|
"The true woman will not be exponent of another, or allow another to be
such for her. She will be her own individual self... Stand or fall by
her own individual wisdom and strength... She will proclaim the `glad
tidings of good news' to all women, that woman equally with man was made
for her own individual happiness, to develop... every talent given to her
by God, in the great work of life."-Susan B. Anthony
Topic: Are you a feminist?
Posted By: Joyce
Date: 11 Nov 1999 10:27 AM
I'm just curious...how many of you reading this message would call
yourselves a "feminist"? I have a daughter who is in colleage and I'm
amazed when I hear her talk with her friends--several are quite adamant
that they don't identify themselves as feminists and seem to think it
has a lot of negative connotations. I think that anyone who agrees
that women should be on equal footing with men is a feminist, but they
think of it in a different way.
Responses:
Subject: Are you a feminist?
From: David
Date: 11 Nov 1999 8:37 PM
Yes! However I can relate to how you feel about your daughter's
friends' views. I am not sure that there ever were a lot of women who
considered themselves "feminists." I did an informal survey a few
years ago, asking about 10 women I knew (relitives, friends,
co-workers) if they considered themselves to be a feminist. They all
said "no." However, they generally agreed with feminist ideals and
most said "yes" when I gave them the dictionary definition (something
like "... believes in the political, social and economic equality...").
I think there are many reasons for this - press coverage of womens'
issues is generally very shallow (although this applies to most press
coverage, the power is still "male", even though there are many more
women now, and so it is an outsider issue). The vast majority of
Americans really avoid anything that might be viewed as "radical."
Also, young women take their improved status for granted because that's
all they know. (by the way, I am a late middle age engineer who works
in the defense industry and voted solid Republican for many
years!)
Subject: Feminism and abortion
From: Susan
Date: 11 Nov 1999 3:46 PM
Am I a feminist? Yes and no. I need a definition. What I know I have
gathered from women who claimed to be feminists. They, for the most
part, are ardent pro-abortion and I really cannot understand that at
all. I have spoken to women who have agreed to abortions simply to
please some man. It sounds very much like men are using these women,
then having them vacuumed out for more fun. And these women think they
have gained some great freedom. Any answers????
Subject: Reply to Susan
From: LeaAnn
Date: 11 Nov 1999 10:04 PM
I think a lot of women facing a hard decision like abortion want to be
able to blame someone if their decision is to abort. Men are the
perfect scapegoats because they have no voice. The fact is that men
have no rights whatsoever and women have every right on this issue.
Trying to blame men is simply ducking responsibility for one's own
actions. The man in this situation has to either work for 18 years to
pay for the woman's decision (or risk jail if he tries to avoid
payment) or stand by and see his son or daughter destroyed on another's
whim. How would you like that "choice"? Either way he is expected to
just go along quietly with whatever she decides, even if she doesn't
bother to tell him of her decision for years. Some men try and run, but
here's a little fact you won't hear from any feminist: when women are
assessed child support they are even less likely than men to pay it.
Women are more often "dead beats" than men are! It's time we stopped
blaming men, and instead take responsibility. It's time for some
genuine equality, not fake equality.
Subject: Feminists and abortion II
From: Susan
Date: 11 Nov 1999 8:00 AM
LeAnn, I agree heartily with you. Abortion, for the most part, is a
woman's decision, but what is empowering about the process of killing
one's own child? Why would any "feminist" feel that she would have to
get rid of her child in order to -- do what? Please her man? -- get a
job? -- Buy a new car? -- Fit into her swin suit? I don't get it. If
she were liberated, she should be able to survive carrying a child for
nine months. If she feels unable to keep the child for any reason,
including the ones above, she could easily release the child for
adoption as I did. With a little planning, she could have all her
expenses paid for during the months before delivery also. That "choice"
seems to me the empowered way. Even with pressure from others, I
refused to have my child vacuumed out of me.
Subject: Civil rights
From: Chris Welsh
Date: 11 Nov 1999 11:16 AM
Pro-Life feminism exists and I myself am a supporter of it. Working
towards eliminating the social problems which contribute to abortion
and hoping that with enough effort both women and their unborn children
will be respected. http://www.mindspring.com/~koat/plinks.htmthat is
my "Progressive and Revolutionary Pro-Life Links" page, and not only
are there pro-life feminists, but there are pro-life gays, vegans,
and....Well any way good luck
Subject: MLKing and women
From: Theodora Howell
Date: 11 Nov 1999 1:03 PM
I have a picture of my mother holding the American Flag and celebrating
her right to vote! But as important as voting is and I never neglect
my privelege to vote as an informed American, I feel that it was not
until Martin Luther Kingand the Civil Rights Act of 1965 that my life
changed drama-tically and I began to feel like a WHOLE person.Let me
explain, I am a woman, now 78 years old, have had graying hair since I
was 13 yrs old, am considered attractive but certainly not beautiful by
? standards, am tall being five feet ten inches, am white, have worked
for a living, have an education which I worked hard to get starting
after high school at a jc, graduated with AA, worked during WWII at a
prominent publisher's company, was riffed in 1947, took my severance
pay and went to the university to extend my schooling, met my dear GI
husband and we married, raised four children, am still married (50
years in 2000, and yet, I was always playing second fiddle once I got
out of my traditional feminine role.What MLK taught me is that I am not
too tall, not too ugly, not too gray, not too stupid, not insufficient
because I am a woman. I started walking tall, wore my high heels,
taught my daughters (3) and son to think for themselves, joined NFRW -
local chapter and entered into polics working for the Nixon campaign in
1971. I have found out something that I think is enormous, the men are
not boogymen, they have frailties also, they can sometimes be extremely
boring, they have not learned to get along with other men or other
people. I therefore am not ahateful feminist, no, indeed. My husband
has every right to be here as I do. After all, he was in WWII and in
the red beach party on IWO. He has earned everything that he has
received from anyone else. I am proud of him. I adored my father who
taught me to walk tall, stand straight, and to think for myself. And I
love my son who is a hardworking, honest, thoughtful man who lives for
his family of two sons and a daughter - I don't how he does it -and he
said he had a wonderful childhood!!! He is doing the same for his
children. His wife is right in there with him! Thank you for hanging
in there to this point. I never intended an essay, but I have given my
opinion and I thank you for the opportunity to express myself.
America, not perfect, but striving!!! Love to all, and God bless -
Teddy H.
Subject: Are You a Feminist
From: Anne McDonald
Date: 11 Nov 1999 4:44 PM
Yes I am a feminist because I believe we can't afford to disregard the
talents of half of our population. I am currently engaged in
supporting the appointment of a second woman to our local judiciary -
we have sixteen positions, only one of which is presently filled by a
woman. Your daughter is still in college and has not yet encountered
the obstacles to advancement that unfortunately are still out there in
the "real world". I think feminism has gotten a bad reputation because
it has been too closely linked (by both pro and con camps) to abortion.
For myself, I would like to see those two topics separated more.
Subject: Who is a Feminist?
