to be a more positive air of equality in those places where the movement has taken hold.

Plus, women should be given much more respect, as they are the other half to Humanity. They are as essential as men, and their input no less important.

However, I do think that feminism has been detrimental to the classic 'family unit'. Plus, it gave the keepers of the economic keys an opening to almost require a dual-income home.

For the life of me I can never understand why some women take affront to the classical housewife duties. Those duties are no less important than going to work everyday. However, I would never stop a woman from pursuing a career.

Plus, I think the pursuit of total equality is one giant farse. Life is never equal to anyone, regardless of your gender. So I think it becomes an easy scapegoat for any perceived imbalance, much like racism. Thus, it gets far too much attention. I have worked side by side with women who claim to be equal, but shirk their work, so what does that tell you?

I agree. The family unit has suffered greatly. A shame.

Women who do not respect those women, who do not join the workforce, and choose to maintain the home and care for their children, deserve as much respect as anyone. It is as tough as a job as any other. My Mom never worked outside of the home. And I think us kids, are all the better for it.

Also the feminist movement has veered in a direction that I am not in total agreement with either. Politically speaking that is.

Here's a well done feminist site:

http://www.realwomenca.com/index.html

But alas, I could only find 1 up-to-date, well-done, anti-feminist site:

http://decadentsociety.blogspot.com/

If anyone knows of any other good anti-feminist sites, I would very much like a link.

Thanks for both the links, solaris32. (A 'heads-up' to anyone about to read the second link - lots of swearing). And I'm just so grateful that no one here stated that God intended women to be subservient to men as tears dripping on my keyboard would have done my poor computer no good at all! Gentle grin!

Do agree with Scarlett's words about how certain groups within the feminist movement - wow, some seem to be veering into 'la la' land at a rapid pace. Eep! In fact, the 'men haters' out there than have the nerve to call themself 'feminists' - grrrr - to put men down is no different than men putting women down.

But the extremists aside, I'm fascinated that much of the understanding of the basic feminist movement is 'to strive for equality'. I do agree it's a bad choice of word in many ways for indeed, that word in itself perhaps shouldn't apply unless we've got two near identical apples sitting on the table. As you said, blueandgold04, "Life is never equal to anyone, regardless of your gender". . Suspect they may have chosen it simply because it's the closest one we have in our vocabulary to ask for being treated as "the other half to Humanity". (Well put!).

While feminists fought for women to be able to work and for 'same pay for same job' regardless if being done by a man or a women, it is odd how our society seems to have veered off into the belief that a family needs 2 cars, massive flat-screen tvs and the biggest house possible - ergo, so many women now 'have' to work when having babies. Could be wrong here but I sort of think feminists gave us the 'key' but we, in turn, choose to walk through the door and not return to do the incredibly hard but necessary job of raising children. (On a personal level, whether it be daddy or mommy as a stay-at-home parent, bet there are millions of kids longing for it).

But I darn near snorted my coffee through my nose when I read these words at the second link, though: "Yes I hate feminists, i despise them, i want them out of our society".

These words are made by a women. A women who, without feminism, would not have the right to inherit her husband's property upon his death, would not have survivor benefits if he should die and live her and her children unprovided for, she couldn't vote, she couldn't take a loan out without her husband's written consent, violence in the home would still be 'okay' in the eyes of the law, women and children's shelters wouldn't exist - and so much more.

And the work of so many women now dead still goes on - the fight to stop having innocent children mutilated, women killed at the pleasure of their husbands with no law saying this is wrong. They have far more courage than I - for the most part, I've simply sat back and reaped the reward for their work.

- - -
PM to blueandgold04 ...
I do sympathize for having to work with women who goof off at work. I worked with both women and men who goofed off at work. (Don't think it often occurs to them that what they don't do, someone else will have do - all for the same pay! Ugh!).

I think the Feminism Movement was necessary and has done a great job. I also think that is now going too far the other way.

Shoot me down if you will, but while the phrase 'a woman's place is in the home' is a bit too far over the top, I think that 'a mother's place is in the home' is very true and the world would be a better place if most mothers were home when their kids came in after school.

Back to the subject; in many areas it is way passed time for a 'Masculism Movement' to bring back some rights for Dads.

Cheers

I, for one, would never 'shoot you down' for feeling as you do, rowal5555.

When it comes to divorce, the parent best able to care for the child(children) on a day to day basis should be the custodial parent - but the non-custodial parent still matters, completely and fully, in a child's life - and woe to either parent who forget that the kids are the important ones in these disputes. (And I'm so happy to see more and more Family Courts feel this way too here!).

Think I mentioned earlier that I too wish a parent could stay home with children - when they are little in particular. If we realize that having a mommy or daddy at home raising the children we chose to give birth too matters to kids (I've honestly not met a single person who complained that they had a stay-at-home mom or dad). For some, it may be that the fancy house, etc takes precedence, even if this means both parents working outside the home perhaps believing they are making up for their absence in other ways. The nasty truth may be that not only do children need parents - there when they need them - they are unlikely to remember the fancy vacations and expensive toys one day but may always remember how many times mommy or daddy was do busy to attend their special events or listen to their oh so serious problems, big and small.

But that said, there are so many single parents, the majority of which are mommies struggling along as best they can - and without working full time and sometimes 2 jobs, there is little chance their children and themselves won't live in poverty. Without being paid the same wage for the same job that a man would be paid, how much worse it would be - but even so, for men and women alike, working all hours of the day and night isn't going to do much more than 'keep their heads above water'.

When the 'Masculine Movement' really gets rolling, let's hope they don't make the same errors that the extremists in the Feminist Movement made. I agree, it's well past time that our society focuses on treating both sexes as capable of being incredible parents and having the same needs and wants as each other in nearly every aspect of life.

I'd say it's a good thing as long as it's done and interpreted properly. It should be about equality and allowing women the choice of what they want to do. So if they want to work at an office, or a construction site they can. But they should be just as free to go and be a housewife if that's what they want. The feminists that decry women for being stay at home moms are just as backwards as the chauvinists that say they shouldn't be able to leave the house.

Yes, and isn't it sad that so many simply don't realize this. Hopefully this generation of children will grow up thinking everyone is important regardless of sex or any other 'differences'.

I think the Feminist Movement has been good in the most part,and has been beneficial to Women in general. However the movement with all good intentions, like many other movements, has been infiltrated with the Extreme Elements,and gone way too far. We have our own War Horse, Germaine Greer,which to me, is too radical in her thinking. Worth the read IMO.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germaine_Greer

I agree with many, it has been beneficial in the past....however, I think currently, the feminists are their own worst enemy.

In no way should women be subservient to men....if anything, men should lay down their lives for women constantly out of love and respect.

Social changes are often accompanied by some excesses. I suppose many thought that the Suffragette Movement was excessive, but it did result in women achieving the right to vote. What followed was the real extension of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" to half the population.
The consideration of women as individual humans first, and women second in all phases of contemporary life, and the recognisation that their subjectivity has as much value as a man's, seems to me an advance for all of us.
Regards,
John

Yes! Thanks, jgweed! In fact, you've touched on what I've believed for myself and taught our kids - you are a person first, a woman or a man second.

I think it is only the extremist activities of feminism that are a problem.

For example -

equal pay for equal work makes sense.


Demanding unisex bathroom facilities so everyone gets equal treatment does not make sense, although it would be amusing to watch women using some urinals.

I agree with John and arcman. I don't mind feminists who just want equal rights for women (which even as a guy, i agree they should) but I hate with firey passion the women who think all guys are scum and think women should rule over men. Those people are SUCH hypocrites and it really bothers me. Wanting equality makes perfect sense, but wanting power is just ridiculous. Have your freedom, but don't take mine! (to extreme feminists)

Regards,
TheYoda

Most comments here seem sensible. Feminism good in general but is given a black eye by extremists.
As for Germaine Greer, what I would like to say about her would get me thrown off this forum.

i am all for equality of all races, and all genders (i know, but it seems like there are some gray lines these days)

but what i have a problem with is the special interest groups that have taken over. like, I'm at IUPUI in indianapolis right now. and there is a group called national society of BLACK engineers.

there are numerous groups like this for blacks, and women have many groups as well

all i'm saying, is if i started national society of white engineers, or a whites only scholarship fund, I'd be ripped on every news channel, and the black that have their own little clubs would cry racism

how is this fair? its not.

so i declare feminism a hendrance to freedom, happiness, and equality

and if you disagree, then you're a racist or a sexist, because i just gave you my reasons, and i stand by them, because i use my logic, which many are lacking in, and came to a valid conclusion

This is called "possitive discrimination".
Point here is to give some advantage to underprivileged groups.
Example: white male engineer is a cliche, black woman engineer is ... well, do we ever assume she could be an engineer?
I agree: it is not fair that some groups of people feel they must start a society based on biological determination to be able promote their right to choose and execute their profession.

that's fair comment; BUT surely to state that if anyone disagrees with your comments and your opinions makes them a racist is NOT fair comment

in my work sphere I meet ALL kinds of people from both sexes, and goodness knows what 'sexual orientation' ..let alone groups they adhere to

but with each person I meet there must be mutual respect for/ of a unique individual

actually, if your a femininst, that means you want special treatment for women. so, you are a sexist.

erm..dont want special treatment for women..that is not in accord with Equal Opportunities; I do want equal respect for both sexes and for each person as a unique individual

The only reason this is happening is because of what this part of society has gone through. For example, things that happened to the African people, i.e. Slavery... Just consider men (Oooops... meant 'humankind'!) shackled together and being bought by another human being but of a different race... not only has your freedom been taken away, but you're being sold like cattle in the market! Why? 'They' thought 'they' were superior to you... So, a community that has been put down and suffered for many generations will usually try to do things so as to lift itself to get equal right as other people. That's what's happening in the examples you gave, especially the first one, so nothing like racism or sexism going on.

