It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Feminist or FemiNazi? Truth and Myth

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 03:41 PM

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Boatphone, the Wage gap stands at 77%. Maybe you don't see a need, but many do.

That is because there are more men in positions of higher power, and thus have higher pay. But that is changing and more and more women are gaining access to the highest levels of power.

But just for the sake of argument if that "wage gap" is true, is that 23 cents the only thing that feminists what to change??

-- Boat

[edit on 28-4-2006 by Boatphone]

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 04:09 PM

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
I've always hated the term feminism.

I know, I'm not crazy about it either, because of the connotation. But it's more catchy and easier to use than "equality for men and women". What's important is that there is a stigma attached to it that is negative and that's what Parr and I are trying to dispell here.

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Why are the radical feminist organizations so quick to ally themselves with the Gay and Transgender movements?

Jim, I can only answer your questions from my perspective, which does not represent all feminists, as I am an individual.

I ally myself with other oppressed groups because I believe in equal rights. For all people. Regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race, whatever...

Why do so many feminist organizations support abortion and eschew motherhood?

Because we believe in the choice. We believe that a woman shouldn't be forced to have children if they don't want them. Just like men.
I don't know that we eschew motherhood, we just feel the freedom to exercise the choice to not have kids. Some women simply don't want kids. That's ok, right?

Why are so many women turning their backs on feminism?

I can't speak to that with surity, but I can guess. Maybe a woman who is anti-feminist can answer that. It might have something to do with the negative stereotype of a feminist that we're trying to dispell.

Another issue is abortion. Many anti-feminist women don't believe a woman should have the choice. I'm against abortion, myself, meaning I wouldn't choose to have one unless my life was in danger, but I do support choice 100%. And I don't look down on women who choose to have an abortion, even though it wouldn't be my choice. I know how important it is to me to have the choice and I support it for other women, too.

The last thing is why can’t people accept the fact that men and women are NOT equal.

Well, they're not identical, we all know, thank goodness, but when speaking in terms of rights and value, women and men should be considered equal. Not the same, but contributing equal value and enjoying equal rights.

I am not still sure if it is in effect but UPS used to have a policy that required met to be able to lift packages weighing 75 lbs., while requiring that women only have to lift 50 lbs.. To me that is discrimination both ways.

Did they get paid the same?

And we're not necessarily talking about who can lift more. We're talking about the vast majority of jobs in the workplace that don't require any lifting at all.

And Boatphone, I'm talking about the same job with the same education, the same experience, working the same hours. All things being equal, the woman makes 77% of the man's wage.

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 04:31 PM
Hmmmm,a new name, something to ponder.
I think the feminine aspect of feminism looks to support other groups being hurt by society. How many families DON'T have a gay member (not necessarily in the immediate family)? Women are in the enviable/unenviable position of bearing children, and this bond overspills to caring for others. Remember, the Mothers of the Disappeared in Central and South America sat outside embassies to bring to light the plight of their sons and daughters.

"Support abortion and eschew motherhood"--false dichotomy. It was precisely to save the lives of women, to value a woman's life, that we legalized abortions. Making abortions illegal will not stop abortions. Now, a woman who has an abortion does not eschew motherhood. Remember, preRvW had many mothers who had had abortions, and many women who could not concieve because of an illegal abortion. Forcing women/girls into becoming mothers is wrong.

IMO some women do not embrace feminism because they are ignorant about it. Maybe they are told it is evil, causing evil like 9-11. If a man in a patriarchal society tells a women what to do...

You know, the height requirement for police used to be tall. Why, because white males (Irish) were tall.

This thread is so great for discussion.

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 06:06 PM
Most of the self-identified feminists I've spoken to are moderate, pro-choice, the very picture of tolerance. Of course there are always going to be fringe whackos, it doesn't matter what organization you want to select, the fringe is ever-present. Femnazis certainly do exist, but they're no more indicative of the whole than any other extremist group.

As I said, I dislike the term, but in searching the folds of my brain for a better one, I came up pretty much dry (equalism, maybe?). This is like the situation with English's lack of a gender neutral pronoun. Very difficult to surmount for writers; ya wind up using him/her or the technically incorrect plural.

