What's the issue with feminism?

I don't think so.

 

Society can't change nature.

Society can't make a woman settle for a man of lesser social status than she is. Hypergamy is a genetic trait and not a choice.

If women become the primary providers in society they are not going to be happy with the results. It will mean more women staying alone for life and more empty nesters.

 

Your argument seems to be. Women shouldn't have choices, such as to go to work, or to study and acquire wealth, lest they not attract men and be alone? This is paranoid, simplistic, un-romantic, inhuman thinking backed up by sterile biology texts books (which by the way are another sad state of affairs, the biology of attraction revolution accompanied by suggestive techniques and whatnot - the schools which attempt to suck any kind of mystery and intrigue out of romantic bonds). Maybe they want to be alone? Alone rich and happy. Or maybe they're a lesbian. Or maybe they find some men who are not threatened by their status? Who cares, the main thing is they have a choice, they can study and be career driven, or they can get married to some lazy moron, have a bunch of kids and drink vodka all day... whatever, it's about choice.

 

You watch too many movies. I think you'll find the first feminist movements occurred in the late 19th century. Have you never heard of the roaring 20s? Some of the women from that era would put women today to shame in terms of pushing the limits. It's also silly to claim that feminism is somehow responsible for better music. Birth control brushed shoulders with the feminist movement, clearly, but I don't think you can argue that feminism was responsible for it. You seem to just be perpetuating stereotypes with this post.

 

Why do I keep hearing about men being threatened by high achieving women? Perhaps most men just aren't attracted to women who work 80 hours a week trying to climb the social ladder? I hear the same thing about tall women being "threatening" to men. All I hear is this feminist blather about men being "threatened" over and over again. Such terminology is used to undermine and challenge men's masculinity.....doesn't seem very socially advanced to me. Another bull(*)(*)(*)(*) standard of feminism.

They should be trying to improve society for everyone instead of advancing women at the expense of men. Men are facing some very serious problems. Schools are increasingly moving away from an environment boys can learn in, men are enrolling in college at lower levels, going to prison more, and struggling in the job market. Society and feminism says it's because men are "violent/stupid/lazy/immature/threatened" etc. If someone tried to imply such things about women they would be stomped on.

 

Just a slip of the keyboard, of course you can trace feminism to before the 60's. I'm just saying that was an era in which movements of many kinds grew and flourished. You can't deny that.

I don't watch a lot of films.

 

I'm not denying anything. The 50s were important in developing modern society though. All the movers and shakers in the 60s and 70s came of age in the 50s.

 

That's a very blase and simple, STEREOTYPICAL view of feminism. I've justified feminism before so I'll hit you with a standard argument. It seems you are labouring under the idea that feminism is defined by its black sheep. Which is a problem amongst many an organisation/movement/creed etc... or that it is now redundant because of how liberated women now are. You may find it harder to justify the need for feminism (I don't) in certain countries but if you look at Yemen, or Indonesia, for example, there are feminist movements you would most likely agree with - you don't have to call yourself a feminist, but you are only doing that, I presume, based on the "black sheep" or extreme interpretation of the theory. The basic idea is hard to oppose.

In Morocco the penal code still condones the idea that - if the victim's family and the rapist agree - an underage girl can marry her rapist so he can avoid persecution and the family can avoid "shame".

A girl killed herself quite recently over this, Morocco is supposed to be a moderate modernist country in North Africa - this tragedy requires women and men to stand up and not only condemn the laws of their country but get them changed and make society see the errors in such idiocy and barbarism. Hence things like feminism.

And you might say "this is a human rights issue." But the fact is this law directly discriminates and dehumanizes young women. Feminism is a much needed movement in the world... you and men in general should get over it. Sure attack individuals whining over nothing, or demonizing men, but don't lump the whole movement into one post and judge accordingly.

 

I'm talking purely of the U.S. It seems you're using blatant atrocities and injustices in third world countries to justify overcompensation in the U.S. The best way for America to become truly socially equal is to stop placing so much emphasis on one group's rights over another. Problems certainly still exist in the U.S., but this constant emphasis on minority protection inevitably alienates different groups from one another, thus exacerbating the problem . Who cares what color skin you have, where your from, or what gender you are? In the socially conscious and equal world that I envision, there will be NO advocate groups for such unimportant things.

 

Far too many people. Far, far too many people, indeed, in America. That's the problem.

