01-04-2012, 07:41 PM
considering their source I think it's more their anti-appreciation for life... be it feminism, flawed education, etc...all kinda goes together IMO.
Originally Posted by Medusa
as for ladies vs women, I had a college prof who proclaimed that one could not be a woman until one had sex. So some of us apparently can remain "young ladies" or "girls" until we give it up I suppose... (and she WAS pushing a feminist agenda which is how the topic came up. I just remember coming on GS instead of continuing to pay attention to the lecture. Pretty sure Susan B. Anthony would have smacked her upside her head lol - though when I pointed out that it seemed anti-feminist to say that sex determined such a thing she then said sex in marriage is what somehow kills the woman's power [paraphrasing from memory] like I said she was nuts.)
Not all people who are "feminists" are the "bad" kind. I have no problem with those fighting for the equal right to vote, work, etc... but there are other points in the movement that I don't find all that GOOD for society at large or women in general... and the movement that gets their panties in a wad (or gstrings, or whatever) because *gasp* of such a trivial thing as ladies vs women... well, as a woman/lady I just can't get on board with it.
01-04-2012, 08:03 PM
^ so, I can see you point about not getting on board; what I find distressing is the dismissive language, the anger that seems to be boiling beneath it - like it is just too too exhausting to think about power, equality, inequality, identity, opportunity and yes - gender relations in all of this and these shapes and impact what and how we see, experience, understand and wish for in life. I also cringe at the seeming wish that 'it' would just all go away, when the "it" remains unspecified but makes me worry that IT does not include inequality (like that can stay, just deal with it) but people like me who might question it and hope for more. But like many others here, I too am glad you are here.
I think it might be important to think about feminism in the plural and many have suggested and thus, feminisms, and it might be important to think of women that way too - as many "kinds" - with different races, nations, class statuses, ages, abilities, sexual identities and so forth. With this in mind, one might consider thinking about reproductive rights (and their movements) and reproductive justice - as a kind of exercise to thinking about different ways of understanding or conceptualizing problems and needs, and programs for change too. The latter, for example, has worked not 'just' for the right to medically sound abortions, but rather, for the right (legal, political, economic, cultural, etc) to have children and so on...
About gender, feminism and economic change: well,....many like to call our current economic crisis a 'mancession', and when they do so, they like to do so to say "f" you to the feminists and to blame them for the current economic crisis all in one breath. It is much more complicated than this f you sound bite, though - yes, many men have lost jobs and many more have faced stagnant and declining wages in the US for the last 3 decades. This, in fact, is a big part of what propelled or pushed so many women to enter the labor force ... but this entry was and remains overwhelming low wage, service sector, low to no benefit employment. So, in short, we are all screwed but some like to make that fact blurry ('cuz then maybe we would unite and do something about it - the it in this case being our economic system -- but divide and conquer has had such a successful history....
01-04-2012, 08:17 PM
I don't mean to stray from the debate here but I just want to respond - Thank you, Mathman, for the welcome
01-04-2012, 10:43 PM
With minor things getting edited, such as poster opinions of certain skaters, kidding, silly remarks, I truly think this thread does not belong in this forum. Discussions of feminism, abortion or not are very serious and this should be moved to ? but not here.
OBJECTION TO SUBJECT MATTER. IMPORTANT BUT NOT FOR FS BOARD.
01-04-2012, 10:51 PM
Maybe, but it's been great while it's lasted. Good to talk these things out from time to time--though scary a bit--with people who agree and with people who disagree. Thanks to everyone for being so honest, for talking and for listening.
Last edited by Olympia; 01-04-2012 at 10:53 PM.
01-04-2012, 11:40 PM
And predictably the cries begin to censor discussion or at least bury it out of sight and out of mind when the topic becomes uncomfortable. Ah ignorance is bliss.
BTW, emma, I think you just got an answer to your question in the post above.
01-04-2012, 11:51 PM
It is amazing what gets censored her and who does not. But really, this thread should be moved. Carry on. Not uncomfortable, but it seems blatantlly against guidelines, however mods are in the thread so, whatever.
01-05-2012, 12:31 AM
that's why this thread should have been closed or moved to politics section days ago.
Originally Posted by skateluvr
we know it will end up like this sort of discussion.
01-05-2012, 12:38 AM
skatinginbc, I have meant every word I've said reguardless how you interpret them. I was talking about the bad consequences of feminism. Everything I've refered to was linked to it, even though some people might not be aware of them.
What's the difference whether I read Chinese newspaper or not?! If you are interested in knowing this, I could honestly tell you that I do not read Chinese newspaper at all. But good for these local newspaper which have the guts!
Originally Posted by skatinginbc
I think we have every reason to say that these two examples you gave are, though it's not entirely, but they are related to feminism. It's a rather large scaled and complexy social issue and cannot be addressed easily and in short. It might not be the feminists' ideas and ideals. It certainly has lead to the consequenses which the feminists might not want to see and bear.
Originally Posted by Dragonlady
gkelly, No one in this thread has ever claimed that feminism was a bad move in the first place. All people have said was feminism has gone too far which has resulted in such and such...
Abortion is the most vulnerable point of conservatives, IMO. The rest, I think Spun Silver and Toni have good points.
Last edited by Bluebonnet; 01-05-2012 at 12:41 AM.
01-05-2012, 02:31 AM
Off the ice
I just told someone yesterday that I would stay out of this thread, as the subject strikes me as a bit too contentious for an online forum. I'll stay out of the main argument, but I do want to address this:
Feminism goes together with flawed education?! (head meets desk)
Originally Posted by Tonichelle
Toni, I am sorry for what your mother went through. Truly. It must have been very scary to get the information she did and then have no support for her choices and decisions. However, arguing that her doctor's action's were directly linked to feminism and represent the views of all feminists is just strange. There are many different types of feminism, and as Medusa noted, there are plenty of other possible explanations for the doctor's conduct and advice. In addition, telling a woman that her pregnancy is likely putting her life at risk may be an unwelcome truth, but not telling her that is condescending, makes it impossible for her to decide what to do, and strikes me as a form of malpractice. That said, if a woman nonetheless chooses to continue her pregnancy, not treating her is unethical.
I for one have no idea what my doctors' politics, views and values are. I don't particularly care, so long as I get good healthcare and can make informed decisions for myself. It seems like your mother was not given this opportunity by at least one of her doctors. FWIW, there is a more awareness now about culturally sensitive practice, and research related to working with specific cultural groups and members of different religions whose decision-making is greatly informed by their faith. I hope that the findings and recommendations from such research will trickle into the field, so that patients can get not just the best care possible but the kind of care that is truly suited to their needs.
01-05-2012, 06:58 AM
Very true, Buttercup. I know that in the old days, a doctor's word was law, not to be questioned by anyone. Now patients are encouraged to question their doctors. Also, since medical knowledge is more widely available, patients have access to information that can help them make more well informed decisions.
One thing that occurred to me the other day in light of this discussion is to consider advances in the rights of the disabled as another result of various civil rights movements. This is a huge step forward, though it's one that isn't as obvious to people who don't know anyone with a disability. Environmental improvements such as ramps and closed captioning have opened the world to people who are perfectly able to be independent but need some extra accessibility. It isn't just something that people do because they're nicer: in the United States, much of it is the result of a law, the Americans with Disabilities Act. (I'm sure there are similar laws in other countries, but I can only speak of the U.S.) This is the law that mandates wheelchair ramps, bathroom stalls that can accommodate a disabled person's equipment, Braille elevator numbers, and other accommodations in buildings. This law is the Title IX of the disabled. As with feminism, people today can't really understand the vastness of this change unless they lived through the years before it or have read about it.
Eunice Kennedy Shriver, the founder of the Special Olympics, once said something very sad but enlightening. She said that long ago, most people didn't know anyone with a mental disability unless they had a disabled relative. Children with extreme mental disabilities were kept at home or even institutionalized. This is the exception nowadays, not the rule. In those days, people with certain physical challenges such as blindness were considered unemployable or eligible for only menial jobs. They were dependent on their families or on charity for bare subsistence. Now, thanks to the ADA and to increasingly effective mechanical and electronic assistance, they have much more potential for varied careers. It turns out that it's surprisingly easy for disabled people to fit into many work environments with just a little accommodation.
I'm not saying that this is a direct result of the women's movement, but it is part of the general trend for people to seek rights for hitherto disregarded groups. Additionally, many of the most avid activists for the disabled are parents of disabled children, both mothers and fathers. In the old days, maybe the mothers would have hung back, because they weren't comfortable in public life. Not any more. People speak up now. And by and large, this is a good thing.
Last edited by Olympia; 01-05-2012 at 07:06 AM.
01-05-2012, 09:49 AM
I am a believer too! As for added "rich", let's be fair: richness has no limits. If someone is rich, his race, sexuality, etc. doesn't count. He/she is just rich! Fact.
Originally Posted by Mathman
I was talking about some average individual in the stories that I see, read, hear in mass media, TV dramas, etc. The pattern is often like that: an afro-american got fired, a woman got fired, a gay got fired, ... They all have what to say: "oh, they said they fired me because I am lazy, but that's not true! They fired me because I am black! F== racists! Or- they fired me because I am a woman, I can get pregnant! Or- they fired me because I am a gay! F== bigots!" Etc. And only a heterosexual male has nothing esle to say except "they fired me because I was a bad employee".
Well, if you say it's not like that, so let it be. You live there, you know better.
01-05-2012, 10:15 AM
1. Of course, if a white straight male is fired due to discrimination, of course, he should be free to make that assertion and demonstrate facts to support that. That the mass media doesn't report it doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but given the make-up of any post-racial Western society (which is of course a massive subject on it's own), I would need to learn the facts before I believe that. Of course, as a black male who's been threatened by white supremacists in my past, I'm more inclined to believe discrimination against the maginalized.
2. I'd be interested in hearing more about how feminism at it's fundamental (the promotion of women as equal beings to men and deserving of the same rights, privileges and freedoms) directly leads to all the negative consequences people are arguing. As a corollary, would one be willing to accept the premise that religion at it's most fundamental (a system of morality generally involving faith of some sort) directly leads to the whole host of negative consequences that we've seen throughout history that has been justified via religion?
01-05-2012, 12:05 PM
Former skater and COMPLETE skating nerd!
Speaking of genders, what I'd love to know is how the ISU and national federations would respond to an elite trans athlete who was an amazing competitor... how would they handle that? I'm sure they'd just be mortified. *rolls eyes* I'm not aware of any examples of this, but I would be very curious to hear people's opinions on this.
01-05-2012, 12:51 PM
Originally Posted by n_halifax
I guess I'm one of those "can't have your cake and eat it too" kind of people. When it comes to sports if it's a man dressed as a woman he still has the advantage of having a male body - ergo he has the "advantage" technically (however ladies have the advantage of having more flexibility etc)... I can't see a woman going as a man having any real advantage over the guys technically though... except, again, they could have better spins etc just due to their body type... again not bashing women here *oh my!* but body type plays a part in sport.