Does anyone else agree with feminism?

Post Reply New Topic

I agree that there is a substantial degree of matriarchy in some tribes in Asia and Africa, but I don't think people ignore that in the name of being politically correct. Radical feminist ideas about the precedence patriarchy, aren't considered politically correct any more (if they ever really were). If anything, it would be more politically correct to say that matriarchal societies are more widespread because I think the politically correct position nowadays is that human behaviour is mostly culturally conditioned. This is why evo psych types like to wear their political incorrectness badges.

It's strange. Sexism is so old that it is hard to imagine that women are equal to men. Logically, this really doesn't make sense.

We are made to hate feminism. It is presented as a cliché, I believe, so that women won't want to relate to it. Thus, sexism is kept in place. It's very effective.

If feminist women are presented as unattractive, no one will want to strive to "be" a feminist or say that they understand what it is all about.

Feminist men, I think, are seen as wimpy, weak and not to be taken serious. So feminist men are even rarer.

Because men are strong and women are weak. As long as we are still made to believe that, sexism will continue to exist.

It's as clear as that. There is no doubt about it. I can't take anyone serious who says we are all equal now if AXE ads are still around and the many other ads who obviously degrade women. As long as the glass ceiling is still there and women bosses are presented as witches... You know... Witch hunts are just an older form of hunting women down who speak up. Nowadays, advertisements and magazines continue the mental witch hunt by calling women "bitchy", etc.

As soon as feminists become radical... you know... people will complain.

But how often do we complain about sexism?

I mean... it doesn't make sense to me. I don't like militant opinions, but some things just make sense to me. If feminists keep trying to please... please patriarchy, basically, they won't get anywhere.

Double standards are around everywhere and yes, there are feminists who are not nice towards men in general, but that's because the gender boundaries are still in place and we make differences between men and women that are not natural. I can't blame women for hating men because they have been repressed all their life. I don't think it's a good thing to do and it is counter productive, but... I cannot blame Malcolm X for drawing strict lines between black and white people and that he wanted to keep them apart, because obviously you don't want to live next to neighbours who could potentially rape your wife or hang you or all the BS that organisations like the KKK like to practise. We still have a long way to go.

If you have any evidence, why are you not giving it to us?

If you do not really have access to the evidence, why are you assuming a) The evidence exists. b) The anthropologists are hiding it. and c) They are doing that to be PC. ?

i think this post needs to be bronzed.

there are a couple of things i had noticed that also reflect the same bias...

it is an insult for a man's behaviour to be called "feminine", "girly", "sissy", etc. but it is a compliment for a woman's behaviour to be called "masculine", "boyish", "tough". the more a man acts like a stereotyped female the less he is respected, but it is the opposite for women who act like men (particularly as long as the women LOOK feminine).

also, if a man works at a traditionally female job like nursing, administrative assistant, housecleaning, etc he is looked down upon, whereas a woman doing a traditionally male job will be held in high esteem.

nobody thinks twice if a girl plays with boy toys like cars and action figures, but it is still considered weird to have a boy playing with dolls and styling barbie's hair.

women can wear blue, but a man wearing pink or lavender is still liable to cause some questioning as those are "girl" colours.

female fashion models have masculine features and masculine body types, yet male fashion models are hyper-masculine.


these are insidious ways that association with femininity is still looked down upon whereas the masculine counterpart is elevated.

It's a fact there are tribes that are female-centric. I'm not gonna dig up a bunch of resources because I'm not in the mood, but you can look it up yourself if you're interested. Patriarchy is NOT a universal and I would argue Western society as we know it today is not completely patriarchal, especially in countries like Canada.

I never said they are hiding it, I said they are glossing over it.

how is Canada less patriarchal?

Feminism is huge in Canada. Abortion is on demand and, at least in theory, without limitations. One constantly sees and hears advertisements against violence towards women in Canada. You have a history of strong female musicianship such as Joni Mitchell, K.D. Lang, Celine Dion and Lights. It's a far more female-oriented society than the States or Australia is where machismo is glorified in the form of guns, patriotism and each countries' type of football.

so basically, what you are saying is that advancing away from a patriarchal society is a good thing, then.