Anyway, to the topic now. My view is generally along the lines of the other people. I agree that the woman=man as a human, so she is not inferior as a human being. However, the woman doesn't equal the man in other circumstances like how they function biologically, socially, different attitudes to different things generally and sensitivities to certain issues between the man and the woman... and who is more suited to where. For example, when it comes to caring for children, we can see that women are more tolerant in caring for the kids than the man. I guess no one objects to this point. The children are usually close to the mother when it comes to nurturing in most communities around the world, and usually when parents separate, children stay with the mum (Or am I wrong?).

I also believe men and women can do many things the other can do, but they have (should if not already have in my opinion) different roles in society. For example, when it comes to different professions, I would say some maybe more suited to a woman than a man, and vice versa. For example when it comes to dealing with problems women might have, like ailment in sensitive areas of their body, I guess most women will be more comfortable to tell... and get examined by a female doctor, and the same for the man... when he has a similar problem, most men will probably feel comfortable dealing with a male doctor.

So, we cannot say that women and men are equal in the absolute sense.

But some feminists are taking it too far...

Those are some of my quick thoughts.

I didn't read your whole post because i was so infuriated by the part that I have boldened in your statement. You say "what this part of society has gone through". If there is one person who was alive and a victim of slavery, then I would really like to hear what his diet is and his excercise routines.

Could you please explain what is 'infuriating' about that statement.

Secondly, I don't understand what you mean by this:
I don't want to respond to an ambiguous statement. Are you denying that Slavery of Black Africans has ever occurred?


P.S. I recommend your read the rest of my previous post since 'slavery' is not the only thing I have talked about. It was one of two examples...

well thats not what we're talking about, so your not a feminist

Nice employment of an inductive fallacy, Mr. quick.

lol, what is that??!!

I am finding your comments to be extremely childish one after the other. What do you mean "no one who experienced slavery is alive"?! Are we really disputing whether someone from the 'Slavery Period' is alive today?! Of course there isn't one. Were you expecting to come across someone who has directly suffered slavery so as to explain it to you?! Do you have to see in order to believe?! If that's the case, then I don't know how you would hold some other things generally to be true. Let's say another 100 years later, do you expect to see someone who has survived the Holocaust still alive? Will you denie that the Holocaust in fact took place in history?! In your words, what if someone starts 'b******g' about it? Does that mean they had to be alive or directly suffered?!

Well, that's what I have to say, and perhaps I might conclude my replies to such childish comments here... well, unless I am actually speaking to a child who might need few lessons.

PS. Apologies for diverting from the original topic.

Google is your friend, buddy. Basically, you are using ad-hominem attacks, when challenging peoples character just because they disagree with you.

so are you saying that martin luther king was using ad-hominem attacks when he challanged the civil right laws, just because he disagreed with them??? are you a racist?

look, i'm not attacking feminists just because they are feminists, thats ad-hominem, right? I'm attacking them because here is what they are basically saying, "We want special treatment for women in the workplace, in order to insure equality of the sexes." Now if I'm not wrong, the first and second part of that statement just don't work toghether.

"Feminism" is SO MUCH a moving target, if it be target you're looking for.

Personally, I'm really fond of the kind of feminism that said "at this time and place, these values are mostly associated with men. These other values are mostly associated with women. The values associated with women are undervalued and underappreciated in our society, and we should change this."

Or, in non-gender-based terms, I think our culture needs a hell of a lot more nurturing, and more homemaking, and more care and attention paid to children and child-raising, and long, slow, home-cooked meals - and I don't care which gender delivers, as long as SOMEONE does. And I think we need a lot less aggression, and competitiveness, and hostility, and angst, and violence, and spectacular displays of waste and destruction, and war...

But I just can't wrap my head around a female kickboxer, for example, being "feminist". I just don't see the point of kickboxing in the first place, I think we artificially cultivate way too much violence for the number of people on the planet, and I don't see any advantage to women, men, or others being any more aggressive than we already are. My sop to "equal rights" is that I don't really see the point of males kickboxing either. I'd say the same thing about a female BMX rider, except substitute "pointless stupid environmental destruction" for "violence".

It's also important to separate feminism as a philosophy, or a collection of incompatible philosophies, from the phenomenon that simply consists of someone saying "I want something. This existing tool can be bent to my purpose, whether it was intended that way or not", and picking up feminism as the tool.

Well put.

Quite true. One of the effects is the fallacy that a woman can raise a family by herself, without the influence/help/support of a husband. Children need a father as well as a mother if they are going to be well-rounded individuals. And a woman by herself is going to have two full-time jobs*. One to make the money to support the family and then the raising of the family. One require her attention for at least eight hours each day, the other requires her attention 24 hours/day, seven days/week.

There is no shame in being a wife and mother. Indeed, it is one of the most admirable pursuits that a woman can choose. She has to handle the finances and logistics of the household; she has to be nurse and paramedic; she has to be able to remain cool during a crisis, whether it is a six-year-old's broken arm or a teen girls' first broken heart.

There is no paycheck and very few rewards - any thanks are rare indeed, although every mother will be told by her children at some point, "I hate you!". There are no sick days, vacations, or "personal" days. Even on Mother's Day she can not completely abdicate the responsibilities of being a mother.

So why would a woman choose such a path for herself? Perhaps the hardships pale in comparison to the rewards.


* Welfare cases not included.