I don't know if it's misunderstood, but it's definitely ABUSED by
some (for political gain). Same goes for race, age, poverty, etc. When
it's used for political gain... it's usually abuse of the actual cause
for an individual politician or party's benefit. This is often the case
with Feminism.When it's not being USED for politics...
it's a good movement.
I think the movement is being Hijacked with the goal of making Women believe
that the Government is the man.
No reasonable person can deny that the American way of life is under direct
attack by those who seek to replace it with European style post Christian
socialist dogma. That is evidenced here.All reasonable persons agree
that women should and must be treated with dignity and respect, and must have
equal access to education and employment. However, that is not what this
so-called feminist movement is really about. The modern feminist
movement has been hijacked by those who are pushing an agenda of uncontrolled
sexuality and drug use. Indeed, the emphasis is not on helping women, but is on
promoting activities that harm women, men, and children. If we
really care about women (and men and children) let us do everything we can to
foster stable family relationships. That will do far more for society than
No reasonable person can deny that the American way of life is under direct
attack by those who seek to replace it with a post constitutional, theocratic
dogma. The modern feminist movement is a bulwark against this encroachment
I think the movement is under attack by the radical right wing which wants to
put women back into their places. They were never happen with women's
suffrage. They're even angrier now that women want equal pay. For the fascist right it's about propaganda. they want us to romanticize
about the past. You know, the good old days when men went to work and women
stayed in the kitchen. It's orderly, it's traditional, and it's a
way to bond together the fascist right movement by focusing on a common enemy:
Those evil Liberal Feminists.
@JCS"However, that is not what this so-called feminist movement is
really about. "I find that it's best to let the people in
the movement tell you what it's about, not the people who hate the
movement. Ask a Tea Partier what a Progressive is or ask a Progressive what a
Tea Partier stands for, I suspect both definitions would be very far from what
the person in that group would subscribe to. "Indeed, the
emphasis is not on helping women, but is on promoting activities that harm
women, men, and children. "Yeah, like the promotion of policies
whereby pregnant women don't get fired just because they got pregnant like
that Hobby Lobby employee (ironic...) or the expansion of family leave for
mothers after giving birth where the US is woefully behind virtually every
nation in the world.
@Real MaverickRe "I think the movement is under attack by the
radical right wing which wants to put women back into their places"...So... where was "the moment" when a woman was trying to break
the glass ceiling and running for Vice President? (Hint... attacking her and
telling their people not to vote for her every step of the way).Obviously this isn't about Women... it's about Left vs Right, and
that's the total sum of what this movement is about. Otherwise they would
have supported Sarah Plain's campaign, and not attacked it.This
is the Left... using Women for politics... plain and simple.
@2bits"So... where was "the moment" when a woman was trying to
break the glass ceiling and running for Vice President?"So a
frequent claim is that feminism is all about claiming women are superior to men
and not about equal rights, and yet when they do something that doesn't fit
that "women are superior" narrative (generally not endorse Palin) they
get grief for that too?
@2 bits – “Obviously this isn't about Women... it's about
Left vs Right”So feminists should support any woman regardless
of any other views they may or may not have in common? I guess by that logic, we
should expect feminists to be supportive of our “war on terror”
unless the terrorist is a woman, then they should all break into a Helen Reddy
chorus.“I am woman, hear me blow up…”
@2 bits "So... where was 'the movement' when a woman was trying to
break the glass ceiling and running for Vice President?"I think
you're referring to Sarah Palin, and I think people in general largely
realized that she was not woman for the job. Where any intelligent,
accomplished, serious Republican candidates would have been already apparent and
widely-known, a barely-experienced governor of a miniscule population was chosen
for a completely different set of qualifications: her common-folksy,
God-fearin', gun-packin', telegenic appeal that would shore up the
base at a time that a "female cred" was also needed for the party to
appear to be, ironically, more modern and more inclusive of female leaders. Polls, not ideals, drove that decision. Picking a pretty
cheerleader to rev up support for the "war hero" was sort of an
"un-feminist" thing to do, actually.
@ 2 bitesPalin was never attacked for being a woman.She
was attacked for her inability to answer simple questions about her job as Vice
President. She especially failed when she was destroyed in her debate despite
having answers written on her hand. And yes, the right loved her
because she fit that "conservative" mold. Hockey mom, gun shooter,
intellectually lacking, but "faith" driven. Essentially, the woman
version of your disastrous president, Georgie Bush.
Feminism-The radical notion that Women are actually people too.
@nycut, Real Maverick, Tyler D, Schnee,So... you're saying
"the movement" would have supported a REPUBLICAN woman for Vice
President... if only it wasn't Sarah Palin???That's
literally NEVER going to happen. And I think even YOU know it.Name
ONE Republican woman "the movement" would support. (this
should be interesting)... Still think it's not about Left vs Right??
"Name ONE Republican woman "the movement" would support. " Better question, name one republican woman that has come out against her
party on the issues of equal pay, maternity leave and violence against women.
When they stop voting lock step with the good ole boys, maybe we'll take a
look. But for now all the GOP give's us are the Palins, Bachmanns and
@2 bits "So... where was 'the movement' when a woman was trying to
break the glass ceiling and running for Vice President?"======
We were backing her with Republicans fighting tooth and nail:Geraldine Ferraro -- Democrat 1984BTW -- Sarah Palin was
still Sarah Heath, and had just won the Miss Wasilla beauty pageant as a
@2 bits – “Name ONE Republican woman "the movement" would
support.”OK, I see your point and it hinges on how you define
“the movement.” If by feminism you mean a movement of certain left
wing political figures who vote strictly Democrat, then yes.However,
I see feminism as much broader than that. Feminism for most people I know is the
basic idea that women have the same rights as men and that societies are better
off when 100% of their citizens have the opportunity to pursue (and provide us
the benefits of) their talents and dreams to their full extent.By
this definition I’d guess many Republicans are feminists and would relish
the chance to support an intelligent, experienced and capable Republican woman.
Condoleezza Rice comes to mind (some errors in judgment during her Bush tenure
notwithstanding).Seriously, look up her resume and compare it to
Palin’s and tell me how by any stretch of the imagination Sarah Palin was
qualified to become VP.PS – Rice’s IQ is estimated to be
between 150 and 180 (almost double Palin’s).
@2bitsThey tended to have a fair bit of support for Kay Bailey Hutchison
(R-TX), Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins from Maine but as long as the Republican
party has views the way they do now I don't see them getting much of any
support on the presidential/vice-presidential level. "Still
think it's not about Left vs Right??"It's not their
fault one political party agrees with almost everything they support and the
other disagrees with almost everything they support.
@ 2 bitesI don't think Palin was ever attacked by feminists. So
whatever point you were trying to make is moot. I'm guessing that
you're doing what you always tend to do, detail the topic at hand to wage
another different (personal) debate.The truth is, the right has been
taken over by radicals. The religious right, that has always been with us and
has fought against every major cultural change (freedom for slaves, womens
suffrage, civil rights, etc) and the well financed corporate elite.The religious right has gained power and new converts due to the fall of
American manufacturing and disastrous trickle down economics. The worse we
become economically the more desperate converts Beck, Rush, Ted Robertson, etc
get.The corporate elite have bought off pastors, politicians, media
outlets, and think tanks to dissolve the federal government. By dissolving the
federal government they eliminate unions, safety protections, and watch dogs
that would otherwise prevent their monopolies.To be continued...
Continued from aboveThe male dominated corporate elite don't
want to pay for women's health benefits nor pay them equally. So they
finance pastors and conservative media to exploit the fear that feminists are
corrupting and destroying the nation. Conservative media financed by
corporate elitists work together to eliminate their common enemy, feminists.
Every fascist movement needs a common enemy. Whether it be immigrants and Jews
in the 1930s or Muslims, homosexuals, or feminists today.So yes,
feminists are under attack just like any and every freedom loving democracy
embracing American. Our freedoms are under attack by a fascist movement
disguising itself in patriotism, religion, and "free market" economics.
I think women are subject to the same kind of prejudice as blacks, and other
subjugated groups and for the same reason. That reason being is that they
represent competition in the struggle for power to control others. In early America it was a crime to allow blacks to be educated with the
ability to read and write. In some parts of the world this policy is applied to
females in the same way. The key to equality for any person of any
group is simply education. However when you are starting from behind the
starting line you may have to run a little faster than the guy with the head
Across the internet, Women Against Feminism has radical feminists and other
liberals going apoplectic. I love it! Liberals will not tolerate uppity women
who dare to question one of the pillars of liberal ideology. I
truly believe Liberals never saw this movement coming, and it has them shocked
to their cores. Many of these women who are identifying strongly with WAF are
millennials. Unlike the founders of radical feminism like Gloria Steinem, most
millennials don't have disdain for men, but in fact, admire men, and have
males as friends. These women, primarily the millennial generation, seem to be
turned off by the nastiness and disdain that radical feminists have for men.
They simply don't like it.I'll make a prediction: This
movement is going to grow exponentially. Liberal intolerance and outrage over
WAF is going to give it even more visibility than it previously had. Not only
will women be identifying with this movement more and more, but men also. Trust
me, men are attracted to women who are attracted to them. The
intolerance and disrespect shown to these women by the Left is illustrative of
Feminism is not a misunderstood term. Feminism is a politically-charged label
that seeks to remake women in the image of whatever the politically-correct say
it is in the moment. It is an anathema to my happiness, my liberty and my life
as a woman seeking to fulfill the measure of my creation, to be a daughter,
sister, wife and mother. Men and women alike have inalienable rights and our
God-given agency to pursue the fulfillment of our respective quest or deny who
we are. I choose womanhood, in all of its majesty, tenderness, and creative
destiny because I am woman.
Wow. History lessons in order here - it was the Republican party that was the
anti-slavery movement, and it was Christian ministers in the forefront of the
abolitionists. Harriet Beecher Stowe was the daughter and sister of ministers,
deeply religious herself, and her book was hugely influential in laying the
groundwork for the Civil War. Equal pay is a farce. When you
control for education, type of job, and work history, women often make MORE than
a man in the same field with the same experience and education. Fact is women
often choose jobs that are more family friendly, put in fewer hours, and take
time out to have and raise children.Nobody, including Women against
Feminism, wants to put women down. But feminism is seen as anti-motherhood,
anti-marriage, anti-men. I don't need their condescension of me as a
happily married, stay-at-home Mormon mother of three who didn't finish
college and will never have a high power career. My kids would laugh in your
face if you thought I was a second class person in my home. They know Mom has
every bit as much power and authority as Dad.
Feminism seems to be trapped in a time warp and is still fighting battles that
were won in the 60's and 70's. Worse, it often creates caricatures
that weren't true even in the day. I remember when NOW made it clear they
would excuse sexual harassment and even sexual assault if the perpetrator was a
democrat supporting their agenda. Then, they tell me I don't agree with
them because I'm oppressed and can't think for myself. I
can think just fine, thank you, and I don't think I need that kind of
"help."Maybe if they actually listened to women when they
explained what's wrong with feminism these days instead of inserting their
own rationalizations for why those reasons don't count, they'd be
getting somewhere. Maybe if they addressed those concerns rather than
condescendingly dismissing them, they'd be able to prove they still have
something meaningful to say to women like me.
"...Wow. History lessons in order here - it was the Republican party that
was the anti-slavery movement...".And today, where are the
offspring of those Democrats who were pro-slavery?They make-up the
rabid base of the Republican Party.President Reagan welcomed them
with open arms as part and parcel of his Southern Strategy.
Respect cannot be forced. Respect can only be earned by respectful individuals
living respectful lives. It is the same for men or women, blacks or whites,
American or non-American.
"Feminism is not a misunderstood term. Feminism is a politically-charged
label that seeks to remake women in the image of whatever the
politically-correct say it is in the moment. It is an anathema to my happiness,
my liberty and my life as a woman seeking to fulfill the measure of my creation,
to be a daughter, sister, wife and mother. Men and women alike have inalienable
rights and our God-given agency to pursue the fulfillment of our respective
quest or deny who we are. I choose womanhood, in all of its majesty, tenderness,
and creative destiny because I am woman."@Mary E Petty: As a
feminist myself, I support your decision to do so. That is what the movement is
about: allowing women to be in charge of their own life choices.
Many of the conservative, even Republican, women I know are feminists. They
just know that can't put it that way without the risk of being
misunderstood, since the idea of what feminism is has been so widely
caricatured: "anti-motherhood, anti-marriage, anti-men."It's a trap to think of the ideals of feminism as being a left vs. right
issue, and, as @RealMaverick suggests, that unflattering charicature has been
very carefully and deliberately created for use as a political wedge.It has been effective: conservative women barely have a way to discuss
feminist ideals-- which are hardly radical.While they may disagree
on tone or approach or tactics, liberal and conservative feminists largely share
the same goals: supporting women's ability to be exactly who and what they
want to be.
A legitimate movement becomes counterproductive when playing the victim, in
order to manipulate passive/aggressive power, becomes more important than actual
competence. Martin Luther King's goal of a color blind society is
compromized when it degenerates into the race bating of Al Sharpton. American
feminists have destryed any credibility of their own movement by devolving into
believing that there are only two genders; men and victims. Truth: "Save
the women and children first" always really meant "kill the men".
Feminists don't qualify as being victims merely because they cant force
someone else to pay for their contraception when they can cheaply and easily do
it themselves. The more feminists sound like Sharpton than King - the less
credibility they deserve.Ultimately the feminist belief that real
women neuter themselves, kill their babies and behave like men is about as
misogynist as one can humanly be. Its hard for feminists to be credible when it
also rather obvious that they actually hate women.
2 bits - you are exactly correct; as evidenced by Schee needing to put words in
your mouth and Tyler D basically admitting that he believes that only liberal
women can represent women (because being an incompetent left winger, such as
"Julia", is what every woman should desire). Truth: feminists do NOT
represent all women any more than the Klan represents all white peopleIts also interesting to read justifications for bashing Sarah Palin - yet she
did not gain her power by riding the glory of her husband, or retain power by
participating in the character assassination of all of his inconvenient
dalliances (or defend the rapist of a 12 year old). Regardless of Palins (or
Bauchman) politics, she is far more self made than Hillary.
@Demisana – “History lessons in order here - it was the Republican
party that was the anti-slavery movement…”You do realize
the parties have almost completely flip flopped, don’t you? The Democrat
mindset of 1860 is now entirely at home within the Republican Party (e.g.,
Nixon’s Southern strategy).I actually agree with the rest of
your post (including the equal pay part) – feminism should be about
choosing the path you want and if that means raising children, more power to
you. You go girl! @Counter Intelligence –
“Tyler D basically admitting that he believes that only liberal women can
represent women…”You must be confusing me with another
Tyler D, or did you just wake up this morning wanting to beat up a straw man?Please reread my comments and pay careful attention to what I wrote
about Condi Rice…
>“It seems like a lot of these problems these women have with feminism
would be solved with a five-minute conversation,” wrote Allegra
Ringo<I find it amusing that the assumption is that we have
never had a conversation with feminists, rather than that we might have made our
decision based on hundreds of conversations (thousands, in some cases) with
feminists.>“Aligning yourself with the dominant group and
upholding their ideas is a subconscious attempt to benefit from their
power.”<Again, we see only a rigid dichotomy of either/or.
If you are against feminism, you must be FOR the "patriarchy". Oppose
those who claim to speak for the "oppressed" and you're in bed with
the "oppressors". My kids had more ability to conceptualize
nuance when they were toddlers.Last line of the article mentions
power, PR and accessibility, nothing about whether they're correct in their
beliefs, or just in their actions. "More doilies and herbal tea, and free
babysitting! Then those WAFs will like us..." Never a single sign of
considering that maybe they've got some things wrong, and that WAF have a
point (lots of them, actually).
@Counter Intelligence said:>Ultimately the feminist belief that
real women neuter themselves, kill their babies and behave like men is about as
misogynist as one can humanly be. Its hard for feminists to be credible when it
also rather obvious that they actually hate women.<I had to read
this twice to see if it was a joke.This statement bears absolutely
no relationship to the feminist women and men I know. It's like a cartoon
description of feminism drawn by someone who never read a book.I
don't mean that as an insult. It's just that there is a lot more
accurate information out there about feminists and feminism if you're
interested in the subject.I hope it was just careless hyperbole, but
it reads like a ridiculous stereotype from the '60s.More fuel
for the fire I guess.
It is unfortunate that young feminists read the definition of feminism in the
dictionary. say great, then stop. If you go to sites like avoiceformen you do
not find opposition to equal pay for equal work, equal rights, equal
opportunities. So what is the big disconnect between the dictionary and reality.
If more women started asking why is there a difference between what I think and
what others have to deal with and research for answers that are true, even if
you do not like the answers, then it will open up room for positive discussion.
As it is now, the dictionary definition is a smokescreen and the rank and file
feminists need to find out what radical feminism is doing and how it has
ramifications on society. Is it trying for equality - or supremacy?
@Sven"I'll make a prediction: This movement is going to grow
exponentially. "Then why is the gender divide (with women
slanted Democratic) growing?
The issue comes from two points of view. Those who value women as equal to men
and those who believe women are there to be subservient and secondary to men.
Tyler D"did you just wake up this morning wanting to beat up a
straw man?" No: Merely wishing to confront a straw
woman implication that there is any correlation between conservative American
women and Islamic terrorist bombers. The comment was
written before your post regarding Condi Rice (who would be a better president
than Hillary) nycutNo need to revive
60's "hyperbole" cartoon images of feminism when Obama's own
"Life of Julia" re-election cartoon provides the perfect example of how
todays feminists condescendingly view women."Julia"
feminists claim to be pro-women; when in reality their actual behavior displays
an intense distaste for anything that is unique to the gender. They vacillate
between playing victim and demanding privilege according to whatever works at
the moment, not what is fair or rational. It is disingenuous
for feminisexist posters to claim that Palin is somehow more deserving of
contempt than Barbara Boxer, Patty Murray or Sheila Jackson Lee, etc., who each
have a much larger litany of irrational statements in their portfolio; but
expect to be excused from criticism merely because they represent left-wing
cartoon feminism. Ernest T BassYour two alternative are YOUR
@Counter IntelligenceI'm pointing out that the views of feminism and
feminists you've expressed here seem quite limited, and that feminism
includes much more than "the feminists you're talking about" --
feminists as you narrowly define them.There are serious, real-world
discussions to be had. Side-stepping real discussion to bash (your
subset of) feminists is an example of ignoring real issues, and using feminism
as a partisan political wedge, as I mentioned before.
nycutI'm pointing out that the views of feminism and feminists
you've expressed here are also limited by the same 200 word threshold.
Feminism is not inherantly evil but it is not all rainbows and kittens either.
If one can hate in the name of motherhood, it is naive to pretend that one
cannot hate in the name of feminism.Side-stepping real discussion to
bash those who reject the dark portions of feminism, while blindly enabling
zealots to continue to play partisan political politics about a phony "war
on women" in an effort to stifle any such conversation that a dark side may
even exist, is truly ironic. Red
Corvette"Ask Kate Kelly if feminism is misunderstood."Or ask Kate Kelly why she didn't join the Community of Christ if
she wanted the priesthood and to believe in the Book of Mormon. A simple
straightforward choice that would have solved her dilemma (and respected other
peoples choices) without the need for stage managed drama. (I am not LDS) Perhaps she didn't really want the priesthood - she wanted
martyrdom. In which case, she got what she wanted and her brand of feminism is
There is a very high-profile Republican woman that I would back for
President….or any elected position. Abby Huntsman. When the Republicans
front an intelligent person, I'd vote for her or him, actually.