# What is Feminism?



## Ruthanne (Mar 8, 2018)

> With all of this being said, feminism is not a movement to receive better rights for one gender but for all genders equally. The word “feminism” should not be used to describe this movement anymore because it has caused confusion and anger between the two groups that consider themselves feminists. I ask that all devoted feminists truly ask themselves what they stand for. It is time that we call the feminist movement by what it truly is — a movement of egalitarianism. As feminists, we are no longer furthering our initiative by hiding behind a mislabeled movement. Egalitarianism is what we stand for now and is what we should label our movement as. The progress of our movement as a whole depends on it. The true definition of the feminism movement is not the word “feminism” any longer because of what it has come to mean. It is a gender-biased word and should be replaced by its better, more accurate word — egalitarianism*.*



From:  https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism

Egalitarianism:



> *egalitarian*
> 
> An egalitarian is a person who believes in the equality of all people, and an _egalitarian society gives everyone equal rights.
> https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/egalitarian
> ...



Feminists are not man haters but want equality for everyone and even animals, too.


----------



## James (Mar 8, 2018)

Ruthanne said:


> From:  https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism
> 
> Egalitarianism:
> 
> ...



I agree that true feminism is the equality of both sexes without limitations or restrictions.  However that message is lost with the radicalized movement of today.  Their messaging has been confusing and at times hypocritical to say the least.


----------



## Ruthanne (Mar 8, 2018)

James said:


> I agree that true feminism is the equality of both sexes without limitations or restrictions.  However that message is lost with the radicalized movement of today.  Their messaging has been confusing and at times hypocritical to say the least.


 I don't think so.  True feminists are for equality of women, men, all colors and all creeds and this is what feminism is not:
https://www.bustle.com/articles/192315-7-things-feminism-does-not-mean


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 8, 2018)

To me feminism is about liberation of women and girls. For this to happen we must be able to determine our own destiny by having access to education, work and financial autonomy. Barriers to these goals need to be cleared away and women need to find their voices.

Some of the above goals also benefit men who no longer have to shoulder all financial responsibility for their families and society benefits from the contributions working women make to the economy.

I don't want to be the same as a man. I just want to be free to realise my potential as a human being according to my lights.
Freedom is never handed to you on a plate. You have to demand it, even fight for it.


----------



## James (Mar 8, 2018)

Yes I agree that's what feminism "was" and to many women, including my wife who was the first female Police Officer {you wouldn't believe what she went through} in her office, still is.

However the radicalized and extreme version of 21st Century Feminism has veered from this messaging and is more about exerting dominance, superiority and discrimination with a dusting of yesterdays "feminism" so that it won't be challenged.

As my wife said, "It's no longer about equality.  Its about making men feel the inequality that women once felt".


----------



## Traveler (Mar 8, 2018)

In my opinion, the entire feminist movement is, and has always been, about power, in the most hypocritical sense.  I, personally, have never met any feminist who was willing to admit that she already has special rights and privileges.  Feminism, has always been about gaining every right and privilege of a man AND keeping every right and privilege of a woman. 

Moreover, the entire movement has been, from the very beginning, at war with men. Their favorite manta has always been Male Chauvinist Pig. That is not exactly a term likely to endear very many men to the needs of women. 

Furthermore, feminists have routinely excluded men from their privileged ranks. A few years back, there was a breast cancer awareness 5 km run in Portland, Oregon.  On the day of the run, women were registered prior to the run. A man, who was currently battling breast cancer, attempted to register and was told, in no uncertain terms, that he was not welcome to participate. Women only. Men not welcome !

There was a time when I supported women's rights. I supported a woman's right to have freedom of "choice" (abortion rights). I saw no valid reason why women could not, or should not, compete on an equal footing for any occupation. That all changed after I began to take notice of totally uncalled for sarcastic remarks directed toward men in general and me in particular. 

I vividly recall arriving at a department store doorway at the same time as a young woman. I opened the door for her and stepped out of her way so she might enter first. Did she say thanks, or even nod at me? No ! She proceeded to give me a venomous chewing out for being such, "A Male Chauvinist". That was, by no means, the only nasty uncalled for remark directed at me.

Eventually I started treating women exactly as a would any man. If I'm walking down the street and I notice a woman with a flat tire ? Oh, too bad. Fix it yourself. Stuck in the snow ? Oh, too bad. Call a woman. 

No more room in my life for angry, militant, man-hating, feminists.


----------



## Ruthanne (Mar 8, 2018)

James said:


> Yes I agree that's what feminism "was" and to many women, including my wife who was the first female Police Officer {you wouldn't believe what she went through} in her office, still is.
> 
> However the radicalized and extreme version of 21st Century Feminism has veered from this messaging and is more about exerting dominance, superiority and discrimination with a dusting of yesterdays "feminism" so that it won't be challenged.
> 
> As my wife said, "It's no longer about equality.  Its about making men feel the inequality that women once felt".


I believe you are wrong.  Read the link I posted and you will see what it's all about.


----------



## Ruthanne (Mar 8, 2018)

Traveler said:


> In my opinion, the entire feminist movement is, and has always been, about power, in the most hypocritical sense.  I, personally, have never met any feminist who was willing to admit that she already has special rights and privileges.  Feminism, has always been about gaining every right and privilege of a man AND keeping every right and privilege of a woman.
> 
> Moreover, the entire movement has been, from the very beginning, at war with men. Their favorite manta has always been Male Chauvinist Pig. That is not exactly a term likely to endear very many men to the needs of women.
> 
> ...


You let a few women dictate how you would treat all others after that.  It's a shame.  if we as women would take a few men personally we would feel like you but we don't and are for equal rights for men and women and everyone.


----------



## James (Mar 8, 2018)

Ruthanne said:


> I believe you are wrong.  Read the link I posted and you will see what it's all about.



I read it and as I said I agree with that.  What I don't agree with as I said previously is the radicalized version of today.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 8, 2018)

Attempting to change the name of feminism to egalitarianism is nothing more than a RE-BRANDING. You can call a man-eating tiger a kitty cat, but it is STILL a man-eating tiger. 

There are some who call illegal aliens, "undocumented migrants", in an attempt to confuse people, but they are STILL illegal aliens. 

A feminist is STILL a feminist, no matter what she is called.

There is/was a group of men who called themselves, "The Promise Keepers".  They pledged to become better men, to always support their families, to never, under any circumstances, hit a woman or child. Sounds pretty good, right ?  Not according to feminists !  Feminists showed up at every gathering of these men and picketed, shouted and called these men misogynists and other less civilized names. Friends of man ? Not bloody likely.


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 8, 2018)

James said:


> I read it and as I said I agree with that.  What I don't agree with as I said previously is the radicalized version of today.



You're looking at a group of people who are new to this and still in the early angry stages, and you're judging the rest of us based on their attitudes and opinions. That's not who most of us are. We aren't a single cohesive mass but many people with our own voices, histories and concerns.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 8, 2018)

Ruthanne said:


> You let a few women dictate how you would treat all others after that.  It's a shame.  if we as women would take a few men personally we would feel like you but we don't and are for equal rights for men and women and everyone.




Sorry, Ruthanne but it is far, far more than a few.  When I see 200,000 women marching on Washington DEMANDING to be registered for the draft, the same as every 18 year old man is REQUIRED by law to do, when I see evidence of equality in the child custody courts, then and only then will I even consider changing my mind. 

Many people may not know this BUT a divorced husband is REQUIRED to pay child support even if he demonstrates, via DNA testing, that the child could NOT POSSIBLY be his. In other words, the wife cheated on him, became pregnant by her illicit lover, and STILL the husband is stuck with the financial responsibility.  How about a little fairness for that poor bas***d ?


----------



## James (Mar 8, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> You're looking at a group of people who are new to this and still in the early angry stages, and you're judging the rest of us based on their attitudes and opinions. That's not who most of us are. We aren't a single cohesive mass but many people with our own voices, histories and concerns.



Nope not judging anyone.  I totally agree with the link and that definition, and totally disagree (along with my feminist wife) with the radical movement....the two groups are at odds with one another.


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 8, 2018)

James said:


> Nope not judging anyone.  I totally agree with the link and that definition, and totally disagree (along with my feminist wife) with the radical movement....the two groups are at odds with one another.



I'm laughing because I remember when a friend took a college course in feminism where she was raked over the coals because she didn't share some of the group opinions. She said it was hive mentality and more than a little scary.

No clue how we got from wanting equal pay and equal access to credit and financial transactions to not being real feminists if we're not lesbians, but there it is.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 8, 2018)

James said:


> Nope not judging anyone.  I totally agree with the link and that definition, and totally disagree (along with my feminist wife) with the radical movement....the two groups are at odds with one another.




I totally agree. I have known more than a few stay at home moms who have been belittled by feminists . Those stay at home moms were treated like some kind of "traitors to the holy cause".


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 8, 2018)

Traveler said:


> I totally agree. I have known more than a few stay at home moms who have been belittled by feminists . Those stay at home moms were treated like some kind of "traitors to the holy cause".



There are some truly obnoxious SAHMs who look down their entitled little surgically-enhanced noses at any woman who goes outside of her home to work. Excuse me if I don't share your sympathy toward the group. Of course not all of them are like that, but many of them are.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 9, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> There are some truly obnoxious SAHMs *who look down their e**ntitled little surgically-enhanced noses at any* *woman who* *goes outside of her home to work* . Excuse me if I don't share your sympathy toward the group. Of course not all of them are like that, but many of them are.




That, Smiling Jane, is EXACTLY what I was talking about.  You proved my point when you said  " ... who look down their *entitled little* *surgically enhanced noses* at any woman who goes outside her home to work". That statement clearly represents the feminist hostility toward any woman who does not support the "holy, feminist crusade". 

In any event, I seriously doubt that any stay at home mom looks down her nose at a working woman. It is much more likely that the stay at home mom does not agree with a woman who is not around to raise and supervise her own children and instead places a much higher value on her own needs, ie career.  Hence the phrase arises, "latch-key-kids", for there is no-one at home when the children come home from school.


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 9, 2018)

Traveler said:


> I totally agree. I have known more than a few stay at home moms who have been belittled by feminists . Those stay at home moms were treated like some kind of "traitors to the holy cause".