From: Deborah
Date: 11 Nov 1999 11:34 PM
The messages posted previously convey the different perspectives
regarding how many of us see ourselves as feminists, and as such, there
are probably as many definitions of the term "feminist" as there are
women who both applaud and disavow feminism.In my opinion, a feminist
is not only a self-defined position -- it is an identification that
others assign to us. The key question that lies at the very core of
defining who is a feminist is: Who is ultimately responsible for
identifying you? We allow the media, other women and men, and politics
to define our beliefs and attach a label to our identity, which is far
beyond the scope of anyone's duty but my own. My personal views may be
regarded as those of a feminist; whether or not I choose to identify
myself as a feminist is my decision and mine alone. There are times
when I choose to bear the weight of the negative connotation, and times
when I choose not to be identified as a feminist. More appropriately,
I define myself as a woman who is aware of the (a) past struggles
encountered by women and men concerning women's rights, (b) future
challenges that women and men face concerning women's rights, and (c)
contributions women continue to make in terms of becoming less
"invisible."My primary concern is, however, the omission of black women
from the women's rights movement. Historically, black women have been
the target of discrimination based on race and sex, even within a venue
that we would expect not to be the victims of disparate treatment. The
"women's movement" has suffered from blindness with respect to the
concerns of and equal rights for black women. I am interested in
hearing comments from black and white women regarding this
topic.Contemporary black feminists such as Patricia Hill Collins,
Barbara Christian, bell hooks and many others have written extensively
about the transparency of black women within the movement to attain
equal rights. And, certainly in addition, black women without the
intellectual base of the above-noted scholars have experienced the
burden of discrimination based on sex, as well as other factors yet are
excluded because of race.Black women in an historical light, such as
Sojourner Truth, Maria Stewart, Mary Church Terrell, Ida B. Wells and
others spoke passionately about the women's movement that sought
primarily (if not only) to procure rights for white women. Would it be
more effective to establish a separate women's movement that focuses on
issues that pertain to black women?Thank you.
Subject: A Country Divided
From: Kim
Date: 11 Nov 1999 7:52 PM
What concerns me the most about all the responses I have read so far,
is the division amongst ourselves. What is the phrase? A country
divided against itself cannot stand? I think our Achilles heel is we
have divided ourselves into sub-groups. One thing the men have on us is
the concept of TEAM. Only TOGETHER can we truly affect change. I do not
mean to minimize the issues that have been discussed. They are all
important. But can we put them aside for the greater good. In my mind
that is the advancement of ALL women - black, gay, white, educated or
not. I am a fine artist of modest accomplishment. I am 37 and own my
own business. I obtained the opportunity to bid on a large public mural
project. I won the bid and was the first woman in Detroit to be honored
with such a commission. Yet, I was sorely underpaid compared to what my
male counterparts would have commanded for the same project. This makes
me crazy! Every day I run into women who still live their lives no
different than Anthony and Stanton prior to 1848. I have a friend who
is recently divorced and on her own for the first time in her life and
she is over 50 with three kids and doesn't know how to pay the bills. I
can't believe that after all that Stanton and Anthony accomplished,
there are women who's behavior flies in the face of their efforts.I
don't get hung up on what other people think of how I refer to myself.
I choose "staunch feminist" and am proud of it! Men know I don't hate
them. Three of my closest friends are male and I love them as dearly as
my woman friends. I do think that they need to come along with us in
our journey. I'm not sure they're completely recovered from the shock
of that first ballot in 1920, but they better get over it! 'cuz women
are on the move. But I think we need each other's support if we are
truly going to achieve what Stanton and Anthony dreamed for us.
Subject: By Any Other Name
From: J. L. Dunkle
Date: 11 Nov 1999 3:03 AM
Sometimes I'm a feminist, sometimes I'm a feminazi--I try to smile
wickedly and look dangerous when I claim this name. For the most part
my genderpolitics rarely come up in conversation. When it's time for
me to be a woman's woman, it is usually some work that needs doing, not
some dialectic that needs a voice. I'm not sure I've ever convinced an
anti-feminist of anything, and to be truthful that kind of debate is
pretty tedious work (and mostly bad company). My body is mine, and I
dress it and do with it as I please. I have been discriminated against
because of gender in my life and I resent it. I make less money than
men with my same skills and talents--I resent that too. I'm pretty
sure feminist isn't a rich enough word to cover us all--it needs
adjectives, or a suitable replacement word that fits each broad
category--and I don't actually want to use it. As soon as I am named
and identified, no one need pay attention anymore. They know me....I
have become a round peg for a ready round hole in their heads. They
know what I am by the name I have been assigned, and they already have
a pretty solid idea what they think about me and my ideas. I think
I'll just remain nameless, it's a more useful condition.
Subject: What does a feminist look like?
From: Deborah
Date: 11 Nov 1999 9:37 PM
Good evening on the premier night of "Not For Ourselves Alone" ...
known as the tale of the women's movement that sought to exclude black
women from the ranks of "all women".I remain concerned about the
repeated and continued omission of black women from the women's
movement, which was showcased at Seneca Falls in 1848. How many of you
supporters of women's rights believe that Sojourner Truth delivered her
powerful "Arn't I a Woman" soliloquoy in Seneca Falls? Or, how many of
you erroneously believe that ANY black woman was present at the 1848
gathering to promote women's rights? The short answer is: Not
one.Refer to your black history treatises for the real truth behind
what continues to be the "white women's movement" that prohibited black
women's participation and attendance because of Stanton and Anthony, as
well as the women who perpetuated the ideals of Stanton and Anthony
that the "immorality of..." black women in the nineteenth century was
the basis on which we were excluded from Seneca Falls. (Davis, Mary
Ann. "Contributions of Black Women to America: A National Research
Project." Kenday Press, Inc., 1982). Interestingly, it appears that
the white male counterparts of these members of the [white] women's
movement thought otherwise since they apparently believed that the
"immorality of..." black women was not prohibitive in connection with
their efforts to sire additional slaves (by raping black female slaves)
who would provide continued service to their white women.History is
remarkable; however, learning the TRUTH about history is even more
enlightening and often spectacular, don't you agree?Regards,Deborah R.
KempKansas City, Missouri
Subject: working together and we are individuals not labels
From: Marilyn Mead
Date: 11 Nov 1999 12:33 PM
I loved the "Not for Ourselves Alone" program that began on PBSlast
evening... YEA!Any time we can shed light on/have open discussion of
something,it is beneficial to all.When I read or hear discussion about
"am I a feminist?" or "is thewomen's movement excluding black women?" I
am saddened.I am reminded of a discussion we had in Sociology class
years ago ... about groups in society arguing amongst themselves ...
which, obviously, impedes progress of the whole group, since theyare
diverted to arguing amongst themselves.Can we all just agree that we
are ALL individuals (and thereforecannot be easily dismissed by
labelling) and that we are ALL fallible,(men and women alike) ... we
could move on to work together toimprove the things that need
improvement - things we ALL have incommon. I mean, here we are, so many
years after SojournerTruth and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and we are
spending so much timediscussing whether the "women's movement" includes
black women!It does IF YOU THINK IT DOES... and good people can agree
todisagree and still move on... we are INDIVIDUALS, which meansthat we
will not agree on EVERYTHING... to the contrary, we canbe sure we will
DISAGREE on many things! That is the HUMAN condition! As far as I can
tell, women and minorities have had many similarissues to work for, for
years!So, let's work together, instead of arguing about
minutia.MarilynSan Diego
Subject: A white women's movement?
From: Mary Shearer
Date: 11 Nov 1999 1:37 PM
Admittedly, the history of women's rights has been too focused on the
white, middle-class movement. Until recently we were led to think it
was a unified movement for women, rather than the divisive movement it
was. That's because winners write the history, and they like to leave
out those incidents which embarrass them. That doesn't mean, however,
that all women in the movement ignored black women or working
women.Victoria Woodhull was written out of the history because she
was too controversial. She said, "The first duty of every living
being, in all things in which people meet and mingle, is to accept the
fact that every other human being is the offspring of the same Almighty
power, and equally entitled to human rights with himself, and that it
can make no difference in this fact if his skin be black, if he be a
pagan or a Jew, Christian or infidel, spiritualist, materialist, or a
nothingarian, or even a woman." She probably shocked even more
people with this statement, "The more prophetic portion is, that here a
new race is being developed, into which will be gathered all the
distinctive characteristics of all the various races. . . . The new
race will combine all these different qualities in one grand character,
and shall utimately gather in all people of all races." Interracial
marriage is still controversial in our time. Imagine a Victorian woman
speaking of the benefits of race mixing! I'm not sure how to take
this statement, though. "Observe the merging of the black and white
races. The white does not descend to the black, but the black
gradually approaches the white." There are two possible meanings to
it. She could be saying that blacks are innately inferior, but will
improve genetically once their blood is mixed with white. (Indicative
of a racist attitude.) Or, she could be saying that society has
lowered the status of blacks and that when the blood of blacks and
whites is mixed, the social status of blacks will be elevated to that
of whites. (Not a racist attitude at all.) In any case, Victoria
Woodhull found the "N" word offensive. When she ran for President of
the United States in 1872, she ran with a black man, Frederick Douglass
as the Vice Presidential candidate. He, however, refused to run with
her because he would be degraded by an association with her. Imagine
that! A man who was a former slave couldn't be seen running alongside
Victoria Woodhull! If Victoria Woodhull had been the winner in
the women's rights movement, we probably would have seen a greater
diversity of women in the women's rights movements. Ida Wells-Barnett
and Mary Church Terrell would've been in the mainstream of the
movement, instead of being tossed to the side. As offensive as
Stanton's statement about Sambo was, I'd be surprised if she didn't
live to regret saying it. She grew more radical as she grew older, and
she criticized Anthony for making compromises in the movement. Black
women were ditched from the movement, not because the entire leadership
thought they were inferior, but because it was more expedient to cater
to the racist attitudes of Americans to get women the vote. That's the
reason I consider Stanton greater than Anthony. Anthony, who had been
such an ardent abolitionist, was willing to compromise in any way she
could to get the votes for women. Stanton grew more unwilling to
compromise. People say that Anthony was the better politician
because she compromised as politicians must. Since when, though, is
compromise a virtue when you're talking about tyranny? Prime Minister
Chamberlain certainly isn't considered a great politician for
compromising with the racist Hitler. Why should Anthony be considered
a great politician for compromising with American racists? Clearly,
Stanton is the better role model and deserves her face on the coin more
than Anthony.
Subject: Minutia?
From: Deborah
Date: 11 Nov 1999 6:39 PM
The word "minutia" fails to define accurately or objectively any
dialogue concerning the deliberate, racially-motivated attempts made to
exclude black women from the women's rights movement. Many who idolize
white suffragists remain oblivious to issues which are fundamental
weaknesses within the women's movement. Is this your version of "Don't
bother me, I can't cope"?Sincerely,Deborah R. KempKansas City, Missouri
Subject: Minutia?
From: Mary Shearer
Date: 11 Nov 1999 12:51 AM
No, Deborah, I don't think it's a case of we "can't cope." I just
think most white women don't know much about the history of the women's
rights movement. Period. The book, "One Woman, One Vote" talks about
the racism in the movement, and it's probably a surprise to most white
women, especially since Frederick Douglass was present at the first
convention. One would think a movement that could accept Frederick
Douglass would have no problem accepting Ida Wells-Barnett.Yes,
there were white women in the women's rights movement who were hostile
to black women. There were white women hostile to immigrants and
Native Americans, too. There were white women hostile to working
women, to socialist women, to anarchist women, and to women who had a
different set of sexual morals than they did. I guess I'm arguing that
the women's rights movement was elitist first, racist second. You
didn't have to be a different color to be excluded by them. They
excluded certain white women, too. The entire history of the 19th
century movement is one of distancing the movement from anyone and
anything that didn't fit with white, middle class morality. In the end,
they even excluded Stanton because she didn't fit with their morality
either. Still, we got the vote anyway, and what the white suffragists
refused to accomplish, Martin Luther King did. I don't idolize
white suffragists. I idolize all the suffragists that the NWSA and
AWSA excluded. Maybe there are some black heroines in history that I've
never heard about because they were excluded by the NAWSA. Tell us
about them, and the other black women we should admire. I'd like to
know more about Lizzie Jennings who was the Rosa Parks of the 1850's.
Can you tell me more about her?
Subject: More than Minutia--less than coalition
From: J. L. Dunkle
Date: 11 Nov 1999 1:07 AM
I don't think the lack of cohesion between African American and
European American feminists can be truthfully laid at the door of
predjudice. It's an easy leap, but ultimately not a logical one. I
honestly believe that the issues we do not share end up being the
problem. We can join to support issues that affect both groups, or
fight to promote the things that are particular to our own. I
am not trying to discount any particular experience here, and I'm well
aware that African American women have the statistical support for an
argument that they are a more oppressed class within American culture.
The reason for that *is* undoubtably due to racial predjudice, and
while it may seem artificial to separate gender and racial issues for
the purposes of an argument, as women's rights advocates we must
attempt that very thing to establish the common ground needed for the
movement to be strong. Both of these causes are just, but the
logical argument for each must be separate, while at the same time
these arguments must not undermine each other. Any argument for racial
equality has to be irrespective of gender, and any argument for women's
equality has to be irrespective of race. This does not mean one can't
argue for both causes, I just don't believe that both cases can be
argued simultaneously without diluting each of them.
Subject: Mary Shearer, a response to "Minutia?"
From: Deborah Kemp
Date: 11 Nov 1999 3:09 PM
Mary, thank you for continuing the dialogue on elitist and racist
attitudes that were prevalent during the women's movement that is the
subject of the PBS televised special. I've not yet read beyond your
message, because I wanted to immediately respond to you. My personal
library contains volumes upon volumes of historial accounts of black
women, books concerning black feminism -- more than one thousand other
books I've catalogued into many different subject matters. My
collection primarily consists of non-fiction written by and about
blacks. I welcome the opportunity to share with you, Mary, and any
others who wish to learn about black women's history. While I do not
hold myself out to be a scholar, I am certainly aware of many of the
prominent, and not-so-prominent black women whose history was barely
cast in the shadows of historical accounts of women like Stanton and
Anthony. Sincerely, Deborah Kemp
Subject: Victoria Woodhull
From: Irvana Wilks
Date: 11 Nov 1999 10:59 AM
The issues that Mary writes about concerning Victoria Woodhull
illuminates for me how little I know about women's history. The
program Not for Ourselves Alone had that same affect on me. I felt as
I did in watching the documentaries on the Revolutionary War and the
Civil War. I kept thinking, "Wow. I didn't know that!"
Subject: Feminist is not a dirty word.
From: Kate Petersen
Date: 11 Nov 1999 4:30 PM
When my mother was pregnant with me in 1950 she was working for the
telephone company in New York. My father was in the service. They
didn't have much money. My mother hid her pregnancy for five
months.When a male supervisor saw that she was pregnant shewas fired.
Everyone if they bother to listen will hearstories like these from
their own foremothers. Do I hate men because I'm a feminist. NO NO
NO ...I have two brothers, a father and a husband I love. There is
this notion that feminists are men hating radicals. Itsa myth that
just hangs out there. I too have encountered young women who
don't want to bereferred to as feminists. They have reaped the
benefits buthave no idea what those benefits are or how hard won they
were. Few people know who Elizabeth Cady Stanton was or Viriginia
Woodhull. I hope this new PBS special will enlighten all - men and
women. As a feminist I look to the future. Many feel that there
is no longer a reason to fight for women's rights. YOUVE COME A LONG
WAY BABY! But there are many women who are still locked into second
class lives because they can't make a decent wage doing "womens work."
There are still women in the world who are considered less than
fullyhuman. Am I a feminist -you bet I am.
Subject: Are you a feminist?
From: Stephnaie
Date: 11 Nov 1999 10:48 PM
I agree with you that young people today need to be educated about what
feminism is and is NOT..I had never heard of feminism likened to hating
men BEFORE the 1980s..I am not sure where myth came from or who started
it, but it seems to have intensified forward during the Reagan/Bush
years of the 1980s. I find it both pathetic and sad that women have to
still justify taking care of themselves and stand up for their rights
and beliefs while at the same the time reassuring people they don't
hate men...it makes me feel men must still be terrible insecure to need
constant reassurance that women are not out to get them or take
something away from them by being a feminist...how tragic...Stephanie
Subject: The Myth of the Monstrous Male
From: whatever
Date: 11 Nov 1999 10:52 PM
"I am not sure where myth came from or who started it, but it seems to
have intensified forward during the Reagan/Bush years of the
1980s."It came out of the wacky world of academic feminism in the
1970's, when mediocre scholars were given positions in the growth
industry of women's studies that they never would have been able to
earn in another department. The theory was that women were morally
superior, but "kept down" by force by brutish males. Challenges to
this theory are still kept out of the insular world of the secular
nunnery, where truth and honest debate don't matter, and "women's ways
of not knowing" are carefully protected. You'll have to see John
Gordan's 1982 book "The Myth of the Monstrous Male" for more.
Subject: Feminism is just a new form of sexism
From: LeaAnn
Date: 11 Nov 1999 7:12 PM
Feminism is a sexist movement that sees the world only through women's
eyes (and not even that any more really). Feminism ignores the
perspective of half the human race and tries to call that "balance".
More recently because there are so few things for even feminists to
legitemately complain about there has been a tendency to just create
fake "oppression" from misleading statistics, or outright lies. How
anyone can see a movement designed to blame men and cast women as
universal victims, as anything to do with sexual equality is beyond me.
Any true beleiver in sexual equality can see that a sex-equality
movement for just one sex is a contradiction in terms. Today feminism
stands not for equality, but for deliberate sexism, bigotry and hate.
Few people appreciate just how evil a movement it has become (because
of the slick propaganda machine) but most women know instinctively
there is something badly wrong with the continued insistance that we
are living in the 19th century when in their own lives they have better
choices than their men. One day people will see that men are people too
-- what a radical idea.
Subject: Are you a Feminist?
From: Mary Shearer
Date: 11 Nov 1999 1:16 AM
Your comments about feminism demonstrate the reason why so many
women (and men) don't identify themselves with feminism. Feminists are
seen as evil man-haters, just as you described them. Certainly, there
are radical feminists out there that are prejudiced against men.
Dworkin and MacKinnon have gone too far, in my opinion, but the whole
movement shouldn't be condemned because of the extremists. I
don't think feminism stands for sexism. I think what has happened is
that the organized movement has locked itself into an ideology which
doesn't allow for a diversity of views. Or, at least, there is an
impression that they don't. Thankfully, there are "feminists" like
Camille Paglia and Naomi Wolf who don't always tow the politically
correct feminist line. They think for themselves and are not easily
pigeonholed. No, we're not living in the 19th century any more.
Women have made remarkable advances in the United States--thanks to
feminism--and one day the changes in our society may render feminism
obsolete. Maybe that's another reason why young people of today shun
the use of the word "feminist." They take all their choices for
granted, as though life could never be any other way. That may
demonstrate feminism's success more than its failure. However, I
don't see how you can say there are "so few things for even feminists
to legimately complain about." Even if the situation for women in the
U.S. were ideal, there is still the matter of the status of women in
other countries. There are women in the world still forced to undergo
clitoridectomies to quench their sexual desire so they will remain
virgins until marriage. There are women in India set on fire by their
husbands or fathers. Women in China have been forced into late-term
abortions simply because the fetus they are carrying is female. There
are still horrible abuses of women going on all over the world, for no
other reason than the gender of the victim. Maybe it would be
better to say that the current wave of feminism has its priorities
mixed up. There's a greater urgency to ending the murder and
mutilation of women around the world than there is to stopping the
publication of pornographic magazines. And maybe it's time feminists
started a men's movement to free men from the tyranny of their own
stereotyped role expectations. It's really sad to think of how much
women have changed in the past century when men have barely changed at
all. We won't achieve true equality in this country until we can
accept a man who stays home and takes care of the children as readily
as we can accept a man as CEO of a corporation. Am I a feminist?
That's not a label I claim because of all the baggage that goes with
it. But do I advocate equal rights for all, regardless of gender? You
bet! What does that make me? A humanist? Why not forget the labels?
Let's just be "ourselves."
Subject: feminism
From: Gene Holland
Date: 11 Nov 1999 11:10 PM
I agree with Mary that LeeAnn has seriously misunderstood contemporary
women's movements and what feminism is about today. There have been
and may still be a few feminists who might be called "men-haters," or
who see women strictly as victims, but these views can NOT be taken to
characterize feminism as a whole - they are a tiny (if in some cases
vociferous) minority. Moreover, you can't be for equality for one sex
alone - equality applies by definition to both sexes. And, though we
have made some progress, there is much to be done before gender
equality is realized in this country -- think of the glaring wage
disparities, for one thing! -- much less around the globe.
Subject: Some more equal than others
From: LeaAnn
Date: 11 Nov 1999 9:22 PM
It's easy to claim that only the "extremists" are to blame, but the
truth is feminism's entire basis is equality for women, not equality
for all. There's no interest in a balanced view. There's no interest in
relieving men of their centuries old oppressive roles. There is only
self interest and scapegoating. You are right about one thing though:
equality for one sex is no equality at all. Feminism is a fake.
Feminism manufactures lies to create the impression of female
powerlessness -- as with the illusiary "glaring wage disparity" you
mentioned. Yes there is much to be done for feminists to keep these
fraudulent myths alive. Women are paid as much as men for *equal* work,
but feminists want them to be paid as much for very unequal work.
Subject: to LeaAnn
From: Kim
Date: 11 Nov 1999 10:35 PM
I wish you were right,but, alas I experience wage "disparity" every
day. In the field of art, men are considered the "masters" and command
the high prices. I am doing what I can to change that as I am as
talented as some of these men. In my previous comments further down the
list, I related how I am the first woman in Detroit to secure a large
and very public mural. I held out for as much funding as the patrons
were willing to spend on this project, but it was pitiful compared to
what my male counterparts have gotten for similar projects. I agreed to
do the project for the amount offered because I thought it was about
time a woman's work was as prominently displayed as several men's are
around town. I hope that this will continue to open doors for myself as
well as other women. There are several fields where men and women are
paid equally. Art is lagging behind in acknowledgment as well as pay.
Subject: feminism
From: Daniel Ward
Date: 05 May 2000 12:43 AM
I agree that feminism has lost some of it's earlier credibility due to
the sexist nature of the more militant of feminists. There is a lesson
to be learned from people who try to work with everyone, and also a
lesson to learn from those who scream bloody murder on any issue they
can get their hands on. I'm all for the furthering of equality in life,
but I think many feminists tend to lose sight of this on some issues.
Although they argue that a woman has the right to her own body because
it's her own, they argue in favor of the butchering of unborn children
because those children will create an economic and emotional burden to
those who had participated in heterosexual intercourse. Yes, women have
the right to their own body, but when was it, and who was it that
decided that these self-concerned women had the right to destroy the
bodies of their unborn chidren. If feminists would abandon the right to
kill, I think they would gain a few points from a LOT of us "simple
minded" pro-lifers. Just think about it, one's right to choose should
not go into the realm of murder. But that's just my opinion, hope I
don't offend anyone.
Subject: I am a feminist
From: Jill
Date: 11 Nov 1999 10:26 PM
I am proud to call myself a feminist, and my daughter and son are both
feminists. I am teaching feminist history at Life Time Learners at our
local Junior College. It is the third time that I have been asked to
teach this class and every person who takes the eight week session has
their consciousness raised and appreciates what has come before.
Subject: Feminism
From: GraceAnne DeCandido
Date: 11 Nov 1999 11:46 AM
I have said, sometimes wryly, that feminism is my religion. By naming
myself a feminist I hope to embrace the struggles of all the women
before me. It surprises and angers me to hear women in their twenties
and thirties, whose lives would be unimaginable without the fight for
women's rights and women's suffrage, deny themselves that word. I am
52, and the arc of my professional and personal life is the arc of
women's rights in the second half of this century.
