Why do most women hate feminism in dating/relationships?

Most women still want a guy who is taller than them, older, more sexually experienced, confident, assertive and other qualities associated with typical masculinity. They also expect the men to ask out, plan dates (preferably pay for dates), call back, initiate sex, propose etc. Also what is traditionally expected from men. They are not looking for an equal but for someone who is in charge and dominates them. When married most women want to stay at home or work part time. Sweden, the bastion of feminism, has one of the highest percentages of women working part time in the world and a high gender wage gap. All other countries that are deemed as most gender equal have very similar outcomes.

I can't remember how many times I've seen women ask things like : Why didn't he ask me out, he kept looking at me? Is he interested? Why hasn't he proposed yet? Why didn't he make a move when we were in bed together? Why didn't he call back? So I ask the same question : why? Why aren't most women eager to adopt feminism into their private lives after 3 waves of it? After all, you never see any of them say they reject having the right to vote, equal pay or education.

Right to vote, equal pay, education etc. are very much life changing opportunities for women. I'm guessing some people just see the whole "man makes the first move" thing as a matter of etiquette (or perhaps the result of some kind of deeply engrained socialisation?) or perhaps because women still don't have much confidence.

I would underline here that feminism is about freedom of choice. Just because all these new doors are suddenly open to you doesn't mean you're obliged to go through them.

Right to vote, equal pay, education etc. are very much life changing opportunities for women. I'm guessing some people just see the whole "man makes the first move" thing as a matter of etiquette (or perhaps the result of some kind of deeply engrained socialisation?) or perhaps because women still don't have much confidence.

I would underline here that feminism is about freedom of choice. Just because all these new doors are suddenly open to you doesn't mean you're obliged to go through them.

Right to vote, equal pay, education etc. are very much life changing opportunities for women. I'm guessing some people just see the whole "man makes the first move" thing as a matter of etiquette (or perhaps the result of some kind of deeply engrained socialisation?) or perhaps because women still don't have much confidence.

I would underline here that feminism is about freedom of choice. Just because all these new doors are suddenly open to you doesn't mean you're obliged to go through them.

Suddenly? It's been over 50 years. And women have taken over well paid professions like medicine or law. The current educational gap is now at 60/40 in favour of female students and going up every year. Women under 40 now make more money than men of the same age (it only applied to women under 30 barely a couple of years ago). So you can see how strong the trends are. But little has changed in what women expect from men in relationships and it's not just initial contact but everything else I mentioned. So why ? Why has so little changed in the relationships scene if it's all socialisation? Socialisation also said women can't be doctors or get a degree? Barely two generations have passed and women have taken over wherever they wanted to take over, they certainly weren't shy about that. So why are they so ''shy'' about equality in relationships when they went from 0 to 100 faster than a Veyron in all these other areas?

What angers me is that women's choices to be paet time working housewives maintains the headline gender wage gap which morons quote (even though women who entered tbe workforce after ~1990 are paid better than men). This means idiotic affirmative action pressure that promotes incompetent women over competent men, ruining the management of our most important corporations.

This. Feminism is about giving people of all genders choices over their lives.

I don't know any women who would wait to be asked out.

but girls are still encouraged to be passive, and, dare I say it, to await a prince who will rescue them.

The media probably has some influence. After all, we still expose our kiddies to Disney cartoons, read them fairy tales and encourage little girls to play princesses. The pattern doesn't change as we get older; think of all those Mills and Boon novels, for instance.

Perhaps we are sending out a subconscious message that you can be whatever you like and do whatever you want, but that you should be "feminine" at the same time. Women may be becoming doctors and lawyers, but girls are still encouraged to be passive, and, dare I say it, to await a prince who will rescue them.

Of course this doesn't take into consideration factors such as culture, class or parental attitudes. Being a middle-class girl with relative freedom, I was actively encouraged by my parents to, "if you like that boy, ask him on a date."

Have you heard of the glass ceiling? How many women CEOs can you name?

I swear the only people who "encourage" women to be "passive" are girls/women themselves. isn't this a problem women themselves need to sort out?

I swear the only people who "encourage" women to be "passive" are girls/women themselves. isn't this a problem women themselves need to sort out?

Have you heard of the glass ceiling? How many women CEOs can you name?

There are different forms of encouragement. There's the belief that a girl should sit prettily and not be rough or noisy, playing with her dolls or with her toy oven.

However, passivity is also encouraged through the media and sexualisation of women and through sexual harrassment on the street. I suppose a radical feminist might call this, "men putting women in their place." Whether it's true or not, it does reinforce the notion that the man chases the woman and that women and girls are objects onto which feelings are projected. Which I suppose would reinforce passivity.

Even today women in the workplace are referred to, rather disparagingly, as "career women" and Thatcher was referred to as "the Iron Lady" - implying that being active and taking life by the horns is not a trait that should be associated with feminine behaviour.

There are different forms of encouragement. There's the belief that a girl should sit prettily and not be rough or noisy, playing with her dolls or with her toy oven.

However, passivity is also encouraged through the media and sexualisation of women and through sexual harrassment on the street. I suppose a radical feminist might call this, "men putting women in their place." Whether it's true or not, it does reinforce the notion that the man chases the woman and that women and girls are objects onto which feelings are projected. Which I suppose would reinforce passivity.

Even today women in the workplace are referred to, rather disparagingly, as "career women" and Thatcher was referred to as "the Iron Lady" - implying that being active and taking life by the horns is not a trait that should be associated with feminine behaviour.

The media probably has some influence. After all, we still expose our kiddies to Disney cartoons, read them fairy tales and encourage little girls to play princesses. The pattern doesn't change as we get older; think of all those Mills and Boon novels, for instance.

Perhaps we are sending out a subconscious message that you can be whatever you like and do whatever you want, but that you should be "feminine" at the same time. Women may be becoming doctors and lawyers, but girls are still encouraged to be passive, and, dare I say it, to await a prince who will rescue them.

Of course this doesn't take into consideration factors such as culture, class or parental attitudes. Being a middle-class girl with relative freedom, I was actively encouraged by my parents to, "if you like that boy, ask him on a date."

Have you heard of the glass ceiling? How many women CEOs can you name?

don't mothers buy their daughters those toys though? can you imagine a father being the one, out of the father and mother, to choose/influence the daughter's toys?



again, I swear women sexualise themselves. consider this: "women's" magazines like HEAT, OKAY!, (etc), are all made by women, and for women. they say things like "check out *female celebrity*'s SEXY beach body!", or "listen to *female celebrity's* advice on sex!". women's magazines probably "sexualise" women more than "men's magazines" do. maybe women themselves, as a gender, should take charge and make "women's magazines" more about STEM, politics, society (etc). and, again, this "women are objects" concept, from germaine greer, is from a radical feminist - I thought radical feminists weren't *real* feminists to a lot of feminists when people bring these people up?



you're talking about the late 1970s there. that was coming up to 40 years ago. there are almost half of the government's current cabinet that are women. also, notice that margaret thatcher wasn't a feminist yet she still got to the top without requiring the help of quotas or other such laws? why should women be led to believe that they need help when they cleary don't with MT being a prime example to the contrary?