Aah.. The Mommy Wars between the working mothers and the stay at homes. Ditto the breast feeders and the bottle feeders. And then there are the breeders and the child free. I don't see any of these lifestyle wars as having anything to do with feminism. They are distractions.


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 9, 2018)

Traveler said:


> That, Smiling Jane, is EXACTLY what I was talking about.  You proved my point when you said  " ... who look down their *entitled little* *surgically enhanced noses* at any woman who goes outside her home to work". That statement clearly represents the feminist hostility toward any woman who does not support the "holy, feminist crusade".
> 
> In any event, I seriously doubt that any stay at home mom looks down her nose at a working woman. It is much more likely that the stay at home mom does not agree with a woman who is not around to raise and supervise her own children and instead places a much higher value on her own needs, ie career.  Hence the phrase arises, "latch-key-kids", for there is no-one at home when the children come home from school.



Not judging either lifestyle but when a child was sick or injured at the school where I worked it was the working mothers who could always be contacted immediately. The stay at home mothers were seldom at home because they had social lives. Of course that was in the days before mobile phones. I am sure things are different today.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 9, 2018)

Warrigal said:


> Aah.. The Mommy Wars between the working mothers and the stay at homes. Ditto the breast feeders and the bottle feeders. And then there are the breeders and the child free. I don't see any of these lifestyle wars as having anything to do with feminism. They are distractions.




I beg to differ. These "lifestyle wars, as you put it, are *entirely *about feminist philosophy. If there was no radical, militant, feminist agenda, there would be no "lifestyle wars". It is exactly the same thing as one African American man calling another African American man an Oreo Cookie, black on the outside and white on the inside.  In both cases, there is an agenda which must be protected at all costs, even if it means calling an otherwise ally names. In other words, follow the agenda, or you WILL be thrown under the bus.


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 9, 2018)

Traveler said:


> I beg to differ. These "lifestyle wars, as you put it, are *entirely *about feminist philosophy. If there was no radical, militant, feminist agenda, there would be no "lifestyle wars". It is exactly the same thing as one African American man calling another African American man an Oreo Cookie, black on the outside and white on the inside.  In both cases, there is an agenda which must be protected at all costs, even if it means calling an otherwise ally names. In other words, follow the agenda, or you WILL be thrown under the bus.



And I beg to differ also. Women have a lot of themselves invested in their roles. No matter what choices we make we are bound to be criticised. Our critics are chiefly but not only, other women, starting with our own mothers and then other family and acquaintances. Defense often turns to offence and so the wars begin. Like any war, there is a certain amount of propaganda around, often delivered by various gurus/experts and so the war hots up. 


Such wars are the antithesis of feminism.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 9, 2018)

*[*QUOTE=Warrigal;786272]And I beg to differ also.* Women have a lot of themselves invested in their roles. No matter what choices we make we are bound to be criticised.* Our critics are chiefly but not only, other women, starting with our own mothers and then other family and acquaintances. Defense often turns to offence and so the wars begin. Like any war, there is a certain amount of propaganda around, often delivered by various gurus/experts and so the war hots up. 
=========================================================================================


I would point out that men, also, have a lot of themselves invested in their roles. We, also, have been criticized by our fathers, our teachers and often our own peer group. Moreover men are often criticized no matter what choices we make. Yet despite this, I feel no urge, or need, to go to war with my fellow man simply because he disagrees with me. 

To a certain extent many women and men can lay claim to victimhood. But, in doing so, we give power to the ones who victimize us.  Playing the victim role is counter-productive, as well as being a huge waste of time.

Polonius, in Hamlet, said, "To thine own self, be true".  My advise to victims, both male and female, is to "go all in" and bet everything on your dreams.


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 9, 2018)

My comments in blue.




Traveler said:


> *[*QUOTE=Warrigal;786272]And I beg to differ also.* Women have a lot of themselves invested in their roles. No matter what choices we make we are bound to be criticised.* Our critics are chiefly but not only, other women, starting with our own mothers and then other family and acquaintances. Defense often turns to offence and so the wars begin. Like any war, there is a certain amount of propaganda around, often delivered by various gurus/experts and so the war hots up.
> =========================================================================================
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Traveler (Mar 9, 2018)

Men are constantly having to do, or not do, something the wife/GF wants. But in the age of feminism when a man wants something from his wife/GF it becomes an issue of "her rights, her needs, her feelings" etc

Example: I was once married to a woman who was delighted that I loved to cook. 6 nights out of 7 I would cook dinner. On the 7th night I would take her out to dinner. Well. after a few years of this, I asked her to occasionally cook for me. Her answer shocked me. She said, angrily, "I am a feminist. Feminists don't cook for men". 

Yeah, she stood up for herself, and in the process, crushed me.


----------



## James (Mar 9, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> I'm laughing because I remember when a friend took a college course in feminism where she was raked over the coals because she didn't share some of the group opinions. She said it was hive mentality and more than a little scary.
> 
> No clue how we got from wanting equal pay and equal access to credit and financial transactions to not being real feminists if we're not lesbians, but there it is.



My wife is a feminist and the last time we checked she wasn't a lesbian..so??  What she isn't however is a radicalized female with a superiority complex.


----------



## Sunny (Mar 9, 2018)

I think defining any movement by its most radicalized elements is a mistake, and an easy way out.  What is probably needed in this discussion is a consensus as to what constitutes feminism in the first place.


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 9, 2018)

Sunny said:


> I think defining any movement by its most radicalized elements is a mistake, and an easy way out.  What is probably needed in this discussion is a consensus as to what constitutes feminism in the first place.



I agree. I believe it's up to women to define feminism.

Also, no flank attacks that involve quoting people the rest of us don't know and never will, as if they should be given the power to dominate the conversation. It's a distraction, not helpful.


----------



## James (Mar 9, 2018)

So a differing of opinions is an attack and a distraction?

That's kind of sad, especially when the op was asking for opinions.  My bad.  Note to self, don't offer an opinion.

Duly noted. (No quotes included)


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 9, 2018)

James said:


> So a differing of opinions is an attack and a distraction?
> 
> That's kind of sad, especially when the op was asking for opinions.  My bad.  Note to self, don't offer an opinion.
> 
> Duly noted. (No quotes included)



Did you actually read what I said? Obviously not.


----------



## Sunny (Mar 9, 2018)

*From Wikipedia:

Feminism* is a range of political movements, ideologies, and social movements that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve political, economic, personal, and social equality of sexes.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP] This includes seeking to establish educational and professional opportunities for women that are equal to those for men.

Feminist movements have campaigned and continue to campaign for women's rights, including the right to vote, to hold public office, to work, to earn fair wages or equal pay, to own property, to receive education, to enter contracts, to have equal rights within marriage, and to have maternity leave. Feminists have also worked to ensure access to legal abortions and social integration, and to protect women and girls from rape, ****** harassment, and domestic violence.[SUP][3][/SUP] Changes in dress and acceptable physical activity have often been part of feminist movements.[SUP][4]
[/SUP]
 Feminist campaigns are generally considered to be a main force behind major historical societal changes for women's rights, particularly in the West, where they are near-universally credited with achieving women's suffrage, gender neutrality in English, reproductive rights for women (including access to contraceptives and abortion), and the right to enter into contracts and own property.[SUP][5][/SUP] Although feminist advocacy is, and has been, mainly focused on women's rights, some feminists, including bell hooks, argue for the inclusion of men's liberation within its aims because they believe that men are also harmed by traditional gender roles.[SUP][6][/SUP] Feminist theory,  which emerged from feminist movements, aims to understand the nature of  gender inequality by examining women's social roles and lived  experience; it has developed theories in a variety of disciplines in  order to respond to issues concerning gender.[SUP][7][/SUP][SUP][8]
[/SUP]
 Numerous feminist movements and ideologies have developed over the  years and represent different viewpoints and aims. Some forms of  feminism have been criticized  for taking into account only white, middle class, and college-educated  perspectives. This criticism led to the creation of ethnically specific  or multicultural forms of feminism, including black feminism and intersectional feminism.[SUP][9][/SUP]


----------



## Traveler (Mar 9, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> I agree. I believe it's up to women to define feminism.
> 
> Also, no flank attacks that involve quoting people the rest of us don't know and never will, as if they should be given the power to dominate the conversation. It's a distraction, not helpful.




Up to women to define feminism ?  It seems rather strange that men are not allowed to take part in the conversation, especially since men are the direct target of feminism.  






James said:


> So a differing of opinions is an attack and a distraction?
> 
> That's kind of sad, especially when the op was asking for opinions.  My bad.  Note to self, don't offer an opinion.
> 
> Duly noted. (No quotes included)





My opinion, your opinion, or the opinion of any man, when that opinion does not completely support the feminist agenda, is not to be tolerated. Feminism has gotten such a bad name precisely because men are viewed by angry feminists as the enemy. Feminists feel they have a perfect right to dictate who gets to speak and how they speak.


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 9, 2018)

I feel so fortunate that Traveler is so willing to control all conversations about feminism. Don't know what we would do without him to explain what's wrong with us.


----------



## Olivia (Mar 9, 2018)

That's the problem with labels. It puts individual people into undifferentiated groups. No more having to think, just react and judge.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 9, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> I feel so fortunate that Traveler is so willing to control all conversations about feminism. Don't know what we would do without him to explain what's wrong with us.




It's high time SOMEONE  speaks up. 

Question: Do you think blacks have a right to speak up about the KKK ?  
Question: Do you think the Jews of Nazi held Europe had a right to define what Nazism was REALLY all about .

I feel quite sure both the KKK and the Nazi's would have loved to be the only ones to define what they were/are about. 

Other people have opinions. When those opinions are suppressed, then we are all in deep trouble.


----------



## Olivia (Mar 9, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Question: Do you think blacks have a right to speak up about the KKK ?
> Question: Do you think the Jews of Nazi held Europe had a right to define what Nazism was REALLY all about .
> 
> I feel quite sure both the KKK and the Nazi's would have loved to be the only ones to define what they were/are about.
> ...



Not surprising that you would put women into the same category as the KKK and Nazi's. And, yes, I do mean women, not just feminists because you posted that way about women in general before the topic of feminism was even brought up. I therefore take your opinions about feminists with a grain of salt because of you having already expressed anger at women in general.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 9, 2018)

There is much that Nazi's , the KKK and feminists have in common.