Subject: A Feminist? I preferr Humanist.
From: Jane
Date: 11 Nov 1999 10:09 PM
As a lesbian,I have always known that my sex is secondary to my
sexuality in my political and social life. Lesbian women are the
unheard voices in the Women's Rights movement. We suffer from both the
problems common to every woman and have the added complications that
our need to love and be loved bring in this society. When I bring up
issues about women's rights,many of my friends and co-workers
say,"Well,you are just upset about it because you are gay and hate men.
What you are talking about isn't a problem for US." I do not hate
men,hating men has no use,most of them aren't actively interested in
oppressing or discriminating against women,it's just the way the
society they were raised in has always treated women,and they often
don't see or realize how their behavior affects us. Actually,I often
find the remarks and jokes straight women make about men to be much
more bitter and harsh than most of the gay women I have known. I have
always said that I like and appreciate men,I just don't want to sleep
with one. Unfortunately,when a woman decides that she wants to control
her own life and argues for her rights as a human being;all too often
she will have the response that she must" be a dyke to act like that."
Why is it that when a man is aggressive,forceful and successful,he is
admired ;but when a woman shows the same qualities,she is labeled a
"bitch",or "dyke". Because of our prevelent homophobia in this
society,women who might have enjoyed the challenges of buisiness or
politics will turn away from these fields for fear of being seen as a
lesbian. In the Women's Rights Movement ,lesbians have been shunned
and pushed aside by the people that we should have seen as sisters. We
were the "Lavender Menace",who's perversions would keep the movement
from being seen as legitimate. We were pushed aside even faster than
women of color in the race to make the movement acceptable to the same
mainstream that had oppressed us so long. It didn't matter that
women-loving women were working hard and doing good work in the
movement,we had to go. Our history was rewritten,our letters
edited,women who had lived in long ,loving partnerships with other
women were just"good friends". Because of our sexuality,we had to be
desexed in order to fit in. I urge anyone who is reading this to go
to the library,pick up any book by Lillian Faderman(a prominent womens
historian)and read the hidden history of my people,women who loved
women and made a difference in the world. Feminist? I guess so,and I
will continue to urge my friends and sisters to exercise the rights
that were fought for so long and hard,and to keep fighting for the
future of women yet to come. For equality not only on the basis of
gender,but on the basis that love is too precious a thing to waste,no
matter what form it takes.
Subject: Unsung Voices?
From: JR
Date: 11 Nov 1999 10:04 AM
Lesbian women the unsung voices of the feminist movement? Hardly, when
that's all the backlashers seem to know about it. Get real.
Subject: Feminism
From: Alice
Date: 11 Nov 1999 5:26 PM
I too am 52 years old and think of myself as a feminist. It seems to
me that many of the younger generation regard feminist as a negative
term, implying a man-hating, probably lesbian, strident,
chip-on-the-shoulder, sort of woman. Especially because of the lesbian
"taint" many young women don't want to be seen as feminists. I hope
many are feminists, as I think of the term, but just don't want to
accept this label. Too bad. Feminist is a good word which should be
retain, embraced and celebrated!
Subject: Feminism
From: Rich Gowell
Date: 11 Nov 1999 7:00 PM
It is, perhaps, an indication of just how far the women's movement
has progressed that it's present incarnation, devoted as it is to
continued dramatic change, has come to have negative associations in
the minds of so many young women. When a just cause achieves, or comes
near to acheiving, it's just end, advocacy for a revolutionary
departure from that destination is, rightly in my opinion, perceived as
odious. Young women don't, by and large, distance themselves from
feminism's magnificent past. Rather, they question whether they ought
to associate themselves with a present-day movement which they perceive
to have lost touch with the realities of their personal lives.Of
course, this opinion could be presumptious, as I do carry a "Y"
chromosome.As an aside, I'd like to add my praise for the film "Not For
Ourselves Alone". I sat, completely enthralled, through both parts,
and was moved almost to tears at a couple of points by the powerful
story of these two nineteenth century giants.Rich Gowell
Subject: The Next Wave
From: Melanie Smith
Date: 11 Nov 1999 8:08 PM
I am 33 and have shouted to the rafters and all who will listen that I
am a feminist. I am also a daughter, sister, wife, mother, friend...
Among my friends, I am a minority in claiming the label "feminist".
Why not "feminist"? My friends say they are not victims, they do not
hate men, they don't see how feminism fits into the reality of life. In
many ways, because of those who have come before us, we are living
lives of practical every-day equality. My friends have become immune
to the rantings of freedom squelchers and consider them mad, ranting,
lunatics. But, the aftershocks of the past are still jarring. In my
professional life, I've been quite successful. I'm on the top half of
mid-way up the corporate ladder. It is the exception when my
female/smart/ambitious/mother combination suprises - angers - enrages
others. But it still happens.I will be the change I want to see in
this world. My husband and I are raising a feminist son. As a family,
and as individuals, we are guided by the principal of equality for all
people. All the time. For all time.
Subject: To Rich Gowell
From: Mary Shearer
Date: 11 Nov 1999 9:32 PM
Don't apologize for the Y chromosome. Stanton would've liked it. ;)
Subject: Are you a feminist?
From: Genie Webster
Date: 11 Nov 1999 4:06 PM
There needs to be a new definition of "feminist" for the new millenium.
Read my proposal for a new definition at:
www.GenieWebster.com/fem.html. I propose that we add spiritual equality
to the dictionary's definition of economic, social, and political
equality. That is, when God is universally perceived as androgynous...
when God the Mother is equal to God the Father... then and only then
will we have true equality of the sexes.
Subject: Androgynous God
From: Mary Shearer
Date: 11 Nov 1999 9:27 PM
Actually, I think since God is so great and good, God can't possibly be
male or female. (I bet both genders are going to get mad at me for
that one.)
Subject: Androgynous God
From: Sandra Gagnon
Date: 11 Nov 1999 10:23 PM
No anger here, Mary.The only kind of god that makes sense to me would,
in fact, be an androgynous god. Or, more to the point, god would
surely be asexual, i.e. having no sex. What makes one male or female?
The presence of male or female sexual organs. The purpose of such
organs? To create life. God creates life, but not by having sex, and
hence has no need for male or female parts.That humankind was make in
"god's own likeness" surely cannot be meant in terms of physical
likeness, because that differs among us not only by sexual parts, but
by hair/skin/eye color, height, facial features, etc. In what likeness
are we like god? In our ability to think, for this sets us apart from
all god's other creations.Is it difficult to think of god as neither
male nor female? Yes, it is hard to picture, but let us exercise and
strengthen our god-given likeness -- let us open our minds and think!
Then equality will not be far behind!
Subject: Genderless God, any attribute
From: Steven Kolins
Date: 11 Nov 1999 5:09 PM
I beleive that God is beyond all attributes but that these attributes
also reveal God. So while God is beyond male/female, male/female
qualities shows things we need to know.Some scattered
references:
"Far, far from Thy glory be what mortal man can affirm
of Thee, or attribute unto Thee, or the praise with which he can
glorify Thee! Whatever duty Thou hast prescribed unto Thy servants of
extolling to the utmost Thy majesty and glory is but a token of Thy
grace unto them, that they may be enabled to ascend unto the station
conferred upon their own inmost being, the station of the knowledge of
their own selves...." "Whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on
the earth is a direct evidence of the revelation within it of the
attributes and names of God...."
- Baha'i Writings.
