Anti feminist women

CDfm

Thaedydal wrote: »

I don't beleive in equal rights, I don't think it's possible.

Isnt that a bit anti feminist?

There must be stuff then you like and dislike? What proposals get up your nose or policies you would change?

Nevyn

What makes you say that is anti feminists ?

I don't think men and women can have the exact same and equal rights.
Men and women are different, this we already acknowledge with materinity leave
and allowances for breastfeeding mothers in the workplace.

I do think that men and women should be afford equal oppertunities and choices
which is different from exactly equal rigths.

CDfm

Thaedydal wrote: »

What makes you say that is anti feminists ?

well some might say that- your views on DV wouldnt appear in a feminist TV ad.;)

i agree with you that there are differences between men and women and thats why we like one another.

One thing I really disagree with is the welfare dependence of single mothers. A woman I know who was a college drop out etc ended up getting pregnant again after her marriage ended on the basis that the LPA would bring her to retirement age. She is a really intelligent person. How did we get to this and how can we condone it?

Would I want it for my child -eh No.

metrovelvet

Is there any point in talking about feminism anymore? The word is so fluid it is close to meaning nothing.


I can admire the ambition and spirit of much [not all] of its project but it has let women down by demanding that women adapt and change and sacrifice to fit in with the man's world, demanding that men let women into that world causing frictions, instead of taking the shrewder approach of using seduction to have the man's world adapt to the suitability of the woman's life.

Dragan

metrovelvet wrote: »

Is there any point in talking about feminism anymore? The word is so fluid it is close to meaning nothing.


I can admire the ambition and spirit of much [not all] of its project but it has let women down by demanding that women adapt and change and sacrifice to fit in with the man's world, demanding that men let women into that world causing frictions, instead of taking the shrewder approach of using seduction to have the man's world adapt to the suitability of the woman's life.

Personally i prefer the idea of finding common ground. For the vast majority of women, relying on there powers to seduce, in any way or in any area of life....well, they wouldn't get very far.

metrovelvet

Dragan wrote: »

For the vast majority of women, relying on there powers to seduce, in any way or in any area of life....well, they wouldn't get very far.

What do you mean?

Nevyn

And the premise behind seduction is to deceive and I have very little time for anyone of either gender who uses that to try get what they want.

So only pretty women who can behave in such a manner should get what they want
and if you are not pretty enough or don't' conform to a certain standard tough shít ?
That has to be imho one of the most anti feminism statement in this thread and it's
from a woman too.

metrovelvet

Thaedydal wrote: »

And the premise behind seduction is to deceive and I have very little time for anyone of either gender who uses that to try get what they want.

So only pretty women who can behave in such a manner should get what they want
and if you are not pretty enough or don't' conform to a certain standard tough shít ?
That has to be imho one of the most anti feminism statement in this thread and it's
from a woman too.

Seduction is a strong word, allure is a better one, and it has nothing to do with being pretty. Au contraire. But since you are on the topic. Women use deceit all the time. Make up, hair dye, push up bras. lying is part of our lives. In fact its a part of everyone's life and a part of evolution. I guess you dont have time for too many people.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/23/science/23angi.html

That has to be imho one of the most anti feminism statement in this thread and it's
from a woman too

And from a woman too? What? The statements [ which you have misinterpreted] are worse then they are from a woman? Are you not applying a double standard?

Dragan

metrovelvet wrote: »

What do you mean?

Because for a lot of women the ability to truly seduce is much like a lot of mens ability to truly hunt.....gone by the wayside.

CDfm

Thaedydal wrote: »

And the premise behind seduction is to deceive and I have very little time for anyone of either gender who uses that to try get what they want.

So only pretty women who can behave in such a manner should get what they want
and if you are not pretty enough or don't' conform to a certain standard tough shít ?
That has to be imho one of the most anti feminism statement in this thread and it's
from a woman too.

Thaed - a closet burqa fan then- well I never.

It wouldnt take much to sell me on the idea that the Lollipops in Friends should be made wear the burqa. Ally McBeal too. :D:D

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

And from a woman too? What? The statements [ which you have misinterpreted] are worse then they are from a woman? Are you not applying a double standard?

If I understand it its counterintuitive to question a female and there she is with her smiley face and straw stuck out - only a :p:p would fall for that.

,8,1

taconnol wrote:

f®eak s&#169 wrote: »

Probably because the original message of feminism has been integrated into Western society.

While the movement was badly needed, the pendulum definitely swung too far imo. A significant portion of the current generation of men carry around a lot of unconscious guilt and shame about the mistreatment of women over the centuries and thus act in a very careful manner when dealing with the opposite sex. Appeasing women appears to be the norm in our society as opposed to chivalry and owning what you want unapologetically.

Are you seriously suggesting that it is women's fault that men feel guilty for the shocking treatment of women over the last couple thousand years?

A few statistics on the question of whether the pendulum has swung too far, in Europe at least:

-Women make up ontly 37% of EU Commissioners
-Over all of the EU, women make up 24% of lower houses of parliament and only 21% of upper houses: effectively meaning that 3/4 of decision makers at national level are men.

Economics
-all 27 governers of central banks in the EU are men
-The governing council of the ECB (European Central Bank) is made up a six member executive board, which includes just one woman, and the governors of the central banks of the 15 Euro area countries, who are all men. Overall control of the European financial system therefore has less than 5% female influence

This is before I even go into social indicators. But suuuuree, we're like tootally equal.

Okay then. What are the "ideal percentages" of women in these areas? 50/50? 75/25?

And if they do indeed reach and exceed parity, what then? Is it an issue of concern from an egalitarian point of view or is it "just the way it is" and "there are so many other areas where women are disadvantaged so it doesn't count".

taconnol wrote:

992 wrote:

But why not bring in quotas for university admission while you're at it - especially when exams are taken at an age when girls have a temporary advantage in terms of maturity?

Because 60% of our university graduates are women yet despite that we still have fewer women in decision-making positions at national and EU level as well as in corporate circles.

[/quote]

Funny how you are attaching all these provisos and qualifiers in the case of a pro-female statistic. However if there is any pro-male statistic, there is no understanding of nuance. It is deemed unjust off the mark and needs immediate rectification.

,8,1

Back OT I dislike anti feminist women, it seems in the past few years there has been a backlash/movement emanating from the States which advocates the "traditional" homemaker role for women

Ah, the horror of the backlash! From 1992:



Not really. Feminism shows as little sign of abating in the States as anywhere else.

Actually as with most of these liberal trends, the US is rather to the vanguard.