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.

>>163
"Human beings are naturally a collectivistic group.  I won't deny having collectivistic thoughts myself, I am human also, but I try to limit this as much as possible out of respect for the individual.  Being an individualist certainly isn't easy."

I respect individuality.  I realize not all neo-cons are corrupt, or that all feminists are unreasonable feminazis.  Yet, when I see someone with said traits, of *either* kind, I don't think it is wrong to assume these things based on past experiances, assuming they have happened reasonably often enough.  However, I will give the individual the chance to show that they are different. 

Yes, if that 1 out of a 1000 feminist came to me, I would probably expect them to be like the others.  But that doesn't make judging them right and I would withhold my judgment of that person until I know more about them individually.

"Yes, drawing generlizations of people is a bad thing because it is intellectually lazy." 

No it isn't.  Drawing generalizations of people while not taking the time to judge every individual on an individual basis that you meet, regardless of whether or not they have said traits would be lazy and 'bad,' but I see nothing wrong with generalizations.

"Liberty friendly feminists might not be the majority of feminists, but they are a sizeable minority."

Again, I have yet to meet one.  Feminists I meet get judged as individuals though. 

"Certainly not one out of a thousand.  I suspect you yourself could be one if you could just get over your group hatred and respect the individual feminist more."

That depends.  I will say I am for *equal rights*.  Take that to mean what you like, but I wouldn't call myself a 'feminist.'

"As for your last paragraph: This is the perfect example of what I am saying.  This is the first mention of neo-cons and you call me inconsistent and biased because you assume you know how I would react and basically making up shit."

It was an entirely reasonable assumption.  Based on past threads discussing the neo-conservatives, I didn't see anyone stepping up to say 'BUT NOT *ALL* NEO-CONS ARE CORRUPT!', or 'cheaters' or something along these lines.  I forget exactly what the topic was about.  This happens quite often that people critisize entire political movements or groups - and nobody says a thing about it - until feminists are the target.