Subject: Female-ism
From: Martian Bachelor
Date: 11 Nov 1999 12:09 AM
Joyce raises two different issues: 1) the greying of the second wave
feminism of the 1960's and `70s, and the younger generations refusal to
identify themselves with it; 2) the lack of the word "feminism" to mean
anything in particular.1) I was surprised that no one in this thread
brought up Rene Denfeld's excellent book "The New Victorians" (A Young
Woman's Challenge to the Old Feminist Order). Denfeld points to the
fact that second wave feminists have simply left the realm of things
that matter in everyday life for a bizarre world of theory and fantasy
where "you're not one of us" unless you buy the whole ball of wax about
woman's moral superiority and their "different voice", male brutishness
and oppression, phallocentric thinking, mythical goddess religions,
etc, etc. She builds a good case for her thesis that much of what
comes out of the ivory tower of women's studies (which is where most
young women first come into contact with "orthodox" feminism) has, in
fact, come full circle and become a throwback to Victorian notions
about gender and sex. Young women have no need of this stuff.
Eye-opening reading, as well as much good history of the sort in the TV
show. Other young women have other criticisms of the movement; a good
(long) summary is at
http://www.worcesterphoenix.com/archive/features/97/05/30/LIPSTICK_LIBE
RATION.html . 2) Along these same lines, it would be my outsider's
contention that feminism has devolved into good old-fashioned female
self-interest and narcissism: the Barbie mantra of "Girls Can Do
Anything!", or "We Take the Woman's Side in Everything". You can put
virtually any word you want in front of the word "feminism" and invent
a new flavor. As Octavio Paz said with regard to the word "freedom",
feminism is also "the word that goes to bed with all the other
words". Equal rights are too often confused with blanket permission
and self-indulgence. Back thirty years ago, feminism was about freeing
both sexes from their traditional roles, but the cause of men was
quickly forgotten. Instead, say when it comes to hunting down
beat-dead-dads and making them empty their wallets for women, feminism
is about keeping men in their traditional roles as money-earners and
protectors of women -- ie, as people who give to and sacrifice for
women. Just to give one example. Most of what women said they wanted
thirty years ago, men gave: rights, opportunities, education, etc. By
and large, the movement got what it wanted (but women are still second
class victims and oppressed). Feminism won, but still wasn't happy.
This then becomes the old ploy of women trying to get whatever they can
out of men. What many women seem to want today is not equality but
privilege -- half of what men have, while retaining what has always
been women's. This is why, say, women demand entrance to military
academies, while breaking down in tears when it's suggested a woman's
college catch up with the times and go co-ed. Unfortunately, these
female orchestrated double standards are still with us, and getting
worse. This is not equality. Some would say the real women's
movement of the last twenty years has been the explosive growth of
romance novels and night-time soaps on TV, as well as man-as-idiot
sitcoms, but that's another story (and you watch PBS anyway). Just
look at all the women's magazines at the grocery store checkout, but
men's magazines are kept hidden. Women's interests command attention.
Men's are ignored, or deplored when noticed. This is not equality, but
an expression of an aristocracy. No need to worry about the definition
of the word which describes it or which word you use. Girls Rule! For
the most part, they don't need no movement.
Subject: Female-ism
From: Stephanie
Date: 11 Nov 1999 8:17 PM
I think you really miss the importance of feminism for both men and
women when you stereotype it as being elitist for women, hating men or
out of touch with the lives of women...that is more of a steroetype
from someone who has never never been sexually descriminted
against...You dont have a clue as to how awful, anger producing and
powerless that feels for women...On the contrary, I find that younger
women (and I am 38 yrs) tend to dismiss feminism because they do not
have enough life experience to know the value of feminism..they have
not personally experienced chronic sexism over many years time, the
glass celing, less qualified men being given promotions over them,
being called a whore/bitch when they stand up for themselves, being
sexually harrased on the job..Indeed, the older a woman becomes and the
more life experience she has in the world, especially in the world of
work, the more of a feminist she becomes..As young woman with little
work/life experiences behind me, I also failed to see the
importance/need for feminism today...But, like me, these young women
will grow up and experince sexism first hand and thus change their
feelings and opinions about feminism..The reason why feminists are not
happy is that we still have alot of work to do..When I make equal pay
for equal work done, when I have the same promotion opportunities as
men, when I am commanded the same respect and attention at work for my
accomplishments as men are, when I am judged more by my internal
attributes of intelligence and integrity rather than what I look like
or what I am wearing ( still asked of me by most men who want to date
me)..I will agree with you that feminism has done its job. Feminism is
about freedom and opportunity for all people, not keeping men in their
traditional jobs..men CHOOSE those jobs that pay more..perhaps if they
chose other jobs that give them more internal rewards rather than
monetary rewards, they would be happier..indeed, most feminists want
men to be an EQUAL partner as a parent as well as a worker, we are not
looking for men tom financially support us or "protect" us (whatever
that is supposed to mean) Worshipping the goddess has nothing to do
with a belief that women are superior to men...the native Americans
worshipped godesses as well as gods and they did not believe women are
superior to men. As for female narccissim and "selfishness"., it is
really healthy for women to develop this after years of catering to the
wants of others..Most women who are physically/sexually abused have NO
sense of healthy narccissm, or the belief that they do not deserve this
kind treatment..narccissim is healthy for women to develop after
growing up in a sexist world that demands that they puts the needs of
others ahead of their own....Your arguments against feminism simply
don't mirror the reality for millions of women ....Stephanie
Subject: Are you a Feminist?
From: Teddy
Date: 11 Nov 1999 9:48 PM
Anne Perry in her novel A BREACH OF PROMISE demonstrates what is
frustrating to many men and women. It is an easy read, entertaining
and highly apropos of this particular subject.
Subject: reply to Stephanie
From: David
Date: 11 Nov 1999 11:37 PM
You have a certain view of feminism of course, but just because you
chose to call yourself a feminist does not mean that your view of the
movement as a whole is correct. In many ways you probably see the whole
thing very much through rose-tints. What you refer to as the
stereotypes about man-hating are stereotypes for a good reason -- they
are often true. Even in your own post there is evidence of it. I could
mention many examples but one will do. You repeat the common claim of
feminism that women are paid less money for the same work. The usual
figure put about these days is 26% less. This statistic is a deception
of course. My question to you: are you aware that the statement you are
propagating is false? Another comment: perhaps women would not be so
angry about their lives if feminists spoke the truth to them?
Subject: Reply to David
From: Stephanie
Date: 11 Nov 1999 11:40 PM
I would have to disagree with you that feminism is about hating men..I
am a strong feminist yet I do not hate men..I love my father, male
cousins and male friends very much..As a practicing psychotherapist, I
often have male clients referred to me by other male therapists, who
state I "work very well with men and seem to really understand them and
their problems"..this is a direct quote from a male clinician...I dont
think someone who is assumed to hate men would continue to have male
referals brought to her..especially when the males often have a better
show rate with their appointments than many of the female clients...men
dont stick around with a professional that "hates" them..My own
personal experience as a woman as well as the experience of my women
clients shows that men are promoted with far less qualifications than
women are and are paid more for doing the same job..I have countless
cases of women I could share with you as "proof"...I find that men
don't want to believe that women experience this because they somehow
feel blamed or made to feel they have to change ther assumptions about
the reality of womens lives...Feminists hating men is a sterotype..EC
Stanton and SB Anthony were feminists but they did not hate men...many
men are feminists but they do not hate their own sex...I would have to
disagree with you that I see feminism through rose colored glasses..my
many years of work as a therapist means I have dealt with the reality
of both men's and women's experiences....the nature of the work is that
you look close and hard at the REALITY of peoples lives...therapy is
the place where people get real..and I have taken those experiences of
my clients to shape my reality/view of the world.....most people have
not witnessed the intimate level of reality that I have of a large
number of people unless they themselves are therapists..therefore it
gives me a pretty accurate idea about what alot of men and women are
struggling with..Stephanie
Subject: Reply to David
From: Stephanie
Date: 11 Nov 1999 11:54 PM
Women are angry about their lives not because of feminism but because
of the burden of living in a patriarchal society in which their
contributions are devalued, trivialized and dismissed..Women are tired
of holding 2 full time jobs..that of wife/mother/housekeeper and that
of employee...Women are tired of being paid less than men for the same
job..Women are tired of being mens emotional caretaker..women are tired
of be passed over on a promotion thats given to a less qualified
man...women are tired, period..those are the complaints that I hear
from women clients....women are tired of being judged more by their
appearance to men rather than their intellect..I never have heard any
of them complain about feminism, that feminsim did not meet their
needs..My experince has been that this complaint comes from young
girls/women with little life/work experience to see the value of
feminsim yet...
