My View on Feminism...

[Thewanderer]

Okay, this is turned into a debate(or argument, depending on the view) about physical and mental stuff, and not views on feminism and equality like I intended it to be. I guess this topic is sorta related, but could you guys try not to argue? I don't want my thread to be locked...

[Veritas]

Originally Posted by arias

I'm not siding with the person you're arguing with, but your argument is weak. Instincts don't come categorized -- they come in shades. That is, I think we all agree that "instincts" are evolved properties, yes? If you're a creationist or ID-supporter, then you can stop reading. If not, then we all recognize that our instincts to fear, breed and such are all products of evolution. And they come in different strengths -- individuals have each property to a different degree.

I know instinct is an evolved property, but knowing how to care for an infant isn't instinct, at least where humans are concerned. One can't pass on knowledge through genetics.

Citing your father or whoever relative, or whatever anecdote as a counter-example is a poor argument.

I only did that because he told me to name one male who can understand that a crying baby is somehow in distress.

What we're talking about is GENERAL POPULATION BEHAVIOR. Let's say we have a statistic that says taller people tend to earn more money (this is true, by the way). You can tell me about your short uncle Bob who's a billionaire, but it's hardly relevant.

Yes, but this dude's argument is, using your example, "Tall people are more successful because they inherited the ability to become successful from their tall ancestors." And this is flawed anyway, since the reason more tall people are successful is because other people are favorably disposed toward their physical characteristics. It's not something at which the tall person is neccesarily better.

Just because your relatives are all kung fu masters and have been for generations, doesn't make you an instinctive kung fu master. Some behaviors are learned, and human child care is one of those.

So proposing that males and females are different AS THEIR INDIVIDUAL POPULATIONS is not a ridiculous idea. Whether this extends to maternal instincts or not is a real hypothesis that deserves to be tested. It might be true, it might not be true. But certainly your extremist position and over-zealousness in trying to rubbish such claims are coloring your intellect. Sure, there might be males out there who are more sensitive than the average female, more 'maternal' than the average female, even.. but I think what statistics, and general statements such as "females = more maternal" are based on are the differences in population.

I'm not disagreeing with this, in fact I even said that women are probably better at learning how to care for a child because they're more devoted to it, stemming from a stronger maternal instinct. What I'm trying to say is that maternal instinct alone doesn't equal better child care. You need knowledge, gathered from books, your grandma, the redneck down the street who has 10 kids, whomever, or barring that, trial and error.

Compare a woman, who's had no one to emulate, and no baby books to read, with with a man who has reared a child already, and see who knows what they're doing when they're presented with a teething baby. The woman may feel more for the kid's hurt and honestly try and figure out what the problem is, but the man will go get the kid a cold teething ring to suck on, pacifying the kid. He solved the problem because he's learned that cold helps when a kid is teething. The woman wouldn't know, because she's ignorant and her instinct won't help her there.

Originally Posted by Thewanderer

No, I didn't because I forgot to.

Can't help but notice you still didn't mention one. But nevermind, I'm past caring.

[Thewanderer]

Originally Posted by Veritas

I know instinct is an evolved property, but knowing how to care for an infant isn't instinct, at least where humans are concerned. One can't pass on knowledge through genetics.I only did that because he told me to name one male who can understand that a crying baby is somehow in distress. Yes, but this dude's argument is, using your example, "Tall people are more successful because they inherited the ability to become successful from their tall ancestors." And this is flawed anyway, since the reason more tall people are successful is because other people are favorably disposed toward their physical characteristics. It's not something at which the tall person is neccesarily better.

Just because your relatives are all kung fu masters and have been for generations, doesn't make you an instinctive kung fu master. Some behaviors are learned, and human child care is one of those.I'm not disagreeing with this, in fact I even said that women are probably better at learning how to care for a child because they're more devoted to it, stemming from a stronger maternal instinct. What I'm trying to say is that maternal instinct alone doesn't equal better child care. You need knowledge, gathered from books, your grandma, the redneck down the street who has 10 kids, whomever, or barring that, trial and error.

Compare a woman, who's had no one to emulate, and no baby books to read, with with a man who has reared a child already, and see who knows what they're doing when they're presented with a teething baby. The woman may feel more for the kid's hurt and honestly try and figure out what the problem is, but the man will go get the kid a cold teething ring to suck on, pacifying the kid. He solved the problem because he's learned that cold helps when a kid is teething. The woman wouldn't know, because she's ignorant and her instinct won't help her there.
Can't help but notice you still didn't mention one. But nevermind, I'm past caring.

I agree with you. Knowledge is impossible to pass down to your offspring. My erlier posts were meant to refer to maternal instinct, but everyone took what I was saying wrong. I't prolly just me, not knowing how to explain things well

Anyway, this is exactly the point I was trying to make from my first post. Maternal instincts just aren't present in most males, but that don't mean they're not capable of child care. Just as normal male stength isn't present in females, but that don't mean that they can't be physically strong if they work hard enough(they'd most likely have to work harder than a man, but hey, determination can get you places).

I hope I made this post clearer...

[Diodati]

Originally Posted by Nightbat®

I hardly hear anyone claiming to be "Feminist" they seem to know what kind of
image that brings up with people

Yes they are aware. They are aware that a particular movement of some 40 years ago (which only a certain sect of Feminists were involved in) has now been 'flipped' onto the study an immense CT as a whole. Which wouldn't be so bad if it didn't disregard the work of many wonderful women from the past 300 years, from a multitude of cultures, races and intentions. Many Feminists hate the opinion of what Feminism now is, because 'that' is quite incorrect. But you either succumb to that wrong 'impression' that so many people seem to have, or you can continue on with your own branches and philosophy hoping that one day, people will actually realise what Feminism now exists as.

I fail to see the big deal about the use of certain terms to describe something

Because it's being used wrong? It would be like talking about any ideology and only quoting the extremists or certain 'trends' or 'fads' that aren't even applicable to Feminism. It's unfair when people do it with religion, so I see it as slightly unfair when people do it with critical theory.

Originally Posted by arias

Right, that's the ideology in its "pure form". But some of us are talking about what feminism has BECOME, or how it's normally seen anyways. Thanks for mixing up different semantics and ignorance.

Feminism as what is being referred to in here is a manipulated version of certain sects of the 2nd wave Feminists - the rather infamous extreme kind *or* what I think is even more likely: silly little girls who claim they are Feminists, but aren't at all and just want to bash men. I can guarantee many Feminists hate those sorts of women far more than the ''common people'' do. These groups bear no real accountability to what Feminism is or has ever been, so I can't agree with anyone who says this is what Feminism has 'become'. It's simply women out for their views and tagging Feminism in with it - which I absolutely loathe myself.

Originally Posted by TrueKnight

I've encountered much feminism in my life, I won't give an example, but it comes especially from bitches that they think that they could take a man's job and fucking demanding equality, but ended up saying the phrase "ladies first".

No please do give an example. I'm a Feminist. I'm absolutely bewildered as to where all this hatred stems from - although I know it gets a bad rep, I'm not an idiot. But these ''Feminists'' (which I don't believe are for one second) are nothing like what I've encountered in my life - maybe you're older than me and have met some lynching 1960's crew? I'm nothing like what is being presented in here. I don't bash men, I'm not a hypocrite, I don't ridicule, I don't rely on double standards, I never say ''ladies first'', I've been educated in a ''male occupation'' (although I found my treatment quite painful to be honest), I'd like to have children one day, possibly adoption but it's not the be all or end all of my life, I don't believe my sexuality should be central to how people consider me, I believe in equal rights and the notion ''Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere'', I've promoted the works of women (and men), not in vein of superiority but one of differentiality and not just in regards to white middle class suburban women but on a scale of cultural celebration. I don't believe women should be left to rot in the house - it's a waste - but nor do I believe that we should all swop 'roles' just for the sake of swopping roles. I believe people should have the option - that men should have more rights as fathers, and that women shouldn't feel 'compelled' by familial or social pressure to behave in a certain way. Just given the oppotunity of what they desire their life to be (and many women, sadly do not have a choice).

If that makes me the monster that some of you have in mind then that's okay. *shrugs*


The fact the person who started this thread put this makes me think that I'll always be a part of a lost cause:

No, this thread isn't about feminism, it's just the only word I could think of when I made the topic.

[Thewanderer]

Originally Posted by Diodati

Yes they are aware. They are aware that a particular movement of some 40 years ago (which only a certain sect of Feminists were involved in) has now been 'flipped' onto the study an immense CT as a whole. Which wouldn't be so bad if it didn't disregard the work of many wonderful women from the past 300 years, from a multitude of cultures, races and intentions. Many Feminists hate the opinion of what Feminism now is, because 'that' is quite incorrect. But you either succumb to that wrong 'impression' that so many people seem to have, or you can continue on with your own branches and philosophy hoping that one day, people will actually realise what Feminism now exists as.


Because it's being used wrong? It would be like talking about any ideology and only quoting the extremists or certain 'trends' or 'fads' that aren't even applicable to Feminism. It's unfair when people do it with religion, so I see it as slightly unfair when people do it with critical theory.


Feminism as what is being referred to in here is a manipulated version of certain sects of the 2nd wave Feminists - the rather infamous extreme kind *or* what I think is even more likely: silly little girls who claim they are Feminists, but aren't at all and just want to bash men. I can guarantee many Feminists hate those sorts of women far more than the ''common people'' do. These groups bear no real accountability to what Feminism is or has ever been, so I can't agree with anyone who says this is what Feminism has 'become'. It's simply women out for their views and tagging Feminism in with it - which I absolutely loathe myself.


No please do give an example. I'm a Feminist. I'm absolutely bewildered as to where all this hatred stems from - although I know it gets a bad rep, I'm not an idiot. But these ''Feminists'' (which I don't believe are for one second) are nothing like what I've encountered in my life - maybe you're older than me and have met some lynching 1960's crew? I'm nothing like what is being presented in here. I don't bash men, I'm not a hypocrite, I don't ridicule, I don't rely on double standards, I never say ''ladies first'', I've been educated in a ''male occupation'' (although I found my treatment quite painful to be honest), I'd like to have children one day, possibly adoption but it's not the be all or end all of my life, I don't believe my sexuality should be central to how people consider me, I believe in equal rights and the notion ''Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere'', I've promoted the works of women (and men), not in vein of superiority but one of differentiality and not just in regards to white middle class suburban women but on a scale of cultural celebration. I don't believe women should be left to rot in the house - it's a waste - but nor do I believe that we should all swop 'roles' just for the sake of swopping roles. I believe people should have the option - that men should have more rights as fathers, and that women shouldn't feel 'compelled' by familial or social pressure to behave in a certain way. Just given the oppotunity of what they desire their life to be (and many women, sadly do not have a choice).

If that makes me the monster that some of you have in mind then that's okay. *shrugs*


The fact the person who started this thread put this makes me think that I'll always be a part of a lost cause:

No, sorry about that. Though keep in mind that the word "feminist" comes from "feminine", which relates to women, so I did have a misunderstood impression about them.

And you speak far more logically than anyone else in this thread, including myself. You're completely on the right track in all of this. I tried to emphasize that equality is a good thing, but everyone took my mentioning of differences in the genders as unequal and a bad thing. Looking through your perspective, I guess I'm with you "true femininists" about equal rights.

[Jinto]

Originally Posted by Diodati

Y'know I'm only going to post once more in here, but I feel I should at least give my POV rather than bite my tongue...erm fingers.

That was too passionate to be true

Originally Posted by Thewanderer

And you speak far more logically than anyone else in this thread, including myself. You're completely on the right track in all of this. I tried to emphasize that equality is a good thing, but everyone took my mentioning of differences in the genders as unequal and a bad thing. Looking through your perspective, I guess I'm with you "true femininists" about equal rights.

Differences is what spices up our lives. The problem with your "mentioning" of differences lies in the way it can be interpreted. It had some generalization and ignorance. Generaliziation is a very human weakness (because it makes the world easier to understand).
Many people underestimate socialization, some overestimate it... yet sure is, the last thing a person is going to give up without opposition is the own personality/oppinion, which devellops in a socialization process beginning when we are born and ending when we are dead. Socially controversial themes like this one, can attract different oppinions very easily. And every single identity/personality/oppinion/endorser weights the provided oppinions of others differently. So what seems no point for an argument to you (often triggered by unknowingly used generalizations), can be critical for someone else (because he/she might take offense). Human movements like feminism can be compared best with religions. There are all types of supporters (ranges from openminded to radical) and opponents (ranges from openminded to radical too) and others who couldn't care less. The radical types (regardless whether they are supporter or opposition) are responsible for most of the conflicts regarding the issue. All the moderate types are caught up in their ideological "war". Sometimes moderate types are driven to adopt some of the more radical views (or have the feeling to defend their own personality against the radical views of the opponent/own side), which may clash with the views of a moderate opponent (or in some cases supporter), leading to less understanding and weighted generalization as well as ignorance (...biased view).
So the moderate types are like bouncy balls in a play driven by the radical views in the society. However, some are more bouncy than others...

My explanation does not intend to formulate a certain standpoint on feminism. It is meant to explain, why the thread is evolving like this.

(If you want, you can try to find the generalization, that made me writing this )

[Thewanderer]

Originally Posted by Jinto Lin

That was too passionate to be true



Differences is what spices up our lives. The problem with your "mentioning" of differences lies in the way it can be interpreted. It had some generalization and ignorance. Generaliziation is a very human weakness (because it makes the world easier to understand).
Many people underestimate socialization, some overestimate it... yet sure is, the last thing a person is going to give up without opposition is the own personality/oppinion, which devellops in a socialization process beginning when we are born and ending when we are dead. Socially controversial themes like this one, can attract different oppinions very easily. And every single identity/personality/oppinion/endorser weights the provided oppinions of others differently. So what seems no point for an argument to you (often triggered by unknowingly used generalizations), can be critical for someone else (because he/she might take offense). Human movements like feminism can be compared best with religions. There are all types of supporters (ranges from openminded to radical) and opponents (ranges from openminded to radical too) and others who couldn't care less. The radical types (regardless whether they are supporter or opposition) are responsible for most of the conflicts regarding the issue. All the moderate types are caught up in their ideological "war". Sometimes moderate types are driven to adopt some of the more radical views (or have the feeling to defend their own personality against the radical views of the opponent/own side), which may clash with the views of a moderate opponent (or in some cases supporter), leading to less understanding and weighted generalization as well as ignorance (...biased view).
So the moderate types are like bouncy balls in a play driven by the radical views in the society. However, some are more bouncy than others...

My explanation does not intend to formulate a certain standpoint on feminism. It is meant to explain, why the thread is evolving like this.

(If you want, you can try to find the generalization, that made me writing this )

You've cirtainly made me understand everyone's standpoints better. I just want everyone to know that I don't mean anything insulting in this thread, though I still want to discuss what the thread was intended to... to find out the views and opinions of everyone else, possibly learning more from them in the process(for myself and anyone else that posts in it)

[Nightbat®]

Originally Posted by Diodati

Yes they are aware. They are aware that a particular movement of some 40 years ago (which only a certain sect of Feminists were involved in) has now been 'flipped' onto the study an immense CT as a whole. Which wouldn't be so bad if it didn't disregard the work of many wonderful women from the past 300 years, from a multitude of cultures, races and intentions. Many Feminists hate the opinion of what Feminism now is, because 'that' is quite incorrect. But you either succumb to that wrong 'impression' that so many people seem to have, or you can continue on with your own branches and philosophy hoping that one day, people will actually realise what Feminism now exists as.

Because it's being used wrong? It would be like talking about any ideology and only quoting the extremists or certain 'trends' or 'fads' that aren't even applicable to Feminism. It's unfair when people do it with religion, so I see it as slightly unfair when people do it with critical theory.

It's being used wrong by those that claim to be it
as my example of the swastika, which stands for hapiness, a positive life and reincarnation
common knowledge associates it with Genocide, racism and Nazis
it's been abused by extremists
blame the ones that abuse a certain subject and creating a wrong impression

Thruth in your words, but explain why ALL young drivers pay through the nose
for car-insurance, when only a small portion is a "bad" driver
It's the extremes that condemn entire groups
it's those who grab the attention

[uzumaki]

Originally Posted by Thewanderer

Okay, this is turned into a debate(or argument, depending on the view) about physical and mental stuff, and not views on feminism and equality like I intended it to be. I guess this topic is sorta related, but could you guys try not to argue? I don't want my thread to be locked...

I know you are trying to be friendly, but what is so nice about calling a group you seem to have a lot of misconceptions about 'greedy selfish nazi-ish bitches'?

[Thewanderer]

Originally Posted by uzumaki

I know you are trying to be friendly, but what is so nice about calling a group you seem to have a lot of misconceptions about 'greedy selfish nazi-ish bitches'?

I wasn't calling every feminist that, just the ones who despise men. There are women out there like that, like this one.

[Diodati]

Originally Posted by Thewanderer

hough keep in mind that the word "feminist" comes from "feminine", which relates to women, so I did have a misunderstood impression about them.

The word 'feminist' actually comes from the Latin word 'femina' - 'woman' - and 'ist' relating to study or characteistics.

Originally Posted by Jinto Lin

The radical types (regardless whether they are supporter or opposition) are responsible for most of the conflicts regarding the issue. All the moderate types are caught up in their ideological "war". Sometimes moderate types are driven to adopt some of the more radical views (or have the feeling to defend their own personality against the radical views of the opponent/own side), which may clash with the views of a moderate opponent (or in some cases supporter), leading to less understanding and weighted generalization as well as ignorance (...biased view).
So the moderate types are like bouncy balls in a play driven by the radical views in the society. However, some are more bouncy than others...

Yes that's very true. And I'm not going to get too upset over it, because there isn't much I can do. There are many Feminists who don't use the term Feminism anymore because they don't want to tied as some neo-Nazi-cum******, or a man-basher but I don't see why I should let a select few wackos taint the CT that was around before they ever came along. And I won't - I don't claim to be the only example of Feminism, but I know I'm closer to a sane, pragmatic version than most of the examples given in the thread.

Originally Posted by Nightbat®

Thruth in your words, but explain why ALL young drivers pay through the nose
for car-insurance, when only a small portion is a "bad" driver
It's the extremes that condemn entire groups
it's those who grab the attention

Well one is Governmental - that none of us have a 'choice' over. The other is an ideology or belief which is simply controlled by information. And it's through media manipulation and lack of education, I'd say, that these misconceptions have gone on as long as they have. Additionally, the 'extremist's are *not* a part of Feminism to me - Feminism isn't really a nice huge big group of many sections. There are hundreds of different branches with their own agenda, each with their own rights/lefts - but I'm quite amazed that a select few have damaged everyone elses work. I feel quite relieved to some degree that I live in Europe, because Feminism is known as a Theoretical study and philosophy in the same sense as Post/Structuralism, Post/Modernism, Marxism, Post-Colonialism is, whereas in America and other places, it seems to be tied to a movement (one of many radical ones) that happened during the Vietnam War. Or simply to any woman who goes berserk with their girl power slogans.

blame the ones that abuse a certain subject and creating a wrong impression

I do blame them - although I feel I can't judge too much on events that happened before I was born. Nor can I undo them. So yes it annoys me that such extremists have given the whole thing such a bad name but I also can't help feel annoyed by the men and women who continue to create that image of Feminism when it's not true. But I'm sure it will fall on deaf ears, life isn't fair - and some of the examples in this thread have not even been about Feminist extremists - they've been about hypocritical women.

Originally Posted by Thewanderer

I wasn't calling every feminist that, just the ones who despise men. There are women out there like that, like this one.

Yeah the woman died in 1988, her teenage years were full of prostitution, she wrote SCUM in 1966, became mentally unstable, shot Andy Warhol (who she knew btw) and ended up in psychiatric centres.

It's not really picking the cream of the crop in terms of Feminists is it? And some people will probably fail to grasp the point that 99.9% of Feminists these days (and prior) aren't like that. Alas. I've explained all that I can, and there is no need for me to repeat anything.

[Thewanderer]

Originally Posted by Diodati

The word 'feminist' actually comes from the Latin word 'femina' - 'woman' - and 'ist' relating to study or characteistics.

Okay, if you want to get technical

Originally Posted by Diodati

Yeah the woman died in 1988, her teenage years were full of prostitution, she wrote SCUM in 1966, became mentally unstable, shot Andy Warhol (who she knew btw) and ended up in psychiatric centres.

Yeah. I kinda feel sorry for women like that, even if they are evil men-haters...

(maybe I'm too sympathetic? Oh well...)

Originally Posted by Diodati

It's not really picking the cream of the crop in terms of Feminists is it? And some people will probably fail to grasp the point that 99.9% of Feminists these days (and prior) aren't like that. Alas. I've explained all that I can, and there is no need for me to repeat anything.

I know that for sure. I'm not at all about generalization like that.

[DaFool]

Originally Posted by uzumaki

UMMMMM. DUDE. What the h*ll? Feminism is not about any of those things. It sickens me when people are so confident while they jabber away ABSOLUTE idioticy. You might want to do a search on Wikipedia (www.wikipedia.com) about what feminism is, and it certainly isn't about wearing skirts, or blushing more, about selflessness (I think you're confusing RELIGION with FEMINISM).

Please explain how societal definitions of what is "masculine" or "feminine", or religious views of women have nothing to do with feminism.

[Nightbat®]

Originally Posted by Diodati

I'm quite amazed that a select few have damaged everyone elses work.

Actually I'm amazed you are amazed
History and current society is FULL of examples like that where a few 'rape' what
is basicly a "good" and 'Innocent" ideaologie/movement/culture

I do blame them - although I feel I can't judge too much on events that happened before I was born. Nor can I undo them. So yes it annoys me that such extremists have given the whole thing such a bad name but I also can't help feel annoyed by the men and women who continue to create that image of Feminism when it's not true.

I do not "create" that image, it's given to me by those bad apples that scream
the loudest
The problem with that is you get a "Boy who cried wolf" effect

But I'm sure it will fall on deaf ears, life isn't fair - and some of the examples in this thread have not even been about Feminist extremists - they've been about hypocritical women.

All modern women should be considered feminist (in the way You describe)
or at least be respected by men on equal level.

So we discussed the Fem-Nazis and those hypocritical women you mention
One group considers themselves Feminist but claim Superiority/want revenge
The other will claim equality but hide behind their "weaker sex" as an exuse to get
men to do the hard/dirty things
both demand men to give them equality, both won't accept they need to earn it

[Aoie_Emesai]

Here's an offical definition just in case you guys/gals are wondering.

Feminism - The view, articulated in the 19th century, that women are inherently equal to men and deserve equal rights and opportunities. More recently, a social and political movement that took hold in the United States in the late 1960s, soon spreading globally.

Well it's rather offical, its google, have fun.

Thewanderer - well you are correct, this is much more of a debate now than a discussion. hahahah

--
Nightbat®-

So we discussed the Fem-Nazis and those hypocritical women you mention
One group considers themselves Feminist but claim Superiority/want revenge
The other will claim equality but hide behind their "weaker sex" as an exuse to get
men to do the hard/dirty things
both demand men to give them equality, both won't accept they need to earn it

Well we haven't really been gettting alone that well have we? Men and Womens? Sometime I feel that men and womens feel that they are inferior or superior to the opposite sex. They think that it could've been better if they were born as a male or female. Personally i'm superbly happy with my sex, so i don't consider a sex change an option. Hahahah

ps: Do you guys/gals ever felt like that?

[Sinestra]

I think what makes us diffrent is that each culture has some type of belief structure and thats where the problem is i will aknowledge that haveing diffrent people in the world in a great thing nor do i think i am superior to a women i am as nature intended me to be just like animals have certin things about them to help them survive so do men and women my point in this



Id rather have an idea then a belief its a lot easier changing an idea then a belief if more people took this to heart men and women and other cultures might get along better

[pinsher6]

though world have given different gift to differnt people... we are the same...we live in the same community with equal status...

[Kaoru Chujo]

Feminism is a good thing. The "man-hating" stereotype is totally exaggerated, promoted by men to try to stop women getting equality. Sure, some women hate men -- and too many women have experiences of violence and discrimination that would justify that feeling, even today. It's amazing that more women don't hate men.

Young women today have no idea how bad things were only 40 years ago: the 60s were an era of liberation, but even the most radical groups treated women as silly toys. Rather like the way women are portrayed in some Japanese media. My grandmother was proud of the fact that she always voted the way my granddad told her. My mother quit her excellent job as soon as she was married because she thought it was wrong for a married woman to work.

Certainly we may have carried the sameness of the sexes a bit far, but it was a necessary antidote to the traditional "separate and totally unequal" situation of the past. The conservative Muslim suppression of women that people criticise so much is not that different from the traditional Euro-American approach.

[Legend Ver 2]

Originally Posted by Kaoru Chujo

Feminism is a good thing. The "man-hating" stereotype is totally exaggerated, promoted by men to try to stop women getting equality. Sure, some women hate men -- and too many women have experiences of violence and discrimination that would justify that feeling, even today. It's amazing that more women don't hate men.

Well this is my first time posting in this thread. First of all, don't take it the wrong way if I'm misinterpreting what you're saying (correct me if I'm wrong), but it almost sounds like you agree and promote that women should hate men because of what happen many decades ago. I personally do not think it's that amazing that more women don't hate men. You seem like make it sound like over 50% of men abuse and use violence against women when in reality it's only a small percentage of the male population that do those kind of sick things.

Young women today have no idea how bad things were only 40 years ago: the 60s were an era of liberation, but even the most radical groups treated women as silly toys. Rather like the way women are portrayed in some Japanese media. My grandmother was proud of the fact that she always voted the way my granddad told her. My mother quit her excellent job as soon as she was married because she thought it was wrong for a married woman to work.

I agree that young women have no idea how bad things were 40 years ago, but I don't really see a reason that they should know. If anything, it just brings more caution in the trust they have towards men and maybe instill even more hate because of knowing something so ugly in the past. If young women are happy at what they have today, I say let them be instead of bringing up the past.

Certainly we may have carried the sameness of the sexes a bit far, but it was a necessary antidote to the traditional "separate and totally unequal" situation of the past. The conservative Muslim suppression of women that people criticise so much is not that different from the traditional Euro-American approach.

This I would have to agree on.

[TrueKnight]

Originally Posted by Kaoru Chujo

The conservative Muslim suppression of women that people criticise so much is not that different from the traditional Euro-American approach.

Bah. Traditional Europe or American were much better. You obviously have no idea what they did to women in Iraq, especially Afghanistan. Underline the word conservative.