Feminists: An Observation

[Peter Octavian]

^ Damn that is a beautiful picture. It really is.

Ain't it though?

Personally, I'm more partial to:

.....as a pet, anyway.

 

[Friday]

That would be so unWordin like of him.

He's a typical academic. He has two or three tricks he does, and he does them whenever he can.

Maybe we should start referring to him as, "The Howard Zinn of TK".

 

[Friday]

I don't think Feminism is about unattractive, hairy, man-hating women. I think it was more about how women were, and in some ways still are, treated less than equal than men.

Oh, but some here feel that battle has been fought, and won. It's now a non issue.

At least, according to some...

 

[Number_6]

Some men are still sexist, yes.

But the vast majority aren't, and the world has changed something fierce since the 1950s.

The rabid gender feminists are unwilling to acknowledge the changes. I think that a large part of this stems from the fact that their continued relevance actually depends upon society remaining sexist. They are also misandrists.

 

[Peter Octavian]

Oh, but some here feel that battle has been fought, and won. It's now a non issue.

At least, according to some...

:roll:

Battle?

The "battle" is a non issue. It ain't the 20's...or the 50's anymore, Bella.

Put away the placards and try a little dialogue. If you insist that it's still a fight, then you are already beaten.

 

[eloisel]

No, there is still a war, but the battle has changed somewhat. At first, it was women not having to be reliant on a man to survive - i.e., allowed to work and make a living wage, own property, drive a car, vote, have credit, etc. Some women were widowed or their husband was injured beyond the ability to work due to war injuries or type of employment (such as coal miner) and needed to be in a position to take care of their families. Many women stayed in horribly abusive marriages because they would not be able to support themselves except through prostitution of a different kind. We finally have the right to gainful employment but now it is almost mandatory that we have to work outside the home - hence, some people saying to housewives that they don't have a "real" job. And, women are still paid less when they do the same exact job as a man.

 

[Friday]

Okay, maybe I was using some old terminology out of habit.

I understand the difference between equity feminism and gender feminism. However, to undeniably state that there is no longer any inequity between the sexes is a tad misinformed.

 

[Peter Octavian]

Okay, maybe I was using some old terminology out of habit.

I understand the difference between equity feminism and gender feminism. However, to undeniably state that there is no longer any inequity between the sexes is a tad misinformed.

Who said there was no longer any inequity?

 

[Friday]

The "battle" is a non issue. It ain't the 20's...or the 50's anymore, Bella.

I inferred from this quote that you feel there is no longer any inequity.

 

[Number_6]

There isn't as much inequity as you are led to believe.

Take a good, hard look at how the numbers are derived that supposedly demonstrate pay inequity.

I'm not saying there isn't still inequity, but a lot of the stuff being thrown around as "fact" is gross misinterpretation of the evidence.

 

[eloisel]

All I know is I've been divorced since 1982. When I bought my house in 1996, I had to go to the courthouse and get a copy of my divorce decree to prove to the lenders that I was divorced - like that made any difference in my ability to buy my house.

 

[eloisel]

There isn't as much inequity as you are led to believe.

Take a good, hard look at how the numbers are derived that supposedly demonstrate pay inequity.

I'm not saying there isn't still inequity, but a lot of the stuff being thrown around as "fact" is gross misinterpretation of the evidence.

Before I "retired" from publishing 7 years ago and started my current career, I know for a fact there was major discrimination in wages where I worked. I found out one of the guys in my crew - I was his boss and had been there longer - was being paid $2 more an hour than me. I asked my boss about it and my boss said, "He has a family to support." Uh ... did he think I was working there because I didn't have anything better to do?

 

[Number_6]

All I know is I've been divorced since 1982. When I bought my house in 1996, I had to go to the courthouse and get a copy of my divorce decree to prove to the lenders that I was divorced - like that made any difference in my ability to buy my house.

This probably had to do with the mortgage or possible claims to the property or some such thing. I had to do this, too--I'm once divorced, twice married--when we bought our house. I can't remember what the reason was, but it was something legal. Thankfully, I have a copy on hand.

As for your experience, I'm not saying it doesn't happen; what I'm saying is that the numbers that are being reported by organizations like NOW are incorrect, and involved a lot of creative manipulation of the numbers.

If you want to foment change, you need to start with an accurate assessmen of where you are currently.

 

[Friday]

That's all I'm saying. There might not be as big of an inequity as in the past, but there still is room for positive change.

 

[Number_6]

And in some areas, there's no inequity at all. Or, as in my profession, the inequity tilts the other way.

 

[eloisel]

I'm doing paralegal work now. It is still considered mostly for women but more men are getting into the area now. It should help raise the payscale across the board. Still, I've run into a couple of guys that think they do something different than me because they are men.

But, having said that ... there is a difference. 20 years ago, all the men would have thought that way. So, there has been progress made.

 

[Peter Octavian]

So, there has been progress made.

This is both my point, and why it can't be thought of in terms of a "battle".

Those who know the importance of equality are ready and willing to exchange ideas. The ones who still need to move into this century are only going fight harder if they think that this is a battle.

This is an issue of trying to evolve antiquated and obsolete sensibilities, not about the capitulation of the old guard.

 

[eloisel]

This is both my point, and why it can't be thought of in terms of a "battle".

Those who know the importance of equality are ready and willing to exchange ideas. The ones who still need to move into this century are only going fight harder if they think that this is a battle.

This is an issue of trying to evolve antiquated and obsolete sensibilities, not about the capitulation of the old guard.

The reason why I still call it a battle is because it is. Only it is no longer between men and women but between women and women. It seems like after any great breakthrough there comes a time when we have to learn that just because we can do a thing doesn't mean we have to do a thing. There are many women who are working outside the home because of peer pressure, not because they really have to. They aren't happy and with daycare costing what it does they really aren't contributing that much to the family income. Personally, I'd like to see the same opportunity for men to be househusbands. Some men would be better at being a househusband and the wife being the income earner.

 

[WordInterrupted]

Wordin, why don't you try staying on topic for once, instead of taking the easy road of personal sniping?

You can call it sniping, but I think it's a fair point. He always rants about how the Jewish conspiracy victimizes people like him, and then he turns around and accuses other people of having a mentality of victimhood. It's perfectly within the bounds of this discussion to point out that rather comic contradiction.

That would be so unWordin like of him.

He's a typical academic. He has two or three tricks he does, and he does them whenever he can.

I've tried to have discussions with you that weren't on the level of base character assasination over the last few months, and have occasionally succeeded, but you obviously aren't satisfied with substantive discussion. You need liberal bashing like drugies need crack.

I have a question for Friday, Six and Octavian: what do you think of TQ's holocaust denial and constant rants about the Jewish conspiracy? Octavian and Six are oh-so-eager to brand me a crazy liberal, but completely ignore the loony Nazi apologist. Supporting Democrats makes me worthy of abuse, but anti-semitism is A-OK?

 

[The Question]

You can call it sniping, but I think it's a fair point. He always rants about how the Jewish conspiracy victimizes people like him.

There's a difference between being wronged and having a victim mentality. Or are you accusing women who really were discriminated against of just making that up? You and the broad generalization -- a relationship for all time?

I've tried to have discussions with you that weren't on the level of base character assasination over the last few months, and have occasionally succeeded, but you obviously aren't satisfied with substantive discussion.

Try offering it, you might be surprised.

I have a question for Friday, Six and Octavian: what do you think of TQ's holocaust denial and constant rants about the Jewish conspiracy?

I don't recall ranting about it. Would you like me to?

Octavian and Six are oh-so-eager to brand me a crazy liberal, but completely ignore the loony Nazi apologist.

That just might be because you are, in fact, a mostly-uninformed pup spouting prefabricated pap while responding to reason as though it were a used hankie.

Supporting Democrats makes me worthy of abuse, but anti-semitism is A-OK?

No, spouting half-formed ideological drivel and then falling back on ridicule when it falls apart, the while putting on airs of authority, makes you worthy of abuse. And no, anti-Semitism is not A-OK -- and neither is it to be found in my statements, except in the minds of those who are desperate enough for a response to my position that they're willing to bend that tired and threadbare accusation to the purpose.