1st.  All 3 are "true believers". They all believe that they, and they alone, are/were correct and everyone else is wrong.

2nd, All 3 are/were quite willing to go to any lengths to get their own way.

3rd. All 3 have a clearly defined enemy. The Nazi's blamed the Jews for their problems. The KKK blames blacks for their problems. And the feminists blame men for their problems.

4th. All 3 use propaganda to portray themselves as victims.

5th. All 3 see themselves as superior beings.

6th All 3 have declared war on people who they see as enemies. ie anyone who disagrees with them

7th. All 3 do not/did not care one iota about people they see as their enemies. 

8th. All 3 lack any tolerance for a difference of opinion. 

The OP asked the question, "What is feminism?"  I reply that since feminists declared war on men, and upon women who disagree with them, they made themselves the enemies of everyone else.


----------



## Olivia (Mar 9, 2018)

Thank you for proving my point. Really appreciate it. nthego:


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 9, 2018)

Traveler, it is a characteristic of young idealistic men and women that they become very angry when they discover that the world is neither just nor fair. This anger manifests differently in men and women. I'll leave you to think about how it surfaces in young men but in my days of young womanhood I was angry about the obstacles that were strewn across my path simply because I was born a girl. I was often goaded by men friends, supposedly in jest, but my response was to argue passionately for changes to occur. Typically I was dismissed or laughed at which did nothing to  improve my mood.

I did not consider men the enemy but their attitude then was a problem. Since that time things have improved a lot. I stopped being angry because it is a pointless emotion that eats away at us from within. The men I knew then have matured and are no longer as ignorant. Having daughters and grand daughters tends to provide another perspective on how women and girls should be treated.

Feminism means different things to different people. My grandfather, who had five daughters and one son, was a feminist. Way back then, early last century, he was a champion of girls' education. He always said that education was "no load to carry" and "when you educate a boy you educate one person but when you educate a girl, you educate a whole family". In many ways, this is what global feminism is all about - lifting up poor populations by making sure that the girls have access to education. It is the first step in the liberation of any oppressed people.

Sunny provided you with a Wiki description of the various facets of feminism. I respectfully suggest you lay down your own anger for a bit and contemplate that passage because it has much to offer.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 9, 2018)

Warrigal, I have no problem with any aspect of the Wiki post, at least not as far as it goes.  However, the Wiki post is one dimensional and does not take into account how feminism plays out in the real world. Out here, in the real world, any "ism" often gets extremely nasty. 

Thus, my take on the Wiki post is that it is a highly polished view of a very complicated revolutionary subject. In other words, the Wiki post, in the words of the media, is nothing more than political spin.

Do I believe that some feminists are kind and reasonable people ? Yes, absolutely !  

Do I believe that there are feminists who are extremely unkind and unreasonable ?  Yes, there can be no question about that.   What percentage of all feminists comprise that latter group, I could not say. Of one thing I am certain. That latter group has alienated many people, both male and female. It is from that rather large group of alienated people that the term "femi-nazi" originated. 

I ask you to consider that peoples lives have been turned up-side-down and that people are rarely happy to be forced to change, especially when they were raised one way and out of the clear blue sky comes a revolutionary idea that profoundly impacts their lives. 

In summary, people on both sides of the issue have been severely wounded. Some of those wounds will never heal, for they have cut too deeply.


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 9, 2018)

In the real world wounds tend not to heal if you keep picking at them, or if some infection is allowed to enter and flourish.

In the psychological sense (and no, I am not qualified in this area in case you are wondering) some wounds are surface deep and heal quickly by themselves and others are very deep indeed. Deep wounds require time, and sometimes a little bit of help from a professional.

However, I have found personally that sometimes we refuse to allow healing to occur by our own rancorous thoughts. I was hurt as a young woman by my grandmother who had a less than loving manner and a cutting tongue. I should have gotten over her words fairly quickly. Instead I cut her out of my life and refused to have anything to do with her and did not even attend her funeral. I kept reminding myself that she had hurt me and as long as I did that, the hurt had power over me.

I kept picking at my wound and the wound became infected by self pity.

Long story short, I matured and realised that I too had inflicted pain. Too late now to ask for forgiveness, I forgave both of us and made an act of contrition by placing flowers on a grave in Singapore. It belonged to one of my uncles, Grandma's eldest son who was killed in Malaya by Japanese troops as they advanced on Singapore in 1942. No member of the family had ever visited the grave and to my knowledge none has been there since except Hubby and I. As I placed the tropical flowers on the grave I whispered "This is for you, Grandma", and the hurt was finally healed without any  residual scar.

Take it from this old feminist, who is not, not ever has been any sort of Nazi, that men and women go through stages that are not all confined to our childhood and adolescence and we learn some of life's lessons very painfully. We must leave the pain behind us or the accumulated weight of many hurts will break us eventually.

I uphold freedom as a value. I believe that is should be enjoyed by men and by women but abuse of freedom is something that I would caution against. If some feminists abuse the freedom of other women, or of menfolk, then remember that that is not the objective of feminism. Remember too that men have long been abusing their freedoms without being aware of it because it was the societal norm.


----------



## Gary O' (Mar 9, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Men are constantly having to do, or not do, something the wife/GF wants


Seems my entry on this thread has vanished
Guess I got incredulous for a moment
Even got off track
It’s just that when someone lumps me (a man) into their slant on what men think or have to do, well, goddammit, I gotta speak from the gut

‘Having to do’ simply does not exist, not with the fairer gender of this specie
Getting to….that’s how it is
It’s not a competition
It’s not even-steven 
It _*IS *_a balance

Being with a woman is a kinder, gentler event
It’s good fortune, a blessing in a harsh world

Maybe I’m the polar opposite of some males that call themselves men 
And that’s OK
I’m prolly way ol’ fashioned

*Just don’t lump me with you*

OK
I feel better
Whoever has command of the delete button, delete away


----------



## Traveler (Mar 9, 2018)

Warrigal, I agree with most everything you have just posted.   I would , however, like to add that feminism goes far, far beyond equal rights in education, financial, reproductive rights and equality in the work place. I would ask you to consider that feminism has, from the very beginning, attempted to control the ****** nature of men. It is no secret that feminism has been attempting to dictate what men "should or should not do" in the arena of romance. 

Our culture has openly embraced the entire LGBTQ concept. But, when it comes to how men behave sexually, feminists, at least very many of them, still insist on trying to dictate what is and is not, politically acceptable. To cite one example of dozens, if I started to talk about Playboy magazine it would be like waving a red cloth at a bull and would be sure to elicit numerous sarcastic remarks from feminists.

Men are ****** creatures. We act on our ****** drives from our teens onward.  This applies equally to gay men as well as straight men. Being sexually active comes as naturally to men as climbing high up does to a cat. All any man has to do is open his mouth about his desires and some feminist is sure to make a snide remark about him. I can't begin to tell you how many hundreds of times I have read or heard some feminist remark that "it is just a male fantasy". This is always accompanied by a facial sneer. She says this as if there is something wrong with men's ****** desires.

I, personally, find this feminist attitude repugnant, and I object most strongly. Men are "hard-wired" to be ******. It is written in our DNA. How dare any feminist tell men what we are allowed to think or condemn what we most enjoy ?

Advocating for equal rights is one thing, but attempting to control men's ****** desires is something else.


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 9, 2018)

Women are ****** creature too. Attempting to control men's ****** desires is puritanism, not feminism.
Women want agency in ****** matters. We want consensual, not forced sex. We would like ****** climax too.
We would like to initiate ****** encounters without being condemned for doing so. This is feminism.

I think the youngsters are already in that place. My generation? Not so much.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 10, 2018)

Warrigal said:


> Women are ****** creature too. Attempting to control men's ****** desires is puritanism, not feminism.
> Women want agency in ****** matters. We want consensual, not forced sex. We would like ****** climax too.
> We would like to initiate ****** encounters without being condemned for doing so. This is feminism.
> 
> I think the youngsters are already in that place. My generation? Not so much.





I truly do not understand how you can possibly believe that it is not feminists who are trying so very hard to control men's ****** desires.
Even a casual reading of feminist writings, about men's magazines will quickly disabuse you of that notion.

Of course women want consensual, not forced sex.  That is understood by any compassionate person. I would never argue otherwise. 

As for agency, ie power, in ****** matters I suppose that all depends upon how you define power. As I have said in other threads,
women already have total, or near total, control of the ****** arena. A man might try for sex, but it is always the woman who makes the final decision. Yes, yes, I know. It is her body and, of course, it is her absolute right to say yes, or no. All I'm saying is that it is never the man who makes that decision. 

As for female ****** climax, we both fully understand that the female body differs greatly from that of the male. For every person who has ever walked the earth, the man absolutely must have reached climax. The same is not true of women. If no woman ever had a climax, the population of the earth would continue to increase. I sympathize, but nature designed women that way. It is unfortunate that many, many men haven't the first clue about how a woman reaches climax. All I can suggest is that women take some personal responsibility and teach their men what is required. On a lighter note, I recall a film where an actress said, "Englishmen don't know what a tongue is for".  

I don't know who condemns women for initiating sex. Perhaps it is other women who do so. I have heard some women make negative comments about other women, as in, "She is a slut". I don't recall ever hearing any man complain that the woman initiated sex. I guarantee that I never complained or condemned any woman for initiating sex.


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 10, 2018)

Once again, we seem to be looking at an issue from such different viewpoints that we are unlikely to ever understand each other.
I am a feminist but I am nothing like your picture of one. I'll leave it at that.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 10, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> I feel so fortunate that Traveler is so willing to control all conversations about feminism. Don't know what we would do without him to explain what's wrong with us.




I am unaware that simply participating is a conversation is equivalent to controlling it. Is there no room in feminism for a difference of opinion ?  It seems to me that there is a faction within feminism which feels that only a woman can be right in all things ?  I have no desire to insult anyone but that does seem rather arrogant.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 10, 2018)

Warrigal said:


> Once again, we seem to be looking at an issue from such different viewpoints that we are unlikely to ever understand each other.
> I am a feminist but I am nothing like your picture of one. I'll leave it at that.




In my personal experience, I find that it is quite common for a man and a woman to have opposing views on a wide variety of subjects, husbands and wives, for example. Undoubtedly you have a lifetime of experiences which gives you one view point. I also have a lifetime of experiences, quite different from your own, which gives me a totally different view point.

Peace


----------



## Sunny (Mar 10, 2018)

> There is much that Nazi's , the KKK and feminists have in common.
> 
> 1st.  All 3 are "true believers". They all believe that they, and they alone, are/were correct and everyone else is wrong.
> 
> ...



Traveler, have you tried reading the Wikipedia definition of feminism that I posted in note #30?  How could a movement promoting equal rights for both sexes possibly fit into the hysterical scenario you are presenting here?  Anything can be be equated with the Nazis and the KKK; that doesn't mean they really belong together. In fact, male brutality against women probably fits in with the Nazis and the Klan a lot more than feminism does.

Read the Wikipedia discussion, and for heaven's sake, calm down!


----------



## Traveler (Mar 10, 2018)

Sunny said:


> Traveler, have you tried reading the Wikipedia definition of feminism that I posted in note #30?  How could a movement promoting equal rights for both sexes possibly fit into the hysterical scenario you are presenting here?  Anything can be be equated with the Nazis and the KKK; that doesn't mean they really belong together. In fact, male brutality against women probably fits in with the Nazis and the Klan a lot more than feminism does.
> 
> Read the Wikipedia discussion, and for heaven's sake, calm down!





I have read the Wiki post, several times. Did you bother to read my post #39 where I discussed the Wiki post ? The difference between us is that you accept it as Gospel, while I do not. I have never, not one single time, in all my 71 years heard of any feminist even acknowledge that men may have some important issues to discuss. As a matter of fact, when I bring up issues where men are discriminated against, those points are either belittled or outright ignored. Just one time I'd love to hear a feminist argue for equality in child custody courts. 

And, Sunny, I am quite calm. Don't mistake my debate for hysteria or anger. I am quite capable of arguing against any number of philosophies, such as creationism, without becoming agitated. 

It never ceases to amaze me that so many people choose to ignore valid points. Do you happen to recall my talking about the man who was battling breast cancer ? Do you recall how he was turned away from a 5km run for breast cancer awareness because he was not female ? Not one single person in this thread has made one comment about that. That speaks volumes about the so-called feminist "support" for the rights of both sexes. 

Please don't think, not for one second, that I am the only person who feels this way. After all, I did not invent the term femi-Nazi.


----------



## Gary O' (Mar 10, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Please don't think, not for one second, that I am the only person who feels this way. After all, I did not invent the term femi-Nazi.


true

there's the KKK, and, well, Nazis


----------



## Sunny (Mar 10, 2018)

Traveler, I don't accept anything as Gospel.  I don't even accept Gospel as Gospel.  But Wikipedia comes a lot closer to objective truth than all your (yes, it is angry) ranting on this subject.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 10, 2018)

Sunny said:


> Traveler, I don't accept anything as Gospel.  I don't even accept Gospel as Gospel.  But Wikipedia comes a lot closer to objective truth than all your (yes, it is angry) ranting on this subject.




(Laughing)  Angry AND ranting ?  Thank you, Sunny. Best laugh I've had in awhile.


----------



## Stormy (Mar 10, 2018)

James said:


> Yes I agree that's what feminism "was" and to many women, including my wife who was the first female Police Officer {you wouldn't believe what she went through} in her office, still is.
> 
> However the radicalized and extreme version of 21st Century Feminism has veered from this messaging and is more about exerting dominance, superiority and discrimination with a dusting of yesterdays "feminism" so that it won't be challenged.
> 
> As my wife said, "It's no longer about equality.  Its about making men feel the inequality that women once felt".



You're right James and your wife must have gone through a lot in her field but looks like a smart woman who sees what "feminism" has become. I had a group of friends and we all went jogging together and one of them was an angry man hater. She called herself a feminist but she just wanted to dominate men and criticize them and even had a boyfriend for a while that she abused in public. My friends use to roll their eyes at some of the things she said she was a fanatic and we finally told her what we thought about her constant ranting

Sure enough she became pissed off and refused to even hear what we had to say. She was as mad at us as she was at men. I told her one day that I didn't want anything to do with her because of her psychotic rants and haven't been around her since. A couple of my other friends joined me and we are happier now. She's not the only female I've known with that attitude. I don't call myself a feminist but I believe in equal rights for women and the strong ones can have equal rights without playing the victim card or having to degrade men to make themselves feel better. Some women manipulate men terribly. There are a lot of good men around who should not be treated like dirt


----------



## James (Mar 10, 2018)

Stormy said:


> You're right James and your wife must have gone through a lot in her field but looks like a smart woman who sees what "feminism" has become. I had a group of friends and we all went jogging together and one of them was an angry man hater. She called herself a feminist but she just wanted to dominate men and criticize them and even had a boyfriend for a while that she abused in public. My friends use to roll their eyes at some of the things she said she was a fanatic and we finally told her what we thought about her constant ranting
> 
> Sure enough she became pissed off and refused to even hear what we had to say. She was as mad at us as she was at men. I told her one day that I didn't want anything to do with her because of her psychotic rants and haven't been around her since. A couple of my other friends joined me and we are happier now. She's not the only female I've known with that attitude. I don't call myself a feminist but I believe in equal rights for women and the strong ones can have equal rights without playing the victim card or having to degrade men to make themselves feel better. Some women manipulate men terribly. There are a lot of good men around who should not be treated like dirt



Amen.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 10, 2018)

Stormy said:


> You're right James and your wife must have gone through a lot in her field but looks like a smart woman who sees what "feminism" has become. I had a group of friends and we all went jogging together and one of them was an angry man hater. She called herself a feminist but she just wanted to dominate men and criticize them and even had a boyfriend for a while that she abused in public. My friends use to roll their eyes at some of the things she said she was a fanatic and we finally told her what we thought about her constant ranting
> 
> Sure enough she became pissed off and refused to even hear what we had to say. She was as mad at us as she was at men. I told her one day that I didn't want anything to do with her because of her psychotic rants and haven't been around her since. A couple of my other friends joined me and we are happier now. She's not the only female I've known with that attitude. I don't call myself a feminist but I believe in equal rights for women and the strong ones can have equal rights without playing the victim card or having to degrade men to make themselves feel better. Some women manipulate men terribly. There are a lot of good men around who should not be treated like dirt




Well said !  There are many more exactly like her than some posters are willing to admit.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 10, 2018)

For anyone who is looking for an honest look at modern feminism, I suggest the following:

http://facebook.com/WomenAgainstFeminism


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 10, 2018)

Some posters are attempting to talk about feminism but the discussion has morphed into a diatribe against individual feminists who are unpleasant to know. 

I am a feminist because I was  born in 1943 and while my life has been easy by world standards, nevertheless the scales were tipped against me in ways that would not happen had I been born male. I do not hate men and have always enjoyed their company except when they decided to belittle or dismiss me for being uncomfortably vocal. 

My education and interest in science has allowed me to talk to men about subjects that many of my contemporary sisters were badly equipped for. I spent my working years teaching girls science, maths and computing so that they would not be excluded from employment in this important field.

Now, if this thread is going to be about how modern feminists are ball crushing man haters, I refuse to contribute further. I know that the vast majority of women who seek equality of opportunity are nothing of the sort.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 10, 2018)

It should be pointed out that attempting to "RE-BRAND" feminists into egalitarians is like trying to sell asbestos under another name. This re-branding is all too transparent and should be obvious to anyone who thinks clearly. As the younger generations of women begin to catch on to the toxic agenda of feminism, they are beginning to totally reject the old-style party line. 

The younger generations of women do not see themselves as victims. Without the victimhood identification the old-style feminism is doomed to collapse and will be swept into the dust bin of history. The old hard-liners see what is coming and it is for that reason they now are attempting to convince the world that they are not feminists but rather egalitarians.

To the old hard-line, man haters, I say, "Sorry gals. It is too little, too late. You played your toxic card and now you must live with the damage your sisters have created".  To the younger generations of women I say, " Welcome aboard the people train and never forget that you can catch more flies with sugar than you can with vinegar". 

For those who missed the earlier link, I respectfully suggest that you read it very carefully.
http://facebook.com/WomenAgainstFeminism


----------



## James (Mar 10, 2018)

_Some diehards (and I say that with the utmost respect for what they accomplished) will never acknowledge that the "movement" has been hijacked by a bunch of vile, repugnant man haters whose goal is superiority not equality.  Even if they are the "minority", ignoring or discounting it is condoning it, plain and simple.  It doesn't matter what the particular hate is, if you don't call it out for what it is it will spread and flourish like a cancer._

_It's also unfortunate that some on here can't accept differing opinions/perspectives and feel the need to discount them with insults or jabs.  That's equally as repugnant and serves no purpose._


----------



## Olivia (Mar 10, 2018)

What do you all think of Susan B. Anthony? If the decision to allow women's  suffrage was to be made today, would you be for or against it? 

If not for the women's movement in Anthony's time, do you think women's suffrage would become inevitable?  Is so, then why?


----------



## hearlady (Mar 10, 2018)

I think feminism is being yourself and doing what you want without boasting any perceived virtues of your decisions, letting your accomplishments speak for themselves, and not apologizing for being feminine or supporting alternative female lifestyles.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 10, 2018)

James said:


> _Some diehards will never acknowledge that the "movement" has been hijacked by a bunch of vile, repugnant man haters whose goal is superiority not equality.  Even if they are the "minority", ignoring or discounting it is condoning it, plain and simple.  It doesn't matter what the particular hate is, if you don't call it out for what it is it will spread and flourish like a cancer._
> 
> _It's also unfortunate that some on here can't accept differing opinions/perspectives and feel the need to discount them with insults or jabs.  That's equally as repugnant and serves no purpose._




Correct.  I would also add, that people who make personal attacks prove only one thing, they don't know how to debate


----------



## Olivia (Mar 10, 2018)

What do you all think of Susan B. Anthony? If the decision to allow women's suffrage was to be made today, would you be for or against it? 

If not for the women's movement in Anthony's time, do you think women's suffrage would become inevitable? Is so, then why?


----------



## Ruthanne (Mar 10, 2018)

Warrigal said:


> Traveler, it is a characteristic of young idealistic men and women that they become very angry when they discover that the world is neither just nor fair. This anger manifests differently in men and women. I'll leave you to think about how it surfaces in young men but in my days of young womanhood I was angry about the obstacles that were strewn across my path simply because I was born a girl. I was often goaded by men friends, supposedly in jest, but my response was to argue passionately for changes to occur. Typically I was dismissed or laughed at which did nothing to  improve my mood.
> 
> I did not consider men the enemy but their attitude then was a problem. Since that time things have improved a lot. I stopped being angry because it is a pointless emotion that eats away at us from within. The men I knew then have matured and are no longer as ignorant. Having daughters and grand daughters tends to provide another perspective on how women and girls should be treated.
> 
> ...


Yes, all of that is very true Warrigal.  Women also should be given equal pay for equal jobs which they don't get because of backwardness.


----------



## Ruthanne (Mar 10, 2018)

Traveler said:


> There is much that Nazi's , the KKK and feminists have in common.
> 
> 1st.  All 3 are "true believers". They all believe that they, and they alone, are/were correct and everyone else is wrong.
> 
> ...


You are sadly miseducated on the topic.  Every one of the points you make are wrong.  Seems you didn't read what feminism is not and what it is in the links provided.  They are accurate while your "points" are not.:givemebeer:  I am a feminist and I am none of those things you point out.  Feminists don't have enemies but it seems you are an enemy of feminists with the untruths you post.  Some would call them attacks on us.


----------



## Ruthanne (Mar 10, 2018)

James said:


> _Some diehards (and I say that with the utmost respect for what they accomplished) will never acknowledge that the "movement" has been hijacked by a bunch of vile, repugnant man haters whose goal is superiority not equality.  Even if they are the "minority", ignoring or discounting it is condoning it, plain and simple.  It doesn't matter what the particular hate is, if you don't call it out for what it is it will spread and flourish like a cancer._
> 
> _It's also unfortunate that some on here can't accept differing opinions/perspectives and feel the need to discount them with insults or jabs.  That's equally as repugnant and serves no purpose._


I see this at totally untrue.  Why would I acknowledge things that simply are not true.  The movement has not been hijacked.  There are even men feminists and plenty of them who would disagree with what you say.


----------



## Gary O' (Mar 10, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Correct.  I would also add, that people who make personal attacks prove only one thing, they don't know how to debate


Never replying to a pointed question, but slithering away with a crass remark about the ilk of the one asking can be a cause of what some regard as a personal attack.
Yer self-aggrandized debate ‘talent’ would never ever ever ever hold up if an arbiter were involved.
These ladies have demonstrated huge patience in honoring yer charade with any replies at all.


----------



## Ruthanne (Mar 10, 2018)

Stormy said:


> You're right James and your wife must have gone through a lot in her field but looks like a smart woman who sees what "feminism" has become. I had a group of friends and we all went jogging together and one of them was an angry man hater. She called herself a feminist but she just wanted to dominate men and criticize them and even had a boyfriend for a while that she abused in public. My friends use to roll their eyes at some of the things she said she was a fanatic and we finally told her what we thought about her constant ranting
> 
> Sure enough she became pissed off and refused to even hear what we had to say. She was as mad at us as she was at men. I told her one day that I didn't want anything to do with her because of her psychotic rants and haven't been around her since. A couple of my other friends joined me and we are happier now. She's not the only female I've known with that attitude. I don't call myself a feminist but I believe in equal rights for women and the strong ones can have equal rights without playing the victim card or having to degrade men to make themselves feel better. Some women manipulate men terribly. There are a lot of good men around who should not be treated like dirt


Yes, an example of one woman has seemed to color your idea of feminism? Perhaps your xfriend was abused by men and venting her anger.  Anger is not what psychotic is.  There are even more women around who should not be treated like dirt.  Have you seen the stats on rape, domestic violence.  It is MOSTLY against women.  No one here is playing the victim card although I'm sure there are some who have been victimized, rather many, many, many.  I call myself a survivor.


----------



## Ruthanne (Mar 10, 2018)

Gary O' said:


> Never replying to a pointed question, but slithering away with a crass remark about the ilk of the one asking can be a cause of what some regard as a personal attack.
> Yer self-aggrandized debate ‘talent’ would never ever ever ever hold up if an arbiter were involved.
> These ladies have demonstrated huge patience in honoring yer charade with any replies at all.


Thank you Gary and we have been patient as I see it, too.


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 10, 2018)

Gary O' said:


> Never replying to a pointed question, but slithering away with a crass remark about the ilk of the one asking can be a cause of what some regard as a personal attack.
> Yer self-aggrandized debate ‘talent’ would never ever ever ever hold up if an arbiter were involved.
> These ladies have demonstrated huge patience in honoring yer charade with any replies at all.



So true. Thank you.


----------



## James (Mar 10, 2018)

Olivia said:


> What do you all think of Susan B. Anthony? If the decision to allow women's suffrage was to be made today, would you be for or against it?
> 
> If not for the women's movement in Anthony's time, do you think women's suffrage would become inevitable? Is so, then why?



I won't pretend to be very familiar with American history but I have done some reading on Ms Anthony.  Many differing perspectives on what she was.

So;
What do you all think of Susan B. Anthony?  

That question would lead to this question;

Was she a true feminist (a champion for the rights and equality for all) or was she, put into in today's terms, a racist?  

If the decision to allow women's suffrage was to be made today, would you be for or against it?

There was inequality against men and women of color as well, did she champion the movement for the rights of all?  If it were "today" {and I'm assuming it would be a movement for equality for ALL} then my answer is, yes.

If not for the women's movement in Anthony's time, do you think women's suffrage would become inevitable? Is so, then why.

Not only would it have been inevitable, it very well could've been furthered by a number of very brave and strong women of color who were not only trying to further the rights of ALL women, but also the rights of men of color.

So given my brief introduction to this portion of American History {a couple of hours of reading} this is the best answer that I can give you.


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 10, 2018)

Ruthanne said:


> Yes, an example of one woman has seemed to color your idea of feminism? Perhaps your xfriend was abused by men and venting her anger.  Anger is not what psychotic is.  There are even more women around who should not be treated like dirt.  Have you seen the stats on rape, domestic violence.  It is MOSTLY against women.  No one here is playing the victim card although I'm sure there are some who have been victimized, rather many, many, many.  I call myself a survivor.



Agreed, and the process of recovering to survive abuse is exactly the same as the stages of grief. One of the stages that lasts longest and is hardest to get through is anger, but it's also very cathartic. When the anger subsides, healing happens. I've always had to acknowledge my anger before I could let it go and move on.


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 10, 2018)

Ruthanne said:


> I see this at totally untrue.  Why would I acknowledge things that simply are not true.  The movement has not been hijacked.  There are even men feminists and plenty of them who would disagree with what you say.



Hear! Hear!

It's totally unacceptable for men to usurp our power by demanding that they have a right to define and judge feminism or feminists. I may not participate in some forms of feminism but more power to those women if that's what they need to do.


----------



## James (Mar 10, 2018)

Ruthanne said:


> I see this at totally untrue.  Why would I acknowledge things that simply are not true.  The movement has not been hijacked.  There are even men feminists and plenty of them who would disagree with what you say.



So we will agree to disagree as there are just as many that would agree with this statement.


----------



## James (Mar 10, 2018)

Ruthanne said:


> Yes, an example of one woman has seemed to color your idea of feminism? Perhaps your xfriend was abused by men and venting her anger.  Anger is not what psychotic is.  There are even more women around who should not be treated like dirt.  Have you seen the stats on rape, domestic violence.  It is MOSTLY against women.  No one here is playing the victim card although I'm sure there are some who have been victimized, rather many, many, many.  I call myself a survivor.



The abuse of anyone whether it be women, men, children or animals is abhorrent and intolerable on all levels. 

So are we now talking about perceptions based upon personal experiences that permits an individual to paint a whole group with the same brush and then somehow justifies attacks against that group?  This is not furthering the rights of anyone.  This is what I would consider to be revenge.

That's kind of alarming.  I would suggest that counselling is in order if someone truly feels this way.  Its misplaced anger and judgement.  Believe me, I have worked with victims of crime for decades and I know having been a victim of crime myself that it takes a long time to regain a clearer perspective.  Unfortunately some never do.  

This however is not feminism.


----------



## James (Mar 11, 2018)

Posted by Warrigal
_"I did not consider men the enemy but their attitude then was a problem. Since that time things have improved a lot..."
_
I understand that the era you grew up in was a different time, however your generalization of "men and their attitude" appears to be a similar thread throughout these posts, you appear to be painting the group with the same brush.

I completely understand having worked tirelessly with victims of crimes (all genders) that ones perspective is very much related to many factors.  Their upbringing, religion, education, life experience, work experience.  All of those things define an individual and it only takes a negative {sometimes not even a serious one} that changes their perspective.

It takes a long time for that person to learn trust again.  Sometimes they never will, sometimes with much intrepidation. However that in itself does not translate into giving one permission in the damning of a whole group.  That is not feminism, that is called something else.


----------



## James (Mar 11, 2018)

If "Feminism" is being used to bring about positive change for women as in safety, equality, quality of life etc and that movement is ALSO inclusive of furthering equality and a better life for everyone (yes including men) then there is absolutely no reason to have a debate.  If anyone was against this then they should remove themselves from the human race.

If however "modern feminism" is being used as a ruse for something else, such as revenge, superiority, domination, discrimination on any level, towards any group, then it really should be labelled as something else.

Thank you for your patience Ruthanne. I do believe at the end of the day that we all want the same thing. 

To celebrate and respect the differences that are unique to each gender, to bring about equality and positive change that will make everyone's life that much better, and to renounce all forms of hate and discrimination.

That'll be it from moi.  I'll now return to posting pictures of my cat and talk about the weather.

Thank you.


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 11, 2018)

James said:


> Posted by Warrigal
> _"I did not consider men the enemy but their attitude then was a problem. Since that time things have improved a lot..."
> _
> I understand that the era you grew up in was a different time, however your generalization of "men and their attitude" appears to be a similar thread throughout these posts, you appear to be painting the group with the same brush.
> ...