If everyone thought like you there would be no need for anti-racists or feminist movements. But since there are lots of racists, and sexists bigots, a lot of them in positions of power, there is still a need for these movements. What we have to differentiate is between genuine progress and counter-productivity. But we should try and do that in an intelligent manner, not just addressing feminism as a monolith, an emasculating man-hating "spinster" creating beast within society. I find it hard to listen to such talk. I think there is something in this but I think people are getting feminism mixed up with modern culture. Our propensity to get divorced, or be promiscuous, is that directly linked to feminism?

I don't think so. Does feminism directly promote such things? Just from personal experience (I live in England) those who consider themselves feminists are not afraid of their sexuality but also not open to all male advances. The geeky woman stood with the sign next to the hooters model is not their representative. In fact, it would be interesting to see if any people here who support feminism care about hooters models? Or even strippers? I don't. That's a choice, don't want to do it, don't do it. Plenty of women enjoy stripping - but being forced into stripping, being forced into the sex industry, weaned onto drugs, etc a very different story and a massive problem facing women in America and across the world.

What about domestic abuse? Transcends almost all cultures. Overwhelmingly men are the perps, same with rape, that's not demonizing men, that's just a fact.

Feminism should only promote equality, as well as self-esteem a female protection and empowerment over their own destiny and their own decisions. The good thing about it, as with most movements, is that it is not a religion, so if there are indeed problems, or people pushing it in the wrong direction, it can evolve. It doesn't have to worry about fundamentalists bombing moderates and such. At least lets hope not. I have a daughter, and I want society to have her back.

 

The constructs were not of women's making, but were made out of the 'strangeness' of the past - were the making (of the particular) 'society of men' who perpetuated / promulgated the 'story of the world'. lol. I feel sad for all the spirited, intelligent, ingenious women of our past who were not 'allowed' / invited to share their talents / gifts in the world. Women writers were stifled / shunned. Mary Shelley, on writing Frankenstein - some attributed the book as being written by her husband, Percy Bysse Shelly - as though a woman not 'capable' of writing books. The field of psychology / psychiatry was another place women were kept out of... but far worse, they were made over into 'objects' of derision / and made to 'carry' the irrational male fantasies and projections of the exclusively male 'psychobabble' world. Freud and his NONSENSE.

I agree with this. It's about humanity. People that throw up all the boundaries want to divide, segment, and classify people into good, bad, and indifferent. Which is one of the most COMMON sights on this forum. Go to the Race Relations section to see the bashing and divisiveness. The Gay section to see the bashing and divisiveness. And this section as well. People need to better develop their characters for the betterment of themselves and for those around them. The concept of drawing up 'boundaries' suggests a rigid, controlling way of thinking to me.

Deconstructing is an interesting word. Some more words to go along with / and after the deconstruction could possibly include: enhancing, facilitating, educating, broadening, opening up and evolving... the culture.

 

LOL's
If you think racism/sexism doesn't exist anymore, you must be a white male!

And someday when we get there there won't be! But we are not there yet.

I'm a cigar smoking, motorcycle riding, white male blessed to have a strong, smart, equal, feminist partner. (not married yet for fiscal reasons) I see the gender pay disparity (77c on the dollar to men) and I see the racial pay disparity

So I can tell you we have a long way to go, and until we get there we need advocacy groups to point out these American hypocrisies to us. Or at least to you.

 

I agree that trying to meet quotas is idiotic. It should be about equal opportunity and no more.

I think that divorce has evened out. It used to be highly in the favor of men, then swung too far in the other direction and started to become discriminatory towards them. Today I think the laws are pretty fair but that still depends on the judge, lawyers, and couple involved.

 

I'm glad somebody said that. From what I've read that guy makes my stomach churn.

 

While you're at it whining about the 'feminists blather about men', maybe you could decipher and explain why a group of 'particular men' congregate at the Women's Rights section to bash women. Been that way for THREE YEARS I've been here. The same old bashing bull(*)(*)(*)(*) all the time. And maybe you could find EVEN ONE THREAD where 'feminists blather' about men being threatened by them. The only men I'd consider being possibly threatened by feminists are the men that bash women on these forums. If they were suitably happy and secure with their own selves, what need to bash anyone else?

Society is to be improved by men and women. Advancing women at the expense of men? Good grief, what a crock of (*)(*)(*)(*). How dare women raise their heads to look around... is that it? Are you intimating / blaming women for the 'serious problems' you claim men have? You are making a load of very very silly (personal) generalisations here. You are putting words in the feminists mouth. That is a no-no. And inaccurate. Your post sounds bitter. And twisted.

 

The quintessential 'father' of psychoanalysis. He was rigid, negative and a miserable git. He died of mouth / jaw cancer. He fell out with many of his peers (underlings to him, of course) because they wouldn't do what HE wanted them to do. Carl Jung had the sense to break away intact, but some others fared not so well from Freud's disavowal. He viewed the unconscious as "bad" and nasty... which possibly gives an indication to the state of his own unconscious. Jung saw the unconscious in the opposite way and worked with patients to draw the unconscious out... Freud was obsessed with sex - probably sexually repressed... to have to dwell and obssess on it all the time. When he told Jung to further / make 'sex' the mantle / opus of his life's work, Jung dissented and broke away. Because he knew the things of the world and universe / psyche were bigger and broader than that.

Freud was particularly horrible towards his female patients. Arrogantly, condescendingly, 'insanely', attributed 'hysteria' and 'penis envy' to them. He was a nutter. And promulgated misogyny.

 

This "man-hating" definitely exists in our culture today. Look at our school system. Mean words, sports, discipline and a variety of other parts of school have been radically altered. Almost everything that's been "dubbed down" has been of the traditionally masculine domain. Most of these new alterations are for a "kinder, gentler, less stimulating environment" that our politically correct culture (which sides with feminism) has been creating. The fact that boys are diagnosed with such a high rate of ADD is a travesty and a complete reflection of the failure of our education system which is utterly dominated by women at the lower levels.

Domestic abuse is always an issue. Ironically, women are just as likely to be physically abusive (some studies show more abusive) than men in their relationships. The difference of course being that typically men are more capable of defending themselves. Men are also MUCH MUCH more likely to not report this abuse. It's still incredibly demeaning and damaging to be struck by your female partner. Feminists have been completely reckless in not reporting the other side. Our entire society also fails to acknowledge this. Anytime a man gets slapped in public or in a movie the crowd cheers because obviously the guy deserved it. If the opposite happens then its a complete travesty and the male is considered to be in company with child molesters and murderers. Rape is also always an issue too. Again though, our society completely and utterly ignores sexual assault against men. Reporting rates for men are much lower than women. Feminists have also been found to have a made up and exaggerated many statistics in this area. There are many double standards in society today. In the past men and women held different places in society and had different privileges that typically favored men, though in some cases women. In the last few decades most of these "male" privileges have been relinquished, but very few of the female ones have. Some of this is cultural, while some of it is legal, like the terribly biased laws regarding child custody and alimony.

 

I don't claim that racism/sexism etc. doesn't exist. I claim that we as a culture would do better to indoctrinate our youth towards equality and eliminate all the polarizing multi-million dollar advocacy groups.

The male/female income disparity is a complete myth. Again, people buy into the silly feminists statistics. Anyone with a basic understanding of economics can see the flaws in this assertion.

Disparity in pay among races certainly exists. Is this overt racism or a side effect of socio-economic status? In a very simple explanation: Minorities are much more likely to be poor, poor people are less likely to be educated, educated people make less money=minorities make less money. We fix this by helping the poor (and by extension minorities) get educated and enter the work force on an equal basis. We don't get there by subsidizing their ascent with quotas and other silliness.

I'm not saying problems don't exist. I'm saying the feminist approach to the problem is wrong.

 

Are you kidding me? How were divorce laws in favor of men? They were designed specifically so that men had to support women and children through alimony and child support. The man definitely didn't have the advantage. Most of these laws still exist and men are most definitely still at a disadvantage when it comes to divorce.

 

Before that woman were left penniless and without access to their children if they were even granted the divorce in the first place. Feminism came about as a reaction to insufferable inequality for women. It has at times swung the pendulum of equality so to speak too far in the other direction and divorce laws are a good example, although today they are pretty balanced in my opinion.

 

The fact that men don't report physical abuse is not the fault of the feminist movement. That's a man thing, who wants to go around saying they're bullied by a woman? My ex partner was very aggressive. I choose to live like that, it comes with the territory when you're attracted to "Firery" types, and it worked to some degree. I don't blame anybody for her actions, certainly not feminists. Irrespective of that the notion that men may suffer more physical abuse at the hands of women is laughable.

 

You're completely off-base. Back in the day men were required to pay alimony and child support. The system was set up to be advantageous to women financially because it was assumed the men made more money (which they usually did). That system is still largely in place even though women now make their own money and have successful careers. Massachusetts actually recently just changed the law in acknowledgement of this inequality. Hopefully the rest of the country takes notice.

 

Well then by your logic, the under reporting by women of rape and domestic violence is a woman problem and has nothing to do with men. You're sexist views mimic most of society's right now, unfortunately.

 

I'm not, you just need to read history a little further back.

 

Here's an interesting article on domestic abuse

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/01...stic-violence-against-men-is-a-growing-probl/

You must keep an open mind.