Subject: Reply to Martian
From: Stephanie
Date: 11 Nov 1999 2:16 PM
Perhaps if male military academies were not funded by federal and state
taxes, women would not be so upset that their money is being used for
the contribution of an adult institution that they have no right to
join/participate in..makes me wonder how men would "feel" if they were
being told that they had to contribute their tax dollars for a female
institution that does not allow men.. as for longing for female
colleges, most of these are funded by private, not tax funded
donations, unlike military academies....women mourn the supportive
atmosphere of a female only college..research shows that women who
graduate from a women's college achieve greater academic and
professional success than women who gradudate from coed colleges...so
perhaps they also have a more tangible reason to mourn the loss of
women's colleges....Stephanie
Subject: Reply to Stephanie abt Martian
From: Mary Shearer
Date: 11 Nov 1999 7:01 PM
Although I find Martian Bachelor's web site to be extremely anti-female
on the subject of dating and other issues, in all fairness to him, I'd
say, if women have every right to mourn the passing of female only
institutions, then men have the right to mourn the passing of male only
institutions. Some women seem to want it both ways. They want
equality. They want to be allowed into the male only military schools,
but they still want the men to fight the wars. Men are subject to the
draft and women aren't. Either women need to start registering for it,
or we need to end the draft for everyone concerned if we're truly
interested in equality.
As for the female colleges, the 19th
century women's rights pioneers saw female colleges as a sign of
inequality and prejudice. I'm not denying that there may be some
benefits to a female only college, but men and women need to spend more
time together than they do apart. We know the effects of keeping men
and women in different "spheres" from the Victorian ages. I don't
think we want to repeat their mistakes. Let the men mourn the loss of
their male only establishments and women mourn the loss of their female
only establishments, and let's all be glad that the segregation is
ending.
Subject: Taxing women for male military academies
From: Stephanie
Date: 11 Nov 1999 10:22 PM
I was more concerned about women not allowed in tax run institutions (
such as military academies) than to make a point of allowing women into
male military academies. if men want their male/only institutions, I
think thats great.... just don't tax women for them and then not allow
women to participate in them....personally, I am against the draft for
both men and women..I certainly do not want it both ways..men drafted
and women not drafted..I am a pacifist..killing people as a attempt to
resolve conflict is wrong to me whether the person doing the killing is
male or female.....Stephanie
Subject: Female-ism
From: Karen
Date: 01 Jan 2000 4:23 AM
Here's my 2 cents on the whole issue of feminism. A little about me so
that you understand where I'm coming from: I’m a 26-year-old woman in
the military. I think that my generation's refusal to identify with
the word "feminist" has a lot to do with the mostly equal world that we
grew up in. If you don't consider yourself a minority or discriminated
against because you are female, you simply will expect equal treatment.
It comes as nothing less than an absolute shock if you are treated as
less than an equal -- and today we have been taught how to fight back.
I think the military (at least what I have seen and experienced of it)
is, in many ways, a role model for society in regards to equal
treatment of the sexes (and races, for that matter). Aside from some
highly publicized incidents, the military on a day to day basis
provides fair and equitable treatment to everyone. When there is a job
to be done, everyone is expected to do the same work. No one is
excused because they are a _____. Maybe I can't lift the same amount
of weight as my male colleagues, but I work just as hard and lift as
much as I can safely. We all help each other out. We have to -- our
lives depend on it.The issue of deadbeat dads is less about keeping men
around to support women than it is about men supporting their children.
Men are half of the equation for a child, and should be expected to
shoulder their fair share of the cost and burden of child rearing. As
a side note, there are also deadbeat moms who are prosecuted just as
severely as deadbeat dads.Here is my spin on all girls and all boys’
schools. I think that such schools are fine, provided that they are
wholly privately funded. If you involve public money in schools of
this type; then a giant can of worms is opened. Is there an equivalent
boys/girls school? Is separate but equal truly equal, etc.I also think
men have come a long way. Today it is far more acceptable for a man to
stay at home with his kids, or to show emotion in public, or to ask for
help from someone. Is everything perfect in the world? No. There is
still a long way to go before everyone is treated exactly the same.
But I think that both men and women have made, and continue to make,
tremendous strides in the right direction.
Subject: Are you a feminist?
From: Angie Souren
Date: 11 Nov 1999 1:06 PM
"Fortunately I am a feminist!" says my personal web site. Then I go on
to explain that many people seem to think "feminist" is either
synonymous with and nothing further than "lesbian" and/or "man hater".
I point out that many men are also feminists. If you're a woman and you
take yourself serious as a human being, then you're a feminist (well,
right now, you still are). If you're a man and you take women serious
as fully capable human beings, then you're a feminist. It is that
simple. Feminists make choices and don't go with the flow.
Subject: Are you a feminists?
From: Carolyn
Date: 12 Dec 1999 12:13 AM
I'm a college student and came upon this message researching the
women's movement. I wholeheartedly agree that feminists are too often
labled "lesbians" or brute male bashers. A prime example of this
misconception was an interview with the star of the show Buffy the
Vampire Slayer. When asked whether she was a feminist, she responded,
"no, I like to shave my legs." It is time to clear the name for
feminists and rediscover the women who devoted their lives so that we
could not only participate, but become influential figures in
government. -Carolyn
Subject: I am a Feminest
From: Erin Tiesi
Date: 01 Jan 2000 9:42 PM
I do believe in being a feminest.
Subject: huh?
From: Nikki
Date: 03 Mar 2000 5:34 AM
We're not feminists if we say that... We should have equal rights...
Everyone should... Being a feminist is judging only on sex. Thats not
what they are doing... They just want to be treated the same.
Subject: If that makes me a feminist...
From: Jennifer Weidner
Date: 04 Apr 2000 11:48 AM
I believe in the struggle for women's rights. Not just the legal
rights but the social rights as well. I believe that our strongest
allies are women but I don't not exclude other genders form this
struggle. In redefining women's rights, we are also redefining the
relationship women's rights have to the rights of others. This
movement has come far from the times when it began. There is still
along way to go and the fight will be well worth it. Don't forget the
struggle of the past and forget to cherish where we stand today and
where we will stand in the future. If this makes me a feminist than so
be it. I am proud to call myself a feminist and stand among my fellow
feminists.
Subject: many shapes and sizes
From: karen klebbe
Date: 04 Apr 2000 7:58 PM
there are many women of my generation (x) who would not identify
themselves as feminists. i believe this most has to do with the
1970'simage of feminists as bra-burning-man-hating-bitter women. and
while those women certainly did exist (and to some extent still do),
they by no means represented the whole. they were simply the most
radical faction of the movement and of course received the most press.
personally, i am unable to understand how any woman can refuse to call
herself a feminist. for me, the two go hand-in-hand. but many young
women believe that they are on equal ground with men- and to some
extent we are. but many of these yoiung women miss the subtle
oppression in everyday life- that virtually all cleaning product
commercials show women using these products, that while we now can have
a fulfilling career outside the home, we are still expected to be room
mothers and primary caretakers of our families. i believe there are
all kinds of feminists. i think the woman who works at hooters is a
feminist- she is using the system and men's desire for her own means
(money). i believe that women in the sex industry are feminists- all
of these women use the system for their own gain, be it economic,
personal, or other. these women aare exercising their right to
determine their own lives, and if they choose to do that by working at
hooters or in pornography or in prostituition, then good for them!
Subject: Feminism
From: Nina
Date: 05 May 2000 6:30 PM
I definately consider myself a feminist and in telling others I get
various responses, especially whenn I went to India with my family. If
I ever spoke up against the repressive treatment of women and how they
are objectified in almost every aspect of thier lives, my family and
especially my father would make me out to be some sort of crazed and
disallusional feminist. People seem to think that if one is a feminist
that they are men-haters, and we all know that this is not true. A
feminist, to me, is someone who wants the well-deserved equal rights
that should belong to women. It is placing women on an equal level as
men, it is not putting men down so women can grow. Equality is the key
word.
Subject: feminism - what people think
From: Carolina Huettmann
Date: 05 May 2000 4:08 PM
I am amazed at how many people still refuse to call themselves
feminists just for the reason that this word has those negative
connotations (femi-Nazis, etc.). People go by what other people think
than by what the word means to themselves. A lot of negative images are
heavily influenced by the media rather than by actual feminists out
there. This seems to be common knowledge in women's studies classrooms,
but not much outside of them.I call myself a feminist and have at times
been afraid that I wouldn't meet all the *positive* aspects of what
this word means to me. (Like: Am I allowed to call myself a feminist if
I'm not a full-time activist at the same time?) Recently I got to know
the opinion of organizations such as the Third Wave that it's useless
not to consider yourself a feminist just because you think you're not
"good enough". That makes a lot of sense to me because otherwise a lot
of people might exclude themselves without real reasons.
Subject: Are you A Feminist
From: Amara Broadway
Date: 05 May 2000 12:24 AM
A feminist could be someone who fights or believe that women should be
treated just as equally as men, or could be a women who thinks she
should be superior to men. I do not agree with the latter, I think
that women should be treated equally but should not be consider
superior, no one should be superior over another we were all created
equal no matter what color you are, gender you are, and how much money
you have. I that that's whats wrong with society now everyone it trying
to be superior over someone else.
Subject: Feminist?
From: Hong C. Tran
Date: 05 May 2000 7:13 PM
I don't think a lot of young women these days consider themselves
"feminists". Joyce stated that any woman who believed that she should
have "equal footings with men" is considered a feminist. I think that
females should have "equal footing with men" but I don't think that I
am a feminist. I think it is becuase I look too much into the past.
My definition of a feminist is a woman who is a strong advocate for
women rights. She would also go to rallies and stand up for her rights
in public. Mainly, the image I have in my mind of a feminist is a
woman in the 1970s, dressed up as a hippie, and carrying a large sign
or flag. I am definitely not that and do not protest. Therefore, I am
not a feminist in my point of view. But I guess, Joyce is trying to
say that anyone who believes in their rights is a feminist. So in her
mind, i am a feminist. but i minds....i think not
Subject: feminist?
From: veronica
Date: 01 Jan 2002 3:18 AM
I was born into a world where boys and girls have equal educational
opportunities. Where anyone can pursue an education in whatever field
they choose. The bras were being burned while I was watching Scoobie
Doo. So I was utterly oblivious to the fact that inequality existed.
The attitude I developed is one not only of equality but also of slight
superiority in reason and acceptance. I do not consider myself a
"feminist". I consider myself a powerful human being who has her pick
of what the world has to offer with nothing in her way. Obstacles
based on gender are set by the ignorant and ridiculous, two personality
traits I despise. So I see them for the weak and unenlightened persons
they are and I move on in the direction I set for myself. In the long
run I win because I accomplish. I see more opportunity than obstacles.
I aspire to and achieve my goals. I encourage others, male and female
alike. I can not be stopped in my endeavors. Am I a feminist? I will
not be labeled nor have I allowed myself to accept a stereotype. I am.
Subject: Feminism, sheminism
From: Courtney Solberg
Date: 05 May 2000 8:33 PM
Feminism. It always puts a smile to my face when I hear about women
today who advocate for more women's rights, who struggle in the face of
adversity, and furthermore, who are not satisfied, but continue trying
to find more ways to be man's "equal." I will not go so far in saying
that women's rights are ludicrous. I give much thanks to the women who
have stood up for the basic rights that women deserve. College, for
one, is a privilege and we wouldn't be here if it weren't for those
women who fought for that right. It is those women who take it upon
themselves to search for other rights to fight for that I am not so
fond of. It seems as if there are some people who can never be
satisfied with what has been accomplished before them. Women can do
many things in this day in age. We have the right to vote, take legal
action against rape, hold high positions in businesses, earn our own
wages, be independent of a man, etc. I realize that these rights are
due to past women's efforts, but what more do we possibly need? I
believe that feminism is partly the reason for the breakdown in the
family structure. Women are taking more jobs, neglecting their duties
as a mother, and putting their children in daycare to pursue their
dream that they never got the opportunity to fulfill. Since when did it
become so horrible to just be a mother and a wife? We seem to have
placed the housewife on a lower scale by sending women the message that
they should be out there, working and doing what they want when this
may conflict with their role as a mother. While I strongly believe that
women should have the same basic rights as any other individual, I
think that we as a country need to first consider the consequences of
today's feminism by evaluating the costs versus the benefits of it.
Only then can we see how our nation's problems have originated.
Subject: Feminism, sheminism, sexism
From: Margreet
Date: 10 Oct 2000 6:22 PM
"I think that we as a country need to first consider the consequences
of today's feminism by evaluating the costs versus the benefits of it.
"___HAHA, I think 'the country' could have saved some costs,.... on
you. (does your husband evaluate you, keeping your costs and benifits
in mind ;-) )Keep in mind that there are women who want to be a person
in the first place, instead of mother and/or wife.I think it's just
great you enjoy backing cookies, but I like making them for the sites I
build AND together with my daughter.No one's forcing you to have a
carreer and become a bussineswoman, but don't force me to backe
cookies all day long. P.s. no costs where made for me by any country or
man. Can you say the same?Margreet (excuse my english ;-)
Subject: reply to Feminism, sheminism
From: Joe
Date: 11 Nov 2000 6:16 PM
test
Subject: Feminism, schmeminism, lady you're a sexist in disguise
From: Katherine L. Jumbe
Date: 11 Nov 2000 7:49 PM
Courtney, what a bunch of bull. I'll agree with you, feminism is part
of the reason that there hasbeen a breakdown in the traditional family
but I say good. A woman should not be defined by the man she she
marries, or the number of kids she has. No, family is not a bad thing,
at all. If a woman is happy with staying home, then by all means, let
her stay home, but the fact remains that now, if she doesn't want kids
or a husband, she doesn't have to have them. Now she can go out and
make a life of her own. Or, like my mother, a woman can have a career
and raise a family, and I can honestly say she was a good mother and a
good career woman. The way this was possible was that my Dad had to
actually help out around the house, sharing in the raising of my sister
and I. And if things are getting better here they are still pretty bad
in other parts of the world, like Afghanistan and China. Even here, it
has been proven that women get paid less than men, female students are
often discouraged from pursuing the sciences and maths, and there still
exists a glass ceiling no matter how thin. Don't hide behind half
agreement, if you're an anti-femanist just say so and as long as there
are women who think like you, we've got a long way to go.
Subject: Are you a femenist
From: Katherine Jumbe
Date: 11 Nov 2000 7:28 PM
My answer would be that I, a college student, do consider myself a
feminist. I look at history books and women are missing, I look at
politics and there are few women in positions of powerand I look at
society and I see women who, while they may be able to work, are also
expectedto do the majority of the house work. Some of my friends,
because of the connotation that the word now carries, are wary of
calling themselves feminists but believe in equal rights. I think part
of the fight that is to be fought is turning the meaning of the word
feminist back to one of social progressiveness.
|
