But I just proved that you at least, and [MENTION=6281]CrazyBeautiful[/MENTION], really want a penis. It was by accident, of course.
Is Feminism Outdated?
- Thread starter iHeartCats
- Start date
But I just proved that you at least, and [MENTION=6281]CrazyBeautiful[/MENTION], really want a penis. It was by accident, of course.
And in every generation of humanity? So, according to you, every man must be a man and every woman must be a woman, and anyone that doesn't fit your ideals is a disgrace to their "generation"? Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding you.
To be fair, wouldn't you agree with me in saying that an —¹incredible—¹ amount of this is due to what we now eat and the terrible environmental factors we are faced with due to the continual destruction of our planet?
And to address the whole, the world needs feminism because, well, just look at it. It's kinda a shitty place to live with a uterus. Just like it's a shitty place to live if you're black. Just like it's a shitty place to live if you're elderly. Just like it's a shitty place to live if you're young. Just like it's a shitty place to live if you're disabled. The world sucks and needs to change. I support feminism because I support black power because I support white power (wait, no, not that one) because I support the elderly because I support the disabled ad nauseum. There is no mold for humanity, but the power structure of the world sure is set up like there is.
Feminism, per language, is both inclusive and exclusive. Your point? (this is pointed at no one in particular). We have our differences and always will, and until the power-structures of the world, EVERYWHERE, recognize the value in this, I will support feminism. There is power that is given to the disenfranchised when they have the ability to identify with an exclusive part of themselves in a positive way. To find strength in your difference rather that shame is incredibly important to the human psyche. Of course, there are always those that suck like the castrate the men and the tie up the women, but the fringes don't define the whole. It's kind of like how LucyJr doesn't define all of those who are opposed to feminism.
You are very quick to take extreme interpretations here. I feel like that is a barrier to communication. If you didnt understand my point it is this: why make life harder than it needs to be? The woman is making free baby food, use that instead of going out of the way to use up other resources which can be used to better the family's situation.
It's not an extreme interpretation or a communication barrier, I just disagree with you.
Not all women want or have children. What happens to them? Are they making life harder for wanting equal wages in their careers?
Not all women with children want to stay at home. Why is it making life harder if a woman who has children wants to pursue a career?
Why should the idea of a woman's life and rights be based on her having to have children? Why can't a mother support her children by going out and having a successful career and providing for them that way?
If people treated their fellow human beings like their brothers and sister we won't have or need movements like feminism. Everyday, I see men and women do horrible, disingenuous things to each other that do not make much sense other than they are succumbing to their human vices, like greed, pride, and envy. To be honest, I'm not even sure what feminism really is these days, but to me it's about treating the minds of women as equal to men and to allow both sexes to have a sense of dignity despite their being significant physiological differences. It's also about recognizing that there is much physiological overlap in abilities. There are many women that are physically stronger than men, but if they can handle the work, then by all means let them. There are many men that make just as good caregivers as women, so let them. Let the women who have good spatial abilities do tasks that men typically do. It is the pride of man that says "she is a woman, she cannot do this". It is envy that makes people want what someone else has, whether it is deserved or even possible.
Something has been lost and it isn't the fault of feminism, it is the fault of our materialist society that wants bigger and better everything. We are greedy creatures for sure. When both parents work, something is lost at home with the family life. The children are often raised by non-relatives, the parents become overworked and over-stressed. Two jobs often mean paying for child care, which is incredibly expensive, as it should be(I wouldn't want to go cheap on my children's care). It also means two cars, two vehicles to maintain, to get insurance on. It means two cell phones to pay for. Then we just buy our children a lot of things to keep them entertained and preoccupied because the parents are too stressed to give them genuine attention. The idea of a family is something that is sought and never found. These are the dilemmas of working class and middle class families. It's all the price we pay for such individuality. Everything has comes at the expense of something else: something gained, something lost. It is the nature of things.