Whoa! Hold your horses!

If I appear to you to be painting a whole group with the same brush, then please allow  me to clarify. Yes, I was speaking historically and geographically of the time when I was a young woman, wife and mother - say from 1963 to about 1975, in Australia. Expectations of how I should live my life then were strongly imposed from the outside. Some of the pressure came from older women (I did mention my mother) but the put downs tended to come exclusively from younger men. It was their attitude that I objected to, not the men themselves. They were my friends and neighbours, and as I said earlier, over time these attitudes changed as their daughters grew to womanhood. The arrogance of youth gave way to the understanding of maturity.

As for damning a whole group based on personal experiences, isn't that what has been occurring in this thread? Some feminists are nasty, ergo, all feminists hate men??? I begin to wonder how many feminists some people have ever met.

I call myself a feminist although I have never been part of a collective, nor have I ever marched for women's rights. However I appreciate the efforts of first and second wave feminists who have forced changes that today's young women have benefited from. Many of these women never married but were active in progressive causes such as the union struggles or civil rights and I will always honour their fighting for social justice for men and for women.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 11, 2018)

James said:


> If "Feminism" is being used to bring about positive change for women as in safety, equality, quality of life etc and that movement is ALSO inclusive of furthering equality and a better life for everyone (yes including men) then there is absolutely no reason to have a debate.  If anyone was against this then they should remove themselves from the human race.
> 
> If however "modern feminism" is being used as a ruse for something else, such as revenge, superiority, domination, discrimination on any level, towards any group, then it really should be labelled as something else.
> 
> ...




Two outstandingly rational posts. James, you have hit the nail exactly on the head. We have seen, over and over again, posters playing the victim card. They seem to think that THEY, AND THEY ALONE, are the only ones to have ever been hurt. Using the victim card does not empower women, it makes them crippled and weaker. 

Moreover, blaming others merely creates a sub-class of individuals with a built-in reason for failure of the entire group. The victim card, or the race card for that matter, are outmoded concepts. People of any gender or race who have succeeded have done so because they have refused to be victims. 

Feminists like to think that they speak for ALL women. They do not. There are tens millions of women who reject the entire concept of feminism. And, they refuse to be identified as feminists. Furthermore, they proudly and loudly say to feminists, "Don't you dare put your label on me".

I, too, will now sign off this thread. It appears to be going in circles.  Have a nice day to everyone who has posted.:dontworry:


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 11, 2018)

> Feminists like to think that they speak for ALL women



I don't presume to speak for all women, not even all feminists. 
May I point out that you don't speak for any women.


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 11, 2018)

Warrigal said:


> I don't presume to speak for all women, not even all feminists.
> May I point out that you don't speak for any women.



Thank you. That needed to be said.


----------



## Gary O' (Mar 11, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Feminists like to think that they speak for ALL women. They do not. There are tens millions of women who reject the entire concept of feminism. And, they refuse to be identified as feminists. Furthermore, they proudly and loudly say to feminists, "Don't you dare put your label on me".



funny how that is



Traveler said:


> Men are constantly having to do, or not do, something the wife/GF wants.


----------



## Sunny (Mar 11, 2018)

Good reply, Warrigal.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 11, 2018)

:lofl:...


----------



## Sunny (Mar 11, 2018)

"Let's be very clear: Strong men - men who are truly role models - don't need to put down women to make themselves feel powerful. People who are truly strong lift others up. People who are truly powerful bring others together." - Michelle Obama


----------



## Traveler (Mar 11, 2018)

Sunny said:


> "Let's be very clear: Strong men - men who are truly role models - don't need to put down women to make themselves feel powerful. People who are truly strong lift others up. People who are truly powerful bring others together." - Michelle Obama




Quite obviously, here is yet another case of a feminist double standard.  They expect men to be supportive, or at minimum mute, while feminists ceaselessly make negative, often viscous, remarks about men. The feminist message to men is quite clear, "Support everything we say, or shut the hell up".

Some men may act like well-trained, submissive, lap dogs, there are others who will bite when kicked.


----------



## Olivia (Mar 11, 2018)

Hopefully, the biters are up-to-date with their rabies vaccinations.


----------



## Gary O' (Mar 11, 2018)

Olivia said:


> Hopefully, the biters are up-to-date with their rabies vaccinations.


....some just need to be put down


----------



## Ruthanne (Mar 11, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> Agreed, and the process of recovering to survive abuse is exactly the same as the stages of grief. One of the stages that lasts longest and is hardest to get through is anger, but it's also very cathartic. When the anger subsides, healing happens. I've always had to acknowledge my anger before I could let it go and move on.


Yes, you make very good points.  Many don't understand how others grieve, too.


----------



## Sunny (Mar 11, 2018)

Traveler, didn't you say a few notes up that you are leaving this thread? 

However, since you are still here, your latest remark is just screaming for a reply.



> Quite obviously, here is yet another case of a feminist double standard.   They expect men to be supportive, or at minimum mute, while feminists  ceaselessly make negative, often viscous, remarks about men. The  feminist message to men is quite clear, "Support everything we say, or  shut the hell up".



Do you remember the old TV show, The Honeymooners, starring Jackie Gleason as an ignorant bully?  His tag line to his long-suffering wife was, "One of these days, Alice, POW!  Right in the kisser!"

This was considered "funny" back in those good old days. It makes Archie Bunker look like an urbane gentleman by comparison. At least he never threatened his wife with physical violence.

So, should we use Ralph as an example of all men?  If their wives continues to make wisecracks they don't like, they will get punched in the face?  Is this how "men" interact with "women?"  Yes, some men. But fortunately,
not most.

Traveler, you are repeating yourself ad nauseum.  You are inventing a stereotype based on the most extreme minority of a group, and using this ridiculous image to give yourself an excuse for boastful puffery. But the image you are presenting of feminists can be described as being "straw dogs."

There may be some extreme people on the fringe who have the attitudes you are accusing women of having; if you look hard enough, there are always some extreme cases out there with every scenario under the sun. But to keep labeling the feminist movement with this stuff either demonstrates extreme ignorance (and you are refusing to listen to what virtually every woman on this forum is saying), or a deliberate attempt to provoke a fight,
never mind if the fight makes any sense or not.



> Some men may act like well-trained, submissive, lap dogs, there are others who will bite when kicked.


 And most women don't want either lap dogs or snarling beasts. They want intelligent human beings who stand equally with them as loving partners.

This whole discussion has gotten beyond ridiculous.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

I'll not respond to such drivel as posted above by Sunny. So, since my words are twisted, or belittled or ignored, I'll let feminists speak for me.

"The more famous and powerful I get the more power I have to hurt men". --- Sharon Stone

"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class hatred of men".  
                                                                 Robin Morgan,  Editor of Ms. magazine.

"The nuclear family must be destroyed. The break-up of families is now in an objectively revolutionary process". ---- Linda Gordon

I want to see a man, any man, beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth like an apple in the mouth of a pig". 
                                                                                                                                                           Andrea Dworkin

"Rape is nothing more than a conscious process of intimidation by which ALL men keep all women in a state of fear".--- Susan Brownmiller

"Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women's movement must concentrate on attacking this institution. Freedom for women can not be won without the abolition of marriage".   Shelia Cronin,  Leader of The National Organization of Women (N.O.W.)

"Marriage is an institution developed from the practice of rape".   Andrea Dworkin

"If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that results in a drastic reduction of males. ----- Mary Daly

"The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race".  ---- Sally Miller Gearhart

"Marriage works better for men than women. The two happiest groups are married men and unmarried women"  --- Gloria Steinem

"Marriage: A ceremony which puts a ring on the lady's finger and through the nose of the man".  ---- Gloria Steinem

*I could easily quote hundreds of similar writings by well known feminists.  I respectfully suggest that you re-read all of the above quotes and ask yourselves what feminism is TRULY about.*


----------



## Gary O' (Mar 12, 2018)

Traveler said:


> I'll not respond to such drivel as posted above by Sunny. So, since my words are twisted, or belittled or ignored, I'll let feminists speak for me.
> 
> 
> *I could easily quote hundreds of similar writings by well known feminists.  I respectfully suggest that you re-read all of the above quotes and ask yourselves what feminism is TRULY about.*



Geeezus
and you read that crap
no wonder


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

Gary O' said:


> Geeezus
> and you read that crap
> no wonder




You are damn right I read that, and much more. I suggest that everyone educate themselves about the *REAL AGENDA* of feminism.


----------



## Gary O' (Mar 12, 2018)

Traveler said:


> You are damn right I read that, and much more. I suggest that everyone educate themselves about the *REAL AGENDA* of feminism.



the media loves you for it, Traveler

oh, look, another one born just a minute ago


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

Gary O' said:


> the media loves you for it, Traveler
> 
> oh, look, another one born just a minute ago



*
You can attempt the be a wise guy all you want but it does not alter the truth one tiny bit.*


----------



## Gary O' (Mar 12, 2018)

Traveler said:


> *
> You can attempt the be a wise guy all you want but it does not alter the truth one tiny bit.*


sorry, man
we all have our beliefs
I will honor that 
all the best


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 12, 2018)

Interesting thread. It seems to me that equating extreme, hate inducing elements of feminism with the rank and file, is analogous to equating Westboro Baptist Church with the majority of Christians. For the record, I am a feminist, so is the present generation of my family, including my outspoken, charismatic son. He is no more likely to be anyone’s lapdog than I.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

Shalimar said:


> Interesting thread. It seems to me that equating extreme, hate inducing elements of feminism with the rank and file, is analogous to equating Westboro Baptist Church with the majority of Christians. For the record, I am a feminist, so is the present generation of my family, including my outspoken, charismatic son. He is no more likely to be anyone’s lapdog than I.




When the leaders of the feminist movement make such outrageous, hate-filled, statements, it is prudent to pay attention. (see post #91)

Personally, I don't think denial benefits anyone.

In any event, there are always exceptions within any group. I don't doubt for one minute what you say about yourself or your son. I'm sure both of you are fine people.  However, that does not belie the fact that feminism is rife with misandry.


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 12, 2018)

Traveler said:


> When the leaders of the feminist movement make such outrageous, hate-filled, statements, it is prudent to pay attention. Personally, I don't think denial benefits anyone.      (see post #91)



Wow, you and I definitely have disparate takes on Sunny’s post. I see a measured, informative statement, nothing drivelish or denial inducing. With respect, to label those who disagree with one’s position is a slippery slope. Yes, in any movement there will be angry people, however, to disparage feminists, female and male, for the sake of a strident few, insults my great 

grandmother, jailed for being a suffragette, beaten and force fed, myself for the struggles necessary to flourish in a male dominated profession, and to promote changes in the absurd pro rapist legal system. Good luck getting a conviction as an adult unless you are beaten. This applies to male victims also. A thought occurs to me, Philly is alpha male, yet has no difficulty with feminism.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

Shalimar, *please *read post #91. THAT is what I'm talking about when I say outrageous, hated filled, statements.


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 12, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Shalimar, *please *read post #91. THAT is what I'm talking about when I say outrageous, hated filled, statements.


We are talking at cross purposes here. I may not agree with these statements, but I am not willing to tar and feather a whole movement, just as I would not have condemned the Civil Right’s Movement for the statements made by some Black Panthers. 

Every movement, religious and secular, has its share of strident opinions, particularly in a democracy. If I wished, I could visit the Red Pill sites, and list any number of “outrageous, hate filled, statements.” Would these comments be representative of men as a whole? No, they would not. Men are not the enemy, they are my brothers. Together, we work for equality for all. That is my reality, and the reality of my millennial family.


----------



## James (Mar 12, 2018)

The "original" post was, "What is Feminism".  

Quite an open ended questions, and I didn't see anywhere in that question that only answers from women were acceptable, or only answers from like minded individuals were acceptable.

No one has cornered the market in "opinions", unless that too has changed.  Everyone has them and is entitled to them.  What something is or isn't will vary as much as there are grains of sand.

I've made my "opinion" known and just as there are as many that will disagree with it, there are just as many that WILL agree with it.

Feminism has, or had, depending on your opinion an extremely important role in furthering the rights and equality of not only women but of society as a whole.  Given that equalities will always equal some inequality because well we are different genders.  For example women will have employment rights surrounding maternity leave that men won't...that's obviously acceptable and no one would ever think otherwise.

But, as the "equality" scope narrows, and it has, the agenda has changed.  

If it's a Radical Minority spewing the male hating rhetoric, then it's a very large and vocal minority with some very influential leaders.  Can you IMAGINE the hue and cry, the protests, the pitchfork parties if even ONE influential male had made just ONE similiar disparaging remark towards women?  These remarks not only define the character of the person making them, they define what they stand for and believe.  That is true of anyone.

As I said before, hate disguised as anything is still hate and if it's condoned (silence is condoning it) it will spread and flourish.  We don't have to look too far back in history to see some very disturbing and horrific examples of this.  Condoning it makes you a part of it.

So if true Feminism is being the champion of the underdog, equality and fairness for all, coming to the aid of your fellow man (that term means everyone just like anything else with "man" in it, i.e. human, humanity, mankind) etc etc, isn't that just being a civilized, caring, compassionate human being?  Why then does that even need a label?  

This is not the 18, 19 or 20th Century.  No matter how hard you try you can't change "history", you can only learn from it and not make the same mistakes.  The perverted hope of some to invoke change by the overpowering and domination of "men" and punish them for what "they did" is ludicrous and abhorent.  Those individuals are in dire need professional mental healthcare.

Anyway, that is my "opinion" on the topic at hand and that is really is it from me.

Btw I believe this is an "open" forum so you should expect and accept differences of opinions when you fish for answers to open ended and controversial questions.  If you're not willing to then perhaps you should be posting in forums where you know your audience.  

Again, just my opinion.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

Shalimar said:


> We are talking at cross purposes here. I may not agree with these statements, but I am not willing to tar and feather a whole movement, just as I would not have condemned the Civil Right’s Movement for the statements made by some Black Panthers.




The statements I quoted in POST # 91 are hardly representative of a splinter group like the Black Panthers.  The statements posted in #91 are *the** very foundation of feminism*.  

It does, indeed, speak volumes about your feminist stance, when you failed to condemn those venomous man-hating remarks.  I had naively hoped that you, above all people, would condemn such toxicity. As a result, I am more convinced then ever that no woman is ever going to admit that a cancer grows within the body of feminism.


----------



## Olivia (Mar 12, 2018)

Skip. Quoted wrong post.


----------



## Olivia (Mar 12, 2018)

James said:


> The "original" post was, "What is Feminism".
> 
> Quite an open ended questions, and I didn't see anywhere in that question that only answers from women were acceptable, or only answers from like minded individuals were acceptable.
> 
> ...



I get what you're saying, James, and I agree with much of what you've said. 

However, and this is very important, there are some opinions here that are using criticism of feminism as a disguise for really hating just about all women. And anyone can know this from other threads that include the topic of men vs. women. Opinions might differ, but that's mine.


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 12, 2018)

Traveler said:


> The statements I quoted in POST # 91 are hardly representative of a splinter group like the Black Panthers.  The statements posted in #91 are *the** very foundation of feminism*.
> 
> It does, indeed, speak volumes about your feminist stance, when you failed to condemn those venomous man-hating remarks.  I had naively hoped that you, above all people, would condemn such toxicity. As a result, I am more convinced then ever that no woman is ever going to admit that a cancer grows within the body of feminism.



How sad that my refusal to totally comply with your position has resulted in such a post. As for “my feminist stance” u pick and choose what that means, completely ignoring the fact that this feminist devotes her life to counseling people in pain, the majority of whom are male vets suffering from crippling PTSD.  I condemn hatred of all kinds, I am in the compassion 

business, after all, but I dispute your position that the foundation of feminism is comprised of toxic people. Nor do I accept your attempt to categorise all women in this matter. All major movements contain toxic elements, such is the varied nature of human beings. Still, I am not your enemy, and I wish you peace. Namaste.


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 12, 2018)

I don't agree with all of the quotes in #91, but I find some of them difficult to argue with.

I agree with Steinem's quote about marriage benefiting men while being single is more beneficial to women. It's been proved by medical science that married men live longer than single men, but for women the inverse is true.

ETA: One of the wonderful facets of the feminist movement is its egalitarianism. There were no leaders, no presidents, no chair_men_, no spokespersons whose voices were more important than the rank and file. To gather and then attribute any set of quotations to the leadership of the feminist movement is untrue on its very face.


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 12, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> I don't agree with all of the quotes in #91, but I find some of them difficult to argue with.
> 
> I agree with Steinem's quote about marriage benefiting men while being single is more beneficial to women. It's been proved by medical science that married men live longer than single men, but for women the inverse is true.
> 
> ETA: One of the wonderful facets of the feminist movement is its egalitarianism. There were no leaders, no presidents, no chair_men_, no spokespersons whose voices were more important than the rank and file. To gather and then attribute any set of quotations to the leadership of the feminist movement is untrue on its very face.


Exactly.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> To gather and then attribute any set of quotations to the leadership of the feminist movement is untrue on its very face.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Huh ? Say what ?  The more I read the above sentence, the less sense it makes. Think about what you are trying to say. Calm down, be less emotional and try to be rational.  Right now,I haven't the foggiest idea of what in the world you are trying to say.


----------



## Olivia (Mar 12, 2018)

Canines deserve a better spokes dog.  layful:


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 12, 2018)

Traveler said:


> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> Huh ? Say what ?  The more I read the above sentence, the less sense it makes. Think about what you are trying to say. Calm down, be less emotional and try to be rational.  Right now,I haven't the foggiest idea of what in the world you are trying to say.



Take your own advice to calm down, be less emotional and try to be rational. You may figure it out eventually.


----------



## C'est Moi (Mar 12, 2018)

Olivia said:


> I get what you're saying, James, and I agree with much of what you've said.
> 
> However, and this is very important, there are some opinions here that are using criticism of feminism as a disguise for really hating just about all women. And anyone can know this from other threads that include the topic of men vs. women. Opinions might differ, but that's mine.



I try very hard to stay out of these discussions but I just have to say, "brava."


----------



## James (Mar 12, 2018)

olivia said:


> canines deserve a better spokes dog.  layful:


lol


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> Take your own advice to calm down, be less emotional and try to be rational. You may figure it out eventually.




Since the dawn of time men have been trying to understand the female psyche. I doubt that I will fair any better than my forefathers.
Jane, even you, who wrote that sentence can't explain it.


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 12, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Since the dawn of time men have been trying to understand the female psyche. I doubt that I will fair any better than my forefathers.
> Jane, even you, who wrote that sentence can't explain it.



Perhaps if men would just _accept_ that psyche instead of trying to _understand_ it, there'd be a lot less tension and turmoil.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

SifuPhil said:


> Perhaps if men would just _accept_ that psyche instead of trying to _understand_ it, there'd be a lot less tension and turmoil.




No, I don't think so. I don't knowingly drink the Kool Aid.


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 12, 2018)

Traveler said:


> No, I don't think so. I don't knowingly drink the Kool Aid.



Why not? A lot of women have to drink it in regards to men ...


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 12, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Jane, even you, who wrote that sentence can't explain it.



It's quite clear if you are able to quiet your bowels long enough to follow a logical procession. In the preceding sentence, I explained there is no feminist leadership. No leadership means all quotes attributed to "leaders" are at best specious.


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 12, 2018)

SifuPhil said:


> Perhaps if men would just _accept_ that psyche instead of trying to _understand_ it, there'd be a lot less tension and turmoil.



I agree. I've never put much effort into understanding men. They are who they are.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

SifuPhil said:


> Why not? A lot of women have to drink it in regards to men ...




LOL  Because I prefer to remain sane.


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 12, 2018)

I think this thread has devolved into genderbait, in an atmosphere of “guilty * how do you plead,” civil debate is impossible. Pity. Out of honest, respectful discussion comes knowlege, if not always understanding. I still contend that there  are far more differences within the sexes than between them. This becomes particularly apparent when people are emotionally broken.


----------



## Olivia (Mar 12, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Since the dawn of time men have been trying to understand the female psyche. I doubt that I will fair any better than my forefathers.
> Jane, even you, who wrote that sentence can't explain it.



Most men have evolved since the dawn of time. Some apparently haven't.


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 12, 2018)

Olivia said:


> Most men have evolved since the dawn of time. Some apparently haven't.



Isn't it a shame that the unevolved tend to be so outspoken? Listen to me. Listen to me. Waaa. Waaa. Listen to me. I'm more important than you are. Listen to me.


----------



## Olivia (Mar 12, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> Isn't it a shame that the unevolved tend to be so outspoken? Listen to me. Listen to me. Waaa. Waaa. Listen to me. I'm more important than you are. Listen to me.



Being highly controversial is a good way to get attention. And I have to admit, he's succeeding in that.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> In the preceding sentence, I explained there is no feminist leadership. No leadership means all quotes attributed to "leaders" are at best specious.




A very neat way to escape acknowledging there is something extremely bizarre happening within the ranks of feminism.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> Isn't it a shame that the unevolved tend to be so outspoken? Listen to me. Listen to me. Waaa. Waaa. Listen to me. I'm more important than you are. Listen to me.




It is not about who is more important. It is about understanding that the most famous (infamous ?)of feminists are man-haters. Period !


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 12, 2018)

Traveler said:


> A very neat way to escape acknowledging there is something extremely bizarre happening within the ranks of feminism.



There are no "ranks of feminism" that exist outside of your fantasies.


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 12, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> There are no "ranks of feminism" that exist outside of your fantasies.


U mean I don’t gets a cute uniform to go with my taser? Damn. I wanted a magenta leather jumpsuit. Sigh. Valkyrie helmet with horns.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> There are no "ranks of feminism" that exist outside of your fantasies.




Haha LOL you get funnier by the minute. Next you are going to tell me that there is no such thing as feminism.  Thank you for the laughter.


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 12, 2018)

Traveler, you are unarmed for a battle of wits. I've watched you do this before, where you're obviously losing the debate so you continue to get sillier and sillier and further off-track.

I'm certainly not impressed and I doubt anyone else is either.


----------



## Smiling Jane (Mar 12, 2018)

Shalimar said:


> U mean I don’t gets a cute uniform to go with my taser? Damn. I wanted a magenta leather jumpsuit. Sigh. Valkyrie helmet with horns.



Magenta leather would be the perfect look. Bright gold on that Valkyrie helmet, the parts that aren't fur or horn.


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 12, 2018)

If we choose to explore the writing of prominent second wave feminists we will see that they can be as critical of women as they are of men.



> “Those miserable women who blame the men who let them down for their misery and isolation enact every day the initial mistake of sacrificing their personal responsibility for themselves.”
> ―     Germaine Greer,     The Female Eunuch



Does this sound like a woman who hates men?



> “Lovers who are free to go when they are restless always come back; lovers who are free to change remain interesting. The bitter animosity and obscenity of divorce is unknown where individuals have not become Siamese twins.”
> ―     Germaine Greer,     The Female Eunuch



I am not familiar with the writings of the current crop of feminists and have not heard of all of the authors in Traveller's list. I would like them put in historical context.

Disclaimer - obviously I am not as adventurous as Germaine Greer because I have been monogamously married for 55 years but within marriage I have striven for a measure of autonomy and personal responsibility. If I had not I would not still be married. I would have given up and left.


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 12, 2018)

Smiling Jane said:


> Magenta leather would be the perfect look. Bright gold on that Valkyrie helmet, the parts that aren't fur or horn.


Mais oui, but no fur. I love the gold on the helmet. Perhaps thigh high gold boots? Gauntlets?


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

Shalimar said:


> Mais oui, but no fur. I love the gold on the helmet. Perhaps thigh high gold boots? Gauntlets?




haha Don't forget the whip. It's a must have.


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 12, 2018)

Traveler said:


> haha Don't forget the whip. It's a must have.


Sequinned, and glow in the dark. C’est bon. Magnifique!


----------



## Traveler (Mar 12, 2018)

Like most things in life, our views on any given subject or group, depends quite often on our personal experiences and sometimes where we live. If, for example a person lives his/her whole life in a smallish town they may view people as helpful and friendly. If, however he/she lived in New York City that same person might have an entirely different view. (no offence meant to New Yorkers).

Likewise, a woman who was sexually abused as a child and later raped in her 20's is likely to have a decidedly dim view of men. I knew such a woman and most of her male friends were gay.  But a woman who was raised with a loving , kind, father and had good experiences with young men as she was maturing into a woman, is likely to have a much more positive view about men. 

The same holds true of a man who has had a series of negative, emotionally hurtful, experiences with feminists is not too likely to have a shining view of feminists. 

The same holds true even among animals. A dog that is repeatedly kicked can become either viscous or a broken shell of a dog who cowers every time a person approaches. Why one dog becomes viscous and the next becomes broken is unknown. 

People can succeed in life spite of over-whelming obstacles and the next person with almost exactly the same obstacles just gives up, never to do well in life. I contend that the difference is how one thinks about his/her experiences.  The same holds true with feminism. If a woman thinks of herself as a victim and is filled with hate, then she becomes crippled. If, however, she refuses to be a victim then she gains power. 

Life is not always fair, but men, as well as women, also have gone though hell. Women are not the only ones to have had a rough go.


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 12, 2018)

Can't ague with any of that, Traveller. 

I would perhaps add that there are some genetic foundations that underpin our view the world and its inhabitants.
We are also programmed by culture to have unrealistic expectations concerning matters of the heart.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

Shalimar said:


> I still contend that there  are far more differences within the sexes than between them. This becomes particularly apparent when people are emotionally broken.




I have heard that said numerous times but I don't agree. I think it is just something people say to prop-up a failing attempt to demonstrate that women can do anything a man can do. Even the most casual glance at men and women it is abundantly clear that in any group of 100 men and 100 women, selected at random, the men are taller, have more muscle, and heavier bones. Women on the other hand have more body fat, less muscle and much more delicate bones. 

That does not make men "better than" it just makes us different. Continuing, women, as a general rule, talk much, much more than men. I do not say that is a negative, it is just a difference.  Clearly, women are better at some tasks and men are better at others.

Beneath the skin the differences are even greater. Everyone who had a basic biology class knows that men have aprox 9 times the amount of testosterone than women, and women have far more estrogen. Testosterone is *the *primary agent responsible for ****** drive and physical aggression. This is why boys, again speaking generally, engage in 'ruff and tumble play.  It is thought that estrogen is one of the main factors in why little girls are much more likely to play well together and much more quietly than boys. 

Speaking biologically,perhaps the greatest difference between males and females is the 23rd chromosome. This is the master chromosome and it controls almost everything. In an age of transgenderism, people can have drastic surgery to change their *outward *appearance but inside the body, a transgender man who has undergone feminizing surgery, is still, and always will  --- remain a man. Moreover, no amount of feminizing surgery can ever change the obvious fact that he could never, ever, give birth. Mother nature has set aside this ability exclusively for the women.

 I mention the above only in reply to the statement that there are greater differences within the genders than there are between the genders.

Well , that's enough for this post but it is not all that needs to be said.


----------



## hearlady (Mar 13, 2018)

That's true. Our opinions are formed by our experiences and influences.
Basic biology was for reproduction. It's not so basic anymore.
Feminism, sexism, racism, etc have a textbook definition but nothing is basic anymore. So many experiences and influences now in the high tech world. We live in this world. Some more than others. 
I think we all just try to do the best we can.


----------



## Sunny (Mar 13, 2018)

> If a woman thinks of herself as a victim and is filled with hate, then she becomes crippled.



True for both men and women, Traveler.  How about all the mass shooters out there?  Probably applies to most of them, maybe all.  And as far as I know, they have all been men.

Your statement that men who have had emotionally hurtful encounters with feminists not having a shining view of feminists is also probably true. But why limit that statement to feminists?  What if someone has had emotionally hurtful encounters with, say, Italians early in their life? Does that justify a lot of big, sweeping negativity toward all Italians?  (Nothing against Italians here, in general I love them. Just an example.)

Saying, "I have had some crushing experiences with feminists" is very different from saying, "Feminists are; " and then equating an entire social philosophy with the Nazi party and the KKK.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

All I know for sure is that I'm about as confused as it is possible for one man to be.

On the one hand, the feminists posters have said that they are fully supportive of men and they love and care about us.

Yet on the other hand, after they have read the hate-filled quotes (post #91) they, the feminists on this thread, have tried desperately to ignore those statements. But most telling of all, not one single feminist has condemned any of those statements. Not one single condemnation. 

 It is NOT about agreeing with me. It is about the dichotomy between what the feminists on this thread are saying and what they are doing, in this case, not doing, ie condemning such vile statements by famous feminists.

It feels like I'm taking a class in "Crazy 101".


----------



## Gary O' (Mar 13, 2018)

Traveler said:


> All I know for sure is that I'm about as confused as it is possible for one man to be.


Well, Travy, ol’ boy, you just began a new movement;

_*Phenomenonism*_

Wimin....are....fascinating 

Leave it at that (they're much more advanced than us)

Speaking of movements…..the loo beckons


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 13, 2018)

Traveler said:


> I have heard that said numerous times but I don't agree. I think it is just something people say to prop-up a failing attempt to demonstrate that women can do anything a man can do. Even the most casual glance at men and women it is abundantly clear that in any group of 100 men and 100 women, selected at random, the men are taller, have more muscle, and heavier bones. Women on the other hand have more body fat, less muscle and much more delicate bones.
> 
> That does not make men "better than" it just makes us different. Continuing, women, as a general rule, talk much, much more than men. I do not say that is a negative, it is just a difference.  Clearly, women are better at some tasks and men are better at others.
> 
> ...



Hmmm. Well, after decades of experience dealing with broken souls, I stand by my statement. I was not referencing body mass, childbearing capacity, or testosterone, etc, but the universal need by most individuals to feel a sense of belonging to the whole, as opposed to feeing isolated, unwanted, invisible. Some people are natural hermits, most crave company, purpose, 

acceptance, loyalty, love. PSTD and other ills, are very destructive barriers to mental and emotional well-being. This transcends gender, class, ethnicity etc. Pain, like death, is a great leveler. Turns human beings into broken shells. A quiet mind is a gift beyond price. Yes, some men become aggressive when ill, most do not. Most weep like broken children. As do most women, although one lady experiencing a hideous flashback dislocated my shoulder. Ouch!


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

Sunