Does anyone else agree with feminism?

Post Reply New Topic

That's because Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin really ARE jerks.

Yes, I'm a Cascadian too and I have never felt like I have been given preferential treatment because I am male. I actually think women are seen as morally superior in this particular part of the world.

You seem very sympathetic to Sarah Palin, simply because of her gender. The vitriol directed against her had very little to do with her being female and everything to do with her character and the fact that she tried to use her sex appeal to advance herself politically. Even feminists don't like that much, despite her projecting a "strong woman" image to the world.


As for Hillary Clinton, had she won the democratic nomination back in 2008(as I had very much hoped for) she'd have been the first woman president of the United States.

You're not far off in your analysis. My contention with feminism is that it requires that everything be adapted to be "female friendly" including men moderating their behavior to accommodating the female gender, but I see and have very little desire for it to go the other way. Rather than requiring every male and company to adapt to be female friendly, the females should adapt to the company. If you look at the women that have adapted within every sector they tend to do very well, the ones who struggle are the "noise makers" that refuse to adapt to the environment they have elected to be in.

How often do you see male nurses demanding changes to the structure of the job and the culture within the organization, in comparison with how often females demand changes to the structure of the job and the culture within the organization?

Hilary Clinton is a prime example of a woman who has adapted to the structure of the field that she's in, whereas Sarah Palin is a woman that wants the structure to change in her favor.

gender is irrelevant in most cases,
discussing who should adapt to who is just as futile as discussing which ideology works better in its ideal world,

too many enviromental variables and too many human variables to be aplicable to reality.
also the attitude that feminism is about female superiorirty(i dont doubt those nutjobs exist) is a bit far fetched, i think most people adhere to the concept that gender deosnt affect the worth of a person, what you call it is up to you, historically that was what the feminist movement was about and i still think that most that hear the word feminism thinks that, if they arent busy blamning them for every other issue in the world that is.

what adaptations do male nurses want?

Which institutional policies or informal practices should working women shut up about, exactly?
Wage gaps?
Environments of sexual harassment?
Hierarchies of "boys clubs" that exclude women from promotion and raises?

Excuse me ladies, there is man talk going on here

Saying of a politician, 'he is a jerk,' or 'she is a jerk,' is a very far cry from 'I'd like to rape her and then strangle her with her own underwear.'

I have never once in my life felt "held back" by my gender or disliked or underappreciated.

Imo, I work for the wages I agreed to when I was hired. I have no concern what someone else is making, the offer I was made was sufficient for me or I would not have accepted it. Despite the sources linked to the contrary, I find it hard to believe that wage gaps exist so commonly as implied. Maybe I'm niave, who knows. Just saying how I feel about it.

As for the other things listed above, I have not experienced any of those things directed at me.

Other than physical abuse or exploitation (including basing career progressions off of sexual favors), many forms of "sexual harassment" only hold power if the listener chooses to be offended by them.

I also see no reason that a woman wouldn't be able to be a part of a "boys club" (blech that term makes me want to wash my fingers off for typing it). I personally get along well with men and am often seen as one of them. What this really boils down to is social favortism where people that are well-liked get promotions first and this exists everywhere regardless of the gender of the people involved. There is no reason a female in a mainly male office could not become well-liked. Once again, I sort of see this as a result of the stereotpyical female's penchant for becoming easily offended so that the males feel the need to walk on eggshells. No one likes people they can't feel comfortable with.

Now, as a disclaimer, I'm not trying to say this applies to everyone. These are just my observations based on some interactions I've seen in my life.

I dislike Palin intensely, and I admire H.Clinton very much; however, I am forced to acknowlege, despite my dilike, that the sexualized vitriol directed at Palin was out of bounds. Even the people who claimed to admire her as a politican clearly were as interested in her attractiveness as they were in her politics. How she personally reacted to these things should not make her proud - but a liberal who attacks a woman who disagrees with him specifically on the basis that she is a woman, rather than on the basis of the disagreement, should be ashamed.

I see this as being the legacy of chivalry. Feminists obviously want equality, but at the same time there were certain social amenities they had as a compensation for having less power and they clearly do not want to give these up.







Exactly! Palin believed that by using her sex appeal, she could created an incentive to change the structure in her favor. Much to her dismay, it backfired.

what social amenities to i supposedly want to retain?

I have worked worked with male nurses at the hospital. The first adaptations that male nurses demand is to have their job descriptions expanded so that they can perform surgeries just like a combat medic is able to perform in a battlefield.

Perhaps that is because they don't have much of their own...?

Feminists support feminists.
Owning a vagina doesn't make one a feminist.
Joe Biden is more a feminist than Sarah Palin.