Something has been lost and it isn't the fault of feminism, it is the fault of our materialist society that wants bigger and better everything. We are greedy creatures for sure. When both parents work, something is lost at home with the family life. The children are often raised by non-relatives, the parents become overworked and over-stressed. Two jobs often mean paying for child care, which is incredibly expensive, as it should be(I wouldn't want to go cheap on my children's care). It also means two cars, two vehicles to maintain, to get insurance on. It means two cell phones to pay for. Then we just buy our children a lot of things to keep them entertained and preoccupied because the parents are too stressed to give them genuine attention. The idea of a family is something that is sought and never found. These are the dilemmas of working class and middle class families. It's all the price we pay for such individuality. Everything has comes at the expense of something else: something gained, something lost. It is the nature of things.
Im not even referring to women without kids. Obviously they would not have any food on thier chest.
I wouldnt generalise to say they dont believe in soul, I'm sure some of them dont, there's others who do.
There are a lot of Jungian feminists and some people suggest that in terms of psychoanalysis Freud represented the masculine while Jung represented the feminine or at least was more balanced and gave women their place unlike Freud.
I think that one of feminism's pluses is that it attempted to correct the invisibility of women and the feminine and the oppression or repression of each. Its a one sides thing but then most politiccal ideologies are like that and its part of the reason I support an elective democracy in terms of shifts between left and right and the, hopeful, corrective of each of the other. Although democracy hasnt worked like that for a long time and works even less like the system of self-governing individuals deciding on things in unison it was meant to be.
[MENTION=2240]rawr[/MENTION] see even she agrees with me, seriously, can we change the name of the thread to the name I suggested? Please.
[MENTION=11622]iHeartCats[/MENTION] can we have permission to change the title?
I can't even follow where this thread has gone, at this point it seems to have nothing to do with its title and OP indeed, but if I am the one who decides about the title change, then I say No.
I think Freud was a INTJ, and Jung was a INTP. Accordingly, Freud would have been more feminine, because he was a Intuitive, and Jung on the masculine side, because he was a logical person.
I found it interesting how many times Freud emphasised that he really doesn't understand how the woman's psyche work...I think that could be something of a "masculinity complex". But this is just silly of course if we look at it realistically.
I tend to agree with that part of feminism. I know there is alot of oppresion and sexism in some cultures toward women, and that of course, is intolerable and must be corrected. In this sense, I think feminism is a good and healthy movement.
But, in my opinion, in the last time, there is alot of unnedeed fanciness to all this movement, and sometimes I can definately see a irrational and absurd inferiority complex in feminism, in report with masculinity and what males represent.
But this is just how I see things, and I'm afraid many people will disagree with me!
Do you mean that the children would grow up without their mother while she would have "a career"? What kind of mother is that?
A pretty selfish one, and also not very smart. What kind of child will grow healthy mentaly and physicaly without the daily support of his parents, and especialy his mother?
I'm really sorry for my comments. I was being a ass, and please excuse me for that.
So what if they disagree, I see that same inferiority complex in a lot of emancipatory movements and I think it is a very big issue, in some ways Franz Fanon hit on it with some of his books but his valorisation of violence is way off.
The thing about the inferiority complex is that it'll be denied and drawing attention to it will be considered betrayal or treachery or make you part of the enemy camp, its like the validation that some minority or alternative lifestyles seek constantly in the shape or recognition battles and attempts to legislate public opinion.
I think many women "enter" feminism for different reasons: some for sexism and oppresion motives, some for reglementation of different objectives and ideals, while a big part of feminism is caused simply from a mindset that is supposed to be proud and independent from masculinity and its role in society, and this is the part of feminism I think its pretty useless, both from a theoretical stand point, and from a efficient point, because to be serious, i don't think ever women could accomplish that objective.
I think its a valid goal for some, I actually like the Amazon feminists, they dont claim any equality they do not actually possess themselves and do not expect any status or anything else to be conferred on them.
