feminism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-12-2010, 05:43 PM
RE: feminism
(07-12-2010 02:09 AM)ArchLucie Wrote:  
(06-12-2010 06:00 PM)Cetaceaphile Wrote:  Feminism doesn't really work.

I have to disagree. There are several examples in which the progress and equality of a society is directly related to the status of women. This is most evident in third world countries as opposed to our fairly equal western world. When you liberate women from the oppression they face due to the restrictions placed on them by religion or some other traditionally patriarchal system based on male dominance, there is an increase in societal health. Educating women and allowing them to have control over their own bodies is one of the most effective ways to combat poverty. This is feminism.


(06-12-2010 06:00 PM)Cetaceaphile Wrote:  It relies on ideas that are no there and considers women to be superior to men.

The Merriam-Webster defines feminism as "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes." This is the definition that I hold to, but just like with religion and other "-isms" there are degrees of it. You have very radical feminists, that as gaglamesh731 said "consider men to be nothing more than rapists." (I don't really like to refer to them as feminists...they are more like angry, bitter, irrational man-haters Angry) These are the ones that usually stick out the most, just like the radicals in any other group, giving feminism a bad name. Then you have the feminists that are rational and concerned with equality that are more inline with the definition I gave above. Plus all the colors in between.

In regards to the OP, I disagree with Barbara Walker's definition and implementation of feminism for the same reason dw406 gives in that "it would be replacing one inequity with another."

The second point makes my first point nul so technically I was right in that extreme feminism doesn't work. Though I never really saw any feminists that haven't been anti-male. Maybe it's another trait of my country?

I did notice though that feminists in Britain and being very very quiet about the Burka and female genital mutilation right now.

[Image: sigone_zps207cf92c.png]

Leonard Nimoy
1931-2015
Live long and prosper.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2010, 09:34 PM
 
RE: feminism
(07-12-2010 05:43 PM)Cetaceaphile Wrote:  The second point makes my first point nul so technically I was right in that extreme feminism doesn't work.

I think that extremism of any kind is one of the least effective ways to approach any situation or problem.

(07-12-2010 05:43 PM)Cetaceaphile Wrote:  Though I never really saw any feminists that haven't been anti-male. Maybe it's another trait of my country?

It's people like that that make me shy away from labeling myself a feminist. I prefer the term humanist. It doesn't have the bad connotation that gets associated with feminism and there's no mistaking that I am all for equality.
Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2010, 10:46 PM
 
RE: feminism
If as Barbara G Walker claims, that a totally matriarchal society existed before Christianity and Judaism, and that only women owned property, that men were not known as fathers, but passers by, couldn't that situation in itself cause a rebellion, perhaps even brought on Christianity? Couldn't Christianity and it's patriarchal mindset be a backlash, just as feminism is to a male dominated society? Why do it wrong again and establish a matriarchal society? Instead total equality should be the goal, perhaps then stability and peace will result.
Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2010, 04:45 AM
RE: feminism
Wait... Someone is claiming that pre-christian earth was run by women?

I'm sorry to say but that is bollocks. Even ignoring Africa, Asia and the Americas that is bullshit. Look at the Roman republic, Egypt, Greece, Gaul, just any any other organized society. Look at Neolithic evidence of human interaction, actually it just keeps going back until you get to creatures who roamed solo and only met for mating like 30 million years ago. I mean damn... Who comes up with this stuff?

It has always been the natural order of things. Nobody claiming that the human race suddenly shifted from matriarch to patriarch some time between 1000 and 200BC is really thinking about things. I mean come on.

[Image: sigone_zps207cf92c.png]

Leonard Nimoy
1931-2015
Live long and prosper.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2010, 08:32 AM
 
RE: feminism
Well, that is exactly what Barbara G Walker is asserting. She paints a paradise for women before the rise of patriarchal religions. She claims that people at the time did not put 2 and 2 together to realize that sex was related to procreation. That fatherhood was unknown, and women ruled by default. I think she's been tipping the bottle a bit much, but that's just my own opinion. I don't think there is sufficient evidence to support much of what she presents as fact.
Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2010, 06:36 PM
RE: feminism
Ya I think she's some kind of crazy extremist o-o

[Image: sigone_zps207cf92c.png]

Leonard Nimoy
1931-2015
Live long and prosper.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2010, 07:34 PM
 
RE: feminism
[Image: 2rzdg6c.jpg]



[Image: 17pclc.gif]

Actually the notion of Matriarchal cultures didn't originate with Walker, but rather was extant as an archeological proposition beginning in the 19th century. (LINK)

There was no time when women ruled the earth, however there certainly was prior to the advent of Patriarchal Abrahmic religions, far more respect for the female sex shown in various cultures around the world. female figurines, excavated and dated as far back as the Neolithic period have been found so as to prompt the theory they are either what have been called Goddess figurines, carved so as to revere the awesome mystery at that time surrounding female power. (Birth, menstruation, lactation) To being said to have been toys. Which is not really all that sound a theory considering there aren't in as great a number even by half, depictions of male figurines.

When the Christian faith came into being, many Pagan rites, rituals and traditions were co-opted, so as to persuade the Pagan communities to more easily accept being converted to the new faith. A conversion that was often effected through coercion or force. Pagan sites, shrines, were desecrated by the new missionaries and upon those former sites churches were built.
Fortunately, they were constructed using Pagan artisans and crafts people who, in order to keep their traditions alive and honor their fallen site, interjected many of their Pagan symbols into the work. Scroll work, glass/windows, carvings in the cornerstones, etc...
In the Catholic tradition, Mary was seen as just another face of the great Goddess. Especially the figure wherein she's standing atop the world with a crown of stars circling her head.
In fact, the Catholic nun's are derived from the Daughters of Auset (Isis) in Egypt. A community of Egyptian virgin girls brought into service to the great Goddess Auset.

So female power was indeed honored and revered in the pre-Abrahamic, pre-Christian world. Until the Patriarchal cult traditions overshadowed them.
Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2010, 08:13 PM
RE: feminism
This might be unrelated, but I'm sick of hearing about how men are pigs because they "sexually objectify women" when women seem to be doing a damn good job of it themselves.

[Image: 4hs9p5.png]

"Remember, Jesus would rather constantly shame gays than let orphans have a family."
-Stephen Colbert
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2010, 09:41 PM
RE: feminism
"Abrahamic religion is heavily sexist" would be the jist of it I think.


Also as for that sexualizing business; I don't get it. Honestly the female body is attractive to men, that's how it is and how nature designed it, otherwise there wouldn't be procreation. It doesn't make someone a pig. Not unless they don't respect the person other than for looks, which to be honest most of the "good looking" women do sexualize themselves, as you say.

[Image: sigone_zps207cf92c.png]

Leonard Nimoy
1931-2015
Live long and prosper.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2010, 10:24 PM
RE: feminism
Hey.

While I don't disagree that many feminists fight for the equality of all sexes (or that some fight for the institution of matriarchy) I find it odd that a word with a root word that is exclusive to a single gender is used. Should not these people call themselves egalitarianists? Or gender neutralists? Something more general.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: