Feminism!

As a woman I feel we probably have the same rights as men if not more, but less respinsibilty.

It is late right now so I am not going to go into too much detail and discuss every point of yours. However to start with I shall discuss a few…
Too often, people see Feminism as anti-male movement which wishes to make men inferior. Feminism has long changed since the days of the Suffragettes as Feminism is not a solid set of beliefs carved in stone but rather a fluid movement which adapts to its environment. One need only look at the definition of Feminism and see that it is not inherently sexist:

“Belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes” (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/feminism)

Feminism has the sole aim of creating equality between the genders by abrogating the cultural, social, political and economic disparities. This would involve not only focusing on the issues which effect women but also those which effect men. Therefore the disparities that exist among men such as those you’ve mentioned such as the difference between lengths of age men live to compared with women. This is an important issue that all feminists should address.

See the main issue here is that gender and race and other categorisations are often seen as a barrier to getting a job in certain industries. One would think that merely improving education would solve the problem and encourage people from groups which are underrepresented into certain careers, but it doesn’t. I think the aim is not lower the standard but to encourage people to see past gender as an issue and for people who are best suited for jobs, to do the jobs. However, in certain industries, there still exist stereotypes that certain jobs are for men or white people etc… Many women are discouraged from studying physics and likewise, many men are discouraged from becoming nurses. By implementing affirmative action and similar policies we can encourage these underrepresented groups into other careers and they can then act as role models and break down the cultural and societal barriers that have been erected and have prevented people who are perfectly able to do the jobs. So if anything, the final result would be a larger fish pool of people entering into careers which they are best suited for and might have overlooked and thus an increasing of standards.


An interesting book which I feel is relevant here is a book called “The Spirit Level”.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Spirit-Level-Societies-Almost-Always/dp/1846140390
The main premise of the book is that equality is better for everyone. The one major issue the books campaigns for is income equality. The book, through a collection of statistical data proves to a certain extent that the income inequality which exists in society is a major source for many of our social ills present in modern society. Therefore, to combat the other issues you have mentioned, income equality and therefore, income equality between the genders, is a very important issue that if corrected would have numerous benefits for society.

No, I am against the idea of war and armies altogether. If we had a world country, there would be no international conflict, so there wouldn't be a 'front line', so this would be a non-issue. There would be civil wars, but believe that anyone should be able to fight in a civil war, but no-one should be made to fight in a civil war (i.e. no conscription) and the only people fighting will actually believe in the cause that they are fighting for rather than having soldiers hide behind the excuse 'I'm only following orders' when they commit atrocities.

"Feminism" has been taken over by the group that is self-interested in themselves. E.g. if I was voting & I was a born & bred, very patriotic British then looking at a list of parties you'd think the party calling themselves British National with the Union Jack would be for you. But its not, its just they have taken over what it means, at least honestly. I mentioned to Tapner in the early post about feminism's history & provided a link, "the contrast between the egalitarian goals of first wave feminism and the unequal demands of modern feminism". Feminism lauded around is also bad for women. This Feminism group specifically created has a certain type of basic equality, if it was named Egalitarian Society about men & women then I'd join! If I had time I'd start one.
Powerful women use the banner of Feminism for their hate words, eugenics & actions - google for what is being said about "Agent Orange Files" who has identified women from "Radfem Hub" where there is the SCUM (Society For Cutting Up Men) connection. Some hate speech are from the UK e.g. Laila Namdarkhan (screen name “yabawife”), a well known feminist activist who was instrumental in passing legislation in the U.K; Lucy Nicholas worked at Uni of Edinburgh and Uni of Portsmouth. Even the most sexist man would not think of culling girls/women or men who oppose them; unlike some of these better known feminists. In case you did not know the global picture with the name & wonder why I am running .

Keeping it to gender - I do not see how women are discouraged from physics (engineering), its just that is not the type of job that they want; there IS equal opportunity. The major women's jobs involve (managing) the general public or under 10s, not alone work like truck driving, fishing, logging, oil drilling, plumbers, electricians, construction, waste disposal, farming, forestry, etc
On Harvard's website for 2007 (can't find link) it showed that the number of women entering Physics/Engineering had remained the same, but the number applying for it had dropped for women & gained for men - more men disproportionally rejected.
You say there implementing affirmative action will help, can you cite me the most recent (preferably UK, but English speaking is fine) affirmative action/positive discrimination benefitting Men? Do not mean age's positive discrimination like B&Q meet & greet, etc staff.

Did read Amazon comments(!) on The Spirit Level.
I will try to answer your question though death trumps ALL inequality & the privileged die older (talking about hundred thousands, not individuals like S.Jobs, A.Winehouse). That list (majority of 1.suicides, 2.workplace (not just 3.police/4.forces), 5.recently divorced people deaths are male; 6.more than 5+ years difference when men die early) of 6 shows, boys & men dying unequally. Valid stats first (for my own reason) & then there can be analysis, any takers?
For ages 15+ men have been 76% of deaths from 2006-2009 inc (2009 ratio 4,304:1,371); Police deaths look 90% male; UK military deaths in Afghanistan, ONS don't have names or by gender; UK Life expectancy Men 78.5, Women 82.4 years, 4 years life gap, not 5. I.e. early death, be underpayed, be 8% of men that get raped, not have voting rights - if unequal which one should be priority?

I agree income equality is good for most people but not good for Govt who give benefit money to subsidise equality, sometimes equality comes in cuts in heavier users of welfare benefits and public services. You will get more people being subsidised for the sake of equality, then people who genuinely should be in the job because they were discriminated. Results in net loss, a luxury to feel better which can't be maintained during recession. In India the Govt doesn't have the luxury to give an illusion/mirage of equality, it looks after its people with bureaucracy (EU countries with big Govt employment do the same & austerity measures hurt them first), i.e. why hire 2 people on an OK salary when 5 people can earn less, so have enough for food & maybe a roof at night. So income equality is better... when it does not lead to an early death.

I believe in poorer, less educated people having gainful employment rather than benefits, because first its 'new money' & second the poor to mid earners (£25K) are more likely to spend. The rich may not need to buy anything more, so save i.e. money does not get circulated, nor help the economy.

Riiight. But the reality of situation is that we have armies, and we have international conflicts. So would you kindly answer the question.

Two very good posts.

Having read through this thread I was all but ready to type out a lengthy reponse, but you two have both put it so well already

I don't think we do - I think women are a lot closer to equality, but not all the way there However, something I've always intensely disliked, is that some women (who call themselves feminists), think that women shouldn't have to, for example, serve on the front line, or be conscripted during war time.

Now there are guidelines demanding that a certain number of women should be in the boardroom etc Men are often accussed of being sexist I think women are just as bad.

I don't think we do - I think women are a lot closer to equality, but not all the way there However, something I've always intensely disliked, is that some women (who call themselves feminists), think that women shouldn't have to, for example, serve on the front line, or be conscripted during war time.

To be honest, I don't think anyone should be conscripted, regardless of gender. However as far as voluntarily serving on the front line goes, men and women should both be able to do it.

Excuse my ignorance, but I've never properly understood what feminism is. I have a basic knowledge, but nothing more. Could someone explain it to me please?

So basically feminists seek equal rights for women in comparison to men? Surely in the majority of first world countries that's the case anyway? I assume they also attempt to eradicate gender roles/stereotypes?

Wasn't SCUM just a joke from like the 1960s? I didn't know it still existed! Crazy Americans...

without being rude, I'd say thats a little naive to say women are equal in many first world countries. Yes, by policies and representation things have massively been improved but they are still sexualised and exploited. Why are women more likely to be victims of sexual violence and why are standards so different for them in terms of appearance, just some of the modern feminist issues.

Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister of this country in 1979 (with two small children in tow). In my opinion, if more 'feminists' took a leaf out of her book, and actually did some bloody work, as opposed to merely snivelling that their maternity leave pay isn't quite what they thought it might be, then we would have had another female P.M.

Some thoughts:
Gendered Analysis is a way of looking at the world which takes account of the differences in men's and women's lives and how this affects them.
Women more likely to be victims of men's violence, because they can be, as men are stronger. Why do frail men/women get mugged than a bulky strong person? Women use their own strengths, like manipulation/shaming/emotional abuse to get a man to be violent against another.

Gendered Analysis is about how individuals are valued & society is organised, law changes can be slow for BOTH sexes, e.g. "A woman's sexual history is still used against her in rape trials, because defence lawyers know that deep-seated views of how women 'should' behave can affect how jury members cast their votes"; men are given costlier crime sentences than women for the same crime; men are named when a rape Allegation is made & women are not, unless sentenced themselves; women get full child custody >80% of the time & can stop the father seeing the child(ren) & rarely get punished.

Policies and representation have not equally improved things for men, that is 1 reason less people are getting married - they realised the law is a Trap! Men are only living in the same house or being with their child as long as the women/mother allows it, if she makes an allegation out you go - she has that much POWER.
If you want to put a man off marriage take him to Family Law Courts & see what really happens to men in divorce, but don't let your friend ask how their case is going.

So soya salami what & how are modern feminists doing to decrease sexual violence & exploitation? Legalising men/women prostitution?
Stopping false rape/violence allegations? Giving the punishment the man would have received, to the false allegator?
Giving fathers rights to the kids after a divorce, not just child support payments? Women are going in to the office, why are men not being allowed to care in the home?
Allowing men proportionately as women to escape violence especially with children? Build men's shelters/allow women in men's shelters?


“I owe nothing to women’s lib,” Thatcher said, and at another point she remarked, “The feminists hate me, don’t they? And I don’t blame them. For I hate feminism. It is poison.” http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/no_way_to_treat_lady_pnAcOzLGiruXY2Q5huJKJN
"The feminist's problem with Thatcher is that she didn't play the victim." This is how Feminism controls, appealing to the goodness of people.

What made you write that it was a joke from the 60's?
Its radical feminism looking at destruction of masculinity, even that feminism logo badge that you use for your Feminism group desensitises you with the word radical in it. Then there is projection about 'women as people' as they ignore that men are people, this is how misandry goes into the subconscious.

SCUM meeting in Chelsea 2008.
The front page of http://radicalhub.wordpress.com/ has "Guest post by Susan Hawthorne; This is based on a talk originally given at the SCUM Conference in Perth, Australia on 24 September 2011."
They show plays based on this to Sweden children 2011, http://www.dads-r-us.se/2011/11/11/the-scum-manifesto-now-as-a-school-performance/. If Feminists rule a country it is Sweden first then Denmark, in how they treat men.

Norway abolishes Women’s Studies for being politicised and ideological, now renamed as Gender Studies for continued funding. Their government cut all their funding. (may have to alter settings to get translation) I read this as: studies not scientific or factual but biased. This is where Tom Martin's fight with LSE's gender studies may show parallels.

A summary of what's happening at http://radfemhubexposed.blogspot.com/. Who knows you may find your teacher in Agent Orange's File! “Once you see what Feminism really is – you cannot unsee.”

There is a lot of talk about Australia now, as a few months ago they changed their laws to remove the assumption of 50:50 shared parenting during a divorce; despite positive research http://www.familylawwebguide.com.au/sp/pg/research. The feminist political leaders who believe in destroying boys & men play a part, a timeline of sorts is in this blog http://robertwhiston.wordpress.com/2011/05/22/25/ & may be part of RadFem Hub.

Cameron decided against 50:50 discussion summer 2011, but USA far slower - they have changed the laws so that if a man is a victim of paternity fraud, he does not have to give the women money 'new' money but he will still owe it from before 2011!
Again to do with money because who do you chase if its 50:50? If no-one the Govt pays for the child, far easier to 1. obligate fathers & demonise them on Father's day 2. tolerate father group's antics fighting to see their children 3. ignore that women are the main abusers of children, 75% according to Sky News http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/15396996 4. ignore victimised children as little help or detection if the mother is the abuser. Factor why more men than women are forced to choose the toughest/high paying jobs; >70% men commit suicides?
Cameron & Obama have to be seen appealing to women to get their votes, rather than what is right & feminists play a self-centred part.

Examples of how young boys/men (16-24) get destroyed from Bias Against Men and Boys in Mental Health Research.
Note that psychology is women dominated. Selfishness will happen whenever women dominate because boys/men are brought up sacrificing themselves, & girls/women have been used to being put on a pedestal by boys/men.

I hope you see how each paragraph & reading the links are related to Feminism's underbelly & its influence, affecting boys/men - tricky, as showing facts is not enough.

Pahahahahaha, what a crock.
She does actually owe lots to the womens lib, they made it possible for her to vote and so become a politician. She owes everything to them.

Men should absolutely be given shelter, and are often victims of domestic abuse themselves, but what does this have to do with feminism? Feminidm is the idea that women should be equal, and what is wrong with that? Men are allowed to do all those things! They can get access and are allowed to 'house husbands', they have a choice.

Do you honestly believe that less people get married because of the law being a 'trap'? Are you really that dumb?

I think women can also be very sexist, but over the years, it has been discrimination against women that has done the harm.