Feminism

According to the dictionary, feminism is:  "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes"

For 'economic equality', would you not require a Socialistic government that then redistributes income? Why should we have 'economic equality' among men and women? Men and women should make equal pay for an equal amount of work.  They should not make equal amounts of pay regardless of whether or not they work.

I think it is interesting to note that Friedan herself (the mother of feminism, essentially) was a staunch Marxist. 

http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/50s/friedan-per-horowitz.html

http://www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2003/1125roberts.html

http://www.wpunj.edu/~newpol/issue35/boucher35.htm

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=1096

http://www.rense.com/general21/bettyfriedan.htm

What of 'social equality'? How will you achieve this 'social equality'? Are you going to ram this agenda down everyone's throat through government force, and social control?

According to webster online, the definition of fascism is:  "a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition"

Of particularly important note is the section that reads "economic and social regimentation".  Keeping in mind that feminism demands both economic, and social equality of the sexes, this begs the question:  'how will you attain this 'social and economic equality'?  Through use of the government. 

Political equality is something women in the USA already have.    So what is the purpose behind the feminist movement?

In light of these considerations, I am not a 'feminist.'  I am in favor of equal rights under the law for all people, regardless of sex.  Is this 'feminism'? No.  Not feminism by definition, anyway.

>>1
"Of particularly important note is the section that reads "economic and social regimentation".  Keeping in mind that feminism demands both economic, and social equality of the sexes, this begs the question:  'how will you attain this 'social and economic equality'?  Through use of the government. "

And social regimentation through force.  (fascism)

>>1 Good post, and great articles.  No wonder all the feminists I know support the democrats (the socialists).

lol

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=feminazi

>>4
It's not feminism to worry about. It's the neo-feminists to watch out for, they're damn hard and stupid. By the way, that site's 'Nazi' symbol is actually wrong, it's a Buddha sign. The Nazi symbol is diamond-shaped, not square. That site loses.

Feminists are losers that are not experiencing a massive stiff cock on a regular basis. I can help them.

>>6 Probably the saddest thing I've read on this board, serious or not.

>>6
Though I would enjoy a stiff cock up my rectum!

>>8 OH FUCKS I GOT HAD BY AN E-OPPONENT WHO INSINUATES THAT BEING GAY IS BAAAAD! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!
One can commonly get the measure of a human by the mental awareness and eloquence of her critics.

>>5
"The Nazi symbol is diamond-shaped, not square. That site loses."

Big fucking deal, he turned it a few degrees to make a joke, shut the hell up. 

>>7 OH FUCKS AFTER REVIEWING THIS POST I'VE JUST REALISED I AM A HUEG HYPOCRITE LIKEW XBOX! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!
One can commonly get the measure of a human by their ability to self criticise (i do so sorely wish to be a blonde 6ft scandinavian woman and not a 5ft sasquatch faced African American *sniff sniff*) critics.

>>11 I'm actually a 181 cm redhead Swede who is growing a goatee. Yay. And how the hells am I supposed to "self criticize critics"? And isn't self-criticizm hyphenated?

>>5
Neo-feminists? Explain plz.

>>4
lol feminazi, that's good shit..:)

>>13
Its true shit.

Feminism, by definition, is incompatible with the ideas of liberty. 

>>15 By your definition, yes. The most intelligent feminists search for core cultural problems rather than trying to balance scales to make things look neat and symbolic. Your lame trolling is argument enough that one has to take the good with the bad with this.
>>13 Feminazi, bushitler and so on. How much more can you people become wastes of human parts? Stop hogging the hydrogen and carbon, you faux-libertarian heterosexuals.

>>16
"By your definition, yes."

More like by the dictionary's definition.

>>16
No one is forcing women to wear bras, I also fail to see what this has to do with egalitarianism.

>>18 Oh your scope of the problem is absolutely mind-boggling. I am a convinced egalitarian now. My dick actually twitched when I read all that truth in one throbbing sentence. Mesmerizing.

>>19
Thx, it is good of you to admit you are wrong. You see most women stopped being feminists once women got equal rights because there was no longer a need to push for women's rights, the real assholes stayed on and came up with stuff like "lol culture is sexist" because they made so much money selling bumper stickers when they were on the rise or something.

>>20 You do provide amusement, I'll give you that for justifying your waste of elements.

I think the worst battles for feminism today are rogue bouts of sexism in the corperate world and the divide of how sexually active men and women are seen as (one as a normal, even complimentary status, and the other as slut).

Otherwise, the rest of feminism is divided between extremists who wish to declare femal supremacy and a 'pseudo-feminism' which wants everyone to know that just because they have equal rights doesnt mean they need to use them and might not want jobs or anything outside of raising a family.

Xel can't get into his head the idea that non-discrimination means not discriminating against anyone.

>>23
Wow, what a terrible thought: everyone being equal?  I shudder to think.

I don't care about any of this bullshit. A dyke fem just needs to get fucked by the right guy. They are confused and frustrated.

>>23 Not so at all. I mean, I don't believe feminism requires discrimination. feminism means a lack of discrimination for both genders, because they go hand in hand. "Oh feminists will want girls to get all the jobs just because they are girls and that is like discrimination anyway so they must be retarded. Lawl feminazis, because that is combining words."
>>24 "Wah wah me, wah me wah, wah wah wah me me me. Feminists don't believe in equality and secretely they want someone to pull out chairs and open doors for them."
>>22 The borders are far from that easy to outline.

>>10
Can you back up your claim? Do you know the author of that shitty site personally? No. GTFO.

Women should make equal pay for baking pies and cakes.

>>26
Why the do you call it feminism then? Surely it makes sense to call your movement "gender-equality" instead of fucking around? Clearly you are a sexist. Also as a black disabled female immigrant from Chad with aids who has aborted 3 8 month old fetuses I fail to see what is wrong with culture, girls are doing better than boys in schools throughout the board, apart from big shot business, women by law must be paid the same and television is filled to the brim with white males getting kicked in the balls by women and white males always being figures of ridicule and the bad guys. Clearly if anything television gives an unrealistic view of white males. Possibly as a result of the reactionary idea that in order to balance thing we must heavy handedly discriminate against people who we perceive to have power. The only result of this is that white males who did not have a millionaire dad and were not given a position at college in favour of a superiorly qualified ethnic minority etc etc... get pushed down lower, whilst the actual racists and millionaires are unaffected and women and ethnic minorities are made to feel even more inferior and ridiculous as affirmative action doesn't solve their problems!

Stop being a feminist and start being pro-equal-gender-rights. Also if you REALLLLLYY think culture is sexist, start trying to ban segregated toilets and sports etc etc.. to prove you are not retarded.

>>29 Okay, if you 'libertarians' get your boxers in a bunch over semantics we'll call it egalitism so that the founding fathers don't cry. Happy?
Also, the reason sports and toilets are 'segregated' is because that is an area were even "feminazis" consider biology to be the crux.

>>30
Well, term feminism originally refered to women's equality movement, but in modern times it has evolved to mean female equivalent of chauvinists. Many people(including even females) consider it extreme and negative term. That's why you shouldn't really use it if equality is what you want.

>>5
Bullshit. Manji(Buddhist Swastika) isn't inverted. Inverted Swastika exist in many cultures, though Nazis probably got it from Hindus. Having deep fascination with India(Hint: Aryan = Indo-European) and Tibet.

>>31 Semantics still, that is my opinion. I am a feminist who will always define my goals through facts and anlysis. Once I'm convinced that a goal is compatible, even synonymous with freedom, I'll act in favor of it and will subsequently trample anyone who can't argument back or tries to label me a reactionary.

>>27
Yes, I do.

>>31
Damn right.  Seconded.  Fuck you feminist bitches. 

>>29
100% agree.

>>33
Yeah but guess what? Your ideas aren't synonymous with freedom.  Equality isn't 'synonymous' with freedom.  >>1 is right.  You can't be consistantly pro-liberty and be a feminist all at the same time.

>>35 Watch me.

>>36
We can't watch you because this is the internet?

>>30
But surely we should be judged by our merits and not out genes? Why should men have to share toilets with people who enjoy splashing their shit and urine around. Not all men are uncivilised immature savages and I fail why we should be dumped in one group. I demand the right to shower and toilet with women!

>>36
It isn't possible.  I'd like to see you justify forcing equality on people using the values of liberty and freedom. 

>>39 Legislation is useless, it's like trying to shrink a tree to bonsai size when it's already big and doing quite okay. If you start of early, though. I know my analogy sounds restrictive and molding but I am not talking about anonymous job applications and making people dress unisex. Inequality is a situation with accumulated, complex causes and most intelligent feminists treat the problem as such. Unfortunately they meet resistance everywhere, so excuse them for not being perfect.