In certain ways, as long as it doesn't swing all the other way around in a matriarchal kind of society where emotion always trumps logic and security trumps freedom. Patriarchy breeds war and matriarchy breeds a passive aggressive unfriendliness. Balance of the masculine and the feminine, imo is the best and Canada does a pretty good job of that.

I think Western society, until about 1990 or so, was rather patriarchal, but I see patriarchy as being more about a certain concept of gender roles rather than being about men benefiting. It is equally a burden upon men because it expects them to be 'manly'.

i can't think of a single matriarchy that was ever like you have described (bolded), so i don't think any fear is necessary.

That seems to refute a lot of the "gender roles in terms of political power are just human nature" arguments that certain anti-feminists make. To be fair, though, there are some feminists who are also gender essentialists*.

*Gender essentialism being the view that almost all or at least most gender differences are biologically based and that variation within gender groups is out-factored by differences between gender groups.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_ess ... d_politics

There is no "politically correct" position on anything. "Politically correct" is just a insulting buzz word hurled at people which means "I don't like that view or recent social norm".

Bit like "racist", then.

Ironically, some feminists contribute to this situation by decrying everything girly and overtly feminine as tools designed to keep women in their traditional place. Lynn Meletiche calls Barbie dolls "the ultimate symbol of women's oppression" and claims that "these dolls may help ensure a constant supply of decorative, nonfeminist, nonactivist women". And when the Lego Group recently announced a new line of feminine, pastel-colored toys geared primarily at girls, there was a huge cry of indignation.

To be fair, the new "Lego friends" toy line is not just a set of the usual Lego bricks in girly colors. It involves less creativity and is more akin to the playsets of Lego's competitor Playmobil. But nobody forces parents to buy their daughters the new cute and girly toys instead of the old, gender-neutral sets of bricks and robot-like, yellow-skinned little figures. Which I hated as a kid, because of their ugly and utterly unrealistic look. I think I would have rather played with a cute science lab like this, nevermind the pastel colors:



But nobody seems to consider that the new product line might appeal to boys as well, especially boys who dream of being a princess. It's wrong to want to be a princess, for boys and girls alike. Both genders are supposed to see themselves in grey business suits. Pink dresses stand for the traditional female gender role, whereas traditionally male clothes scream "strong and empowered woman". Skirts, bras, high heels, anything feminine represents a symbol of oppression according to a subset of feminists.

Men who dress up in lingerie, corsets and skirts are just getting a kick from acting out the role of oppressed women. Women who dress and act in a stereotypically feminine way are brainwashed Stepford wives who have succumbed to the expectations of a male-dominated society. If some extremists had their way, everything girly would end up under the guillotines of the feminist revolution. I think this mindset is as much responsible for the promotion of traditionally masculine traits over all things feminine as the male respect for tough and competitive women in combination with the male derision of feminine men.

I agree with the basic idea of feminism that women should have equal rights and opportunities (including abortion rights). As a whole, however, I am not what you would call a "radical feminist" or "feminazi". I think initially it started out legit and with a genuine concern for equal rights and social status for women, but eventually went too far. Now, you find that society as a whole seems to favor women over men in many areas of life and views them as superior. It's gotten to the point where in many Western countries it is politically incorrect to side with men in certain areas (the family courts, for example), be an advocate of men's rights, or even criticize the extremism of the modern feminist movement. I know that a young German woman who was a news anchor for a news station in her home country was fired from her job after she wrote two books on motherhood and telling how she chose to become a stay-at-home mother. A journalist who worked for a newspaper went so far as to say that she had praised the Nazis even though she claims to denounce them (this was shortly prior to her actually being fired). Another woman there lost her job for helping men in divorce cases after deciding that men's rights were just as important as those of women. I think what has happened now is that the feminist movement has turned things the other way around and made it to where women have more rights and are looked upon more favorably (probably to the point of bias) in most if not all areas of society than men. Equality should be the goal, not superiority.

Last edited by LiberalJustice on 03 Mar 2012, 9:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.