Anyway, one of the reasons feminism has allied with bi/gay/transgender activism is because of mutual interest. Both movements seek to remove gender bias, and promote equality across the spectrum. While it can be said that there are huge rivalries between lesbian activists and gay activists, and between gay activists and transgender activists, and so on - the basic demand for acceptance, tolerance, and equal oppurtunity pervades throughout.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend - and intolerance is the shared foe (Despite the notable existence of intolerance within the sub-cultures that are demaning equality, but I think that's a case of people being unable to see themselves in the same light as they see others.)

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 06:40 PM
i rather like WyrdeOne's suggestion of "equalism".

i certainly believe that no differentation should be made between the genders as far as civil and political rights. i think it's horrible that women make 23% less than men that work the same jobs. i am entirely in support of legalized abortion.

but i also believe that, in the extreme to which many of its proponents carry it, feminism is just as detrimental to gender equality as any effort of a chauvanist male.

the problem with feminism vs. male chauvanism is the same as that which underlies racism: rather than trying to equalize these groups through legislation that benefits one or is detrimental to the other, we must regard this issue as a personal responsibility. when the individual stops classifying others into biological pigeonholes, that individual does not need legislation to enforce equality. and no amount of legislation will ever solve this problem.

so rather than calling for the government to do something about this, address it in your own life, through your own actions. if you come across a sexist, or a racist, or someone who has a problem with gay people, don't go get your senator and tell on the bigot. do something yourself. take personal responsibility. evangelize. beat them up if you want, hell, it's none of my business.

if we want equality we have to create it ourselves. the government will never engender a social change like that of its own volition. and we sure as hell won't get equality if we-- males and females alike-- keep treating this like some kind of contest.

radical feminism won't get us anywhere.

radical equalism just might.

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 06:50 PM

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I ally myself with other oppressed groups because I believe in equal rights.

Whoa, women are an "oppressed group" in America?!?

And Boatphone, I'm talking about the same job with the same education, the same experience, working the same hours. All things being equal, the woman makes 77% of the man's wage.

I have not seen that stat anywhere...

-- Boat

[edit on 28-4-2006 by Boatphone]

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 07:08 PM

Originally posted by BoatphoneThat is because there are more men in positions of higher power, and thus have higher pay. But that is changing and more and more women are gaining access to the highest levels of power.

Not entirely, and not entirely. For instance, women programmers with the same experience as men are often paid less, are not put in charge of teams as often and aren't thought of as "serious programmers" (or are thought of as "expendable programmers") because it's believed they aren't the primary wage earner of any family. It's often "adjusted" in favor of the guys in peer reviews, where your performance determines your raise. At my old job, we watched as a guy who slept at his desk and had numerous complaints by his customers kept his job and was given raises while the woman who fixed his mistakes and was highly thought of by his customers was downsized when the company ran into financial trouble.

This ain't an isolated incident.

I should note that many people blame it on women's "lifestyle choices" -- they earn less because they take off time to have babies (as though the alternative is to give birth right there in the middle of the break room and then go back to loading the forklift) and because they drop out to take care of elderly parents when they have a health crisis. Women are usually the ones who stay home with sick children.

Now we are told this is a "lifestyle choice" and that it's the reason why our wages are lower.

Feminists say "nonsense" to that, and that BOTH parents should be encouraged by society to share the duties. Not to make it an "oh, the kid is sick so we call mommy to pick them up. We can't bother daddy at work but it's okay to bother mommy."

But just for the sake of argument if that "wage gap" is true, is that 23 cents the only thing that feminists what to change??

Oh no. Among the other things:
- the perception that women who get raped "asked for it" (the case of the Duke lacrosse team, here, who felt that hiring a woman as a stripper then meant she was also going to have sex with them, whether or not she wanted to have sex with them.)
- game concepts such as "grand theft auto" where you (the handsome and dynamic males) manage a string of prostitutes as part of the game scenario (and you threaten them or beat them to get money/information.)
- women as unthinking followers of any male in the landscape.
- we're not fond of pornography because it's so one-sided as a rule.
- the concept that the only women worth considering have large breasts, tiny bodies, have blue eyes and blonde hair and are between the ages of 16 and 25.
- across the world, the idea that little girl children are sold into slavery, raped, abused, abandoned or killed because girls are not as desired as boys.
- making sure that if someone works at a low wage job, that it is at least a living wage (they can pay rent and bills and afford food for a month.)
- making sure no child gets left behind in terms of health care.
- making sure no child has to go to school hungry because the household is too poor to buy food.
- active participation in the political process.
- more women film directors, movie producers, tv series writers and producers. In fact, more women in all creative fields (this has changed since the 1970's, when, in order to get a job as a cover artist for a book or a writer of science fiction, westers, or ANYthing other than romance or the occasional mystery, you had to be a man. It's not that women couldn't write -- it's just that the editors wouldn't buy it. Ditto artists (the comic book world is in some respects still very hard to crack, except in the indies.), more women orchestra conductors.
- encouraging women to go into engineering, robotics, computer science, programming or any other field they like (I remember the days when I was the *only* woman at computer conferences -- except for the doll-like models who stood at the displays and smiled and played "hostess" and steered you to the guys who told you all about the product.)
- the right for any woman to select the kind of birth control she wants, and to NOT have that dictated by the religious beliefs of the pharmacist or the doctor.
- that if a woman choses an abortion because the guy didn't believe in condoms or in sticking around to raise a child, that she should get good counseling in all options and if she opts for it, a safe and legal medical abortion.
- that violence against any partner in a relationship is wrong and poisonous to the relationship and society and victims need counseling and they need safe houses and a way out (feminsits started the women's shelters.)
- that a woman has a right to walk in a public place without having to put up with loud and lewd sexual comments (or ugly, bigoted comments about her shape, race, or whatever.)
- that these issues are not issues only for American women, but are for all people.

I could go on, but that's kind of the basics. More here:

[edit on 28-4-2006 by Byrd]

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 07:37 PM
Oppressed, meaning burdened by abuse of authority; burden spiritually or mentally. An individual or a group can be oppressed. As a group, women have come a long way, but there is still work to do. As long as persons in national leadership/influential positions accuse women of being feminazis, etc., then there is oppression. When womem are not free to worship as men there is oppression. Men in a patriarchal society can be oppressed, if they don't live up to society's standards. Workers in an economy can be oppressed with a degradation of working conditions and low wages. Families can suffer mentally with debt from medical bills or lack of treatment. We all suffer when unemployed in an economy that values levels of unemployment. As citizens we either honor ouselves and each other or blow away in winds of oppression.

Dang, did it again, forgot to say...I like "equalism."

Oh, right on, Byrd.

[edit on 28-4-2006 by desert]

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 07:39 PM
Look at NOW (National Organization of Women) or if you prefer NAG (National Association of Gals).

That organization gives women a bad name. Whose side where they on when all these accusations where being made against Clinton? Clintons side of course, they only represent liberal women. The hypocracy is amazing.

Where was the NAG gang when Katherine Harris needed them, what about Paula Clark, Kathleen Willey, or even Monica Lewinski?

Katherine Harris is the perfect example why NOW is hurting and not helping womens rights.

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 07:54 PM

Originally posted by Boatphone
I have not seen that stat anywhere...

Whether you are the manager in the corner office or the cashier ringing up sales, a woman earns only 77 percent as much as her male counterpart with the same job description and experience.

I can give you the link (as I did on page one) but I can't make you read it.

So many great posts! Great post, Byrd!

P.S. I don't have any problem with pornography. I don't have a problem with prostitution or 'exotic dancing' either. If women want to do those things, I support them to do so. IF WOMEN WANT TO DO THOSE THINGS. That's what it's all about for me. The choice.

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 08:11 PM

Originally posted by WolfofWar

"The War against Boys"

Gender Bias

18 September 2002 Martin Lehmann


If you saw a TV commercial or sitcom depicting a clumsy, bumbling, dork, is it more likely the person is: male[ ] female[ ]

If you saw a TV commercial showing the dangers of drinking and driving, would you expect the persons in the commercial to be: male[ ] female[ ]

If you saw a TV commercial about domestic violence would you expect the perpetrators of the violence to be: male[ ] female[ ]

If you saw a TV commercial or sitcom showing a smart, competent person with a confident, all-knowing smile, is it more likely the person is: male[ ] female[ ]

In a recent Perth survey of Year 11 students (male and female), 82% answered male, male. male. female to the survey questions.

The campaign of affirmative action over the past three decades to improve opportunities for women has been hijacked by radical feminists to denigrate, belittle and emotionally castrate men (particularly white heterosexual men). Many of the feminist zealots are now in positions of power as government advisers where they increasingly influence public policy.

Gender Bias in Australia

I'm going to be perfectly honest about this; In all cases I was able to picture both male and female characters equally.

As for the "feminazi",..... I can also honestly answer that the only time I've seen a "feminazi" in action was on TV, usually in movies (fiction). One example is the movie called "PCU". I don't believe that there is no such thing anywhere in this world,.... I think there probably is,... I just haven't seen it, or don't remember seeing it.

In the case of TV shows surrounding the subject of crime,.... It is true that men are usually the ones portrayed as murderers and rapists. Then again... what are the statistics on how many men vs. women commit terrible/bloody crimes in the real world? Are the show writers being true to that ratio? I don't watch these shows enough, but so far, for the ones I have watched, women are shown to commit crimes as well, sometimes murder, and sometimes lesser crimes. I guess statistics on this would really help.

Anyway,.. I know the true meaning of feminism, and I'm all for it. IF there are "feminazies" (or man-haters) out there, I would never support their cause, just as I would never support the woman-haters/oppressors.

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 09:55 PM

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Whether you are the manager in the corner office or the cashier ringing up sales, a woman earns only 77 percent as much as her male counterpart with the same job description and experience.

I guess that must be true in some places and in some professions.
But in my world, it doesn't seem to happen. My union job for 30+ years gave the same pay and benefits to either sex.
And, I worked there for a time in a job that had always been done by men. (And my supervisor there was a bit of a misogynist, lol)

The place I am at now gives the same pay for either sex, although the pay ain't great.

What I do see a lot of these days is a return to woman-as-sex-object: in movies, music, magazines, music videos.
Some may say that women now have the freedom to do and say and wear whatever. But, to me, its a voluntary return to the days of Al Bundy, in Married with Children.
To me its very tiresome to see mag cover upon mag cover standing in line at Blockbuster featuring women in various stages of undress, with obvious surgery to alter body parts.
I don't understand this fascination with breast enhancement :shk:

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 10:03 PM
Feminism is OK for me as long as it debates issues with merit (ie: equal pay) and doesn't devolve into the Naomi Wolfe "war against men"/ "war against femininity" agenda. Anybody agree?

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 10:52 PM
Wow, I was off for the afternoon and evening and the thread really took off!

Originally posted by WolfofWar
I dont quite have a quote offhand, but I would suggest to read into some of Wendy Mcelroys views on Feminism.

I will do, WoW.. thanks

Also, extremist feminist rhetoric can be seen almost everywhere if you open your eyes to see it. it has affected our schools, our television shows, commercials, and ultimately, how our society views men. How many times on a crime show like law and Order: SVU, have you seen a woman being the perpretrator of a heinous act?

I haven't watched tv in close to 5 years, so I can't say regarding the TV analogy, and having said that, I'm not sure what you mean when you say extremist feminist rhetoric can be seen most anyway if my eyes are open to it. What exactly do my eyes need to be open to?

Also Extremist feminists try to paint a picture of girls in school being given unfair disadvantages.

I'm having a look at this page right now.

Now I in no way condemn the core beliefs of feminism. I believe women should be equal, in an ideal world, I do not think we should havea patriarchial society. But one cannot be blind to the fact that certain groups of feminists have hi-jacked these beliefs to fuel a change from a patriarchial society, to a matriarchial society. That is not equality. :T

I am sure my responses here will not havea warm welcome, but I guess most views that go against the norm never really do.

Point taken. Concerning the survey you presented... I think the 82% who answered what they did is a reflection of superficial change. Women are still disadvantaged. Look at what BH has talked about regarding women's wages as compared to men. Look at the roles that are still expected of women. Look at the stuff Byrd speaks of. Are you trying to say that patriarchy has passed and based on anti-male bashing we are moving to matriarchy?

I agree that presenting men as they've been presented is not accurate and may indeed be a result of feminst influence. However, based on these mainstream presentations of men, I do not think you can say that women are still not oppressed and limited, and I most certainly do not see it as a move toward Matriarchy. As a woman within the feminist movement such a suggestion is ludicrous.

And WoW, care not how your responses are taken. This is a conversation that we need to have, and I am glad you are partaking

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 11:04 PM

MD: I think it’s not a bad idea at all. If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males. People are afraid to say that kind of stuff anymore.

I knew someone was going to bring up Mary Daly. She had her time, and speaking theoretically, it's long gone (even amongst radicals). She's quite well known for her concept of "spinning" and in the process of developing that concept she basically essentialized women, which is something, imo, to be avoided.

As to the drastic reduction of males in connection to a decontamination of the earth, if we are to be technical, that is ecofeminism, which has some interesting points to be considered.

Though, I think it goes to far to say that it's necessary to think that men need to be reduced in order to decontaminate the earth, and this is based on an assumption of gender as a social construction. However, that is where Daly and I differ, she seems to believe in naturalised gender traits.

It is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear.”

I have some stuff to add to this Brownmiller quote that you might find interesting.

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 11:10 PM

Originally posted by Boatphone
I don't see the need for a "feminist" movement in America. Women have equal rights now, so I fail to see the need for such a movement. I hear "feminists" speak on my campus and all they do is bash men as being dumb or mean.

Women may have equal rights formally, but those rights have yet to be substantiated.
In other words, lots of talk, not much action.
We are far from equal.

I think that the "feminist" movement hurts women, by making those that choose to stay home and work seem somehow less equal to men. Also, besides getting to right to vote (which was before the modern feminist movement) I don't think feminism has done anything positive for women, or anyone else for the matter.

I think it's unfortunate that anyone sees it as bad that a woman chooses to stay at home. Feminism enabled that choice. I have seen women be criticized for it, and all I can do is voice my disapproval of it. It is a choice, and one that was not availible before. That needs to be respected.

You say you don't think feminism has done anything positive for women since the first wave sufferage movement. Well, what negative things do you think feminism has done?

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 11:22 PM

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
I've always hated the term feminism. I mean, if someone started a movement called manism, they wouldn't get out the gate without falling under the weight of protest.

There's a good reason why a movement called manism wouldn't make it out of the gate...

It's because men are not oppressed.
It's because men are celebrated each day via normative factors in society.

I support this movement being called feminism. Why? Because it is women who are oppressed. It is the feminine. And it is the feminine who need to gain rights and privilege taken for granted by men.

That is why it's called feminism. Because the main goal is for the feminine (women) to become equal to men.

To call it something else would detract from the focus and intent, as well as those most affected by patriarchy.

Something, anything besides the term feminism. That doesn't speak of equality, it speaks of a different brand of inequality.

Just my .02

As stated, I disagree. I do not think feminism implies a different inequality. More that women need to become equal, as they are the oppressed. It puts the focus on women as they are the ones suffering.

posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 12:09 AM
Parr I am in complete agreement with you. There is a woman who has a column in Fox News' Viewpoints section. Her name is Wendy McElroy. I read her column every chance I get. I also agree with her 100%. the website she writes for is Check it out.

posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 12:25 AM
The irony I always consider when I think of "Feminazis" (ie: the angry dike types who hate men) :

They hate men with all their heart, but they copy men in every single little facet and want to replace men (and take all the women while at it- let's be frank).

Anybody ever think about that?

posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 01:04 AM
First off excellent thread! I've always considered the modern demonization of the feminist movement to be distressing. I truly don't understand how people can consider gender equality a bad thing. Its sad that modern women might feel a hesitation to call themselves feminist because of the slanderous rhetoric that has beeen cast against them.

Now, has the era of feminism past?
I answer with an emphatic no!

As a nation we have a habit of losing interest in an issue once minimal progress has been made. Popular culture seizes upon a movement driving it forward accomplishing some goals but often having little impact on the culture at large. Once it loses its hipness, once it's no longer a cause celebre but just another mundane issue people forget to keep moving forward. We allow things to stagnate secure in the belief that we've accomplished enough when often we've merely paid lipservice instead of taking an issue to heart. I have a feeling subconciously we realize this and feel a resentment when we are reminded of our forgotten civil projects. So instead of resuming the struggle we lash out, we bemoan the necessity of being "PC" belittling the very real issues that plague our nation. When black people complain of discrimination they're playing the "race card", when women point out inequality they're buying into a "victim culture". Women have have made great strides toward legal equality yet unfortunately made little impact on American cultural views which is the true goal of any civil movement. Without cultural change legal change is meaningless.
As long as "strong" women are viewed as an aberration and feminine submission is valued over independence there will be a need for a feminist movement regardless of the enlightened status of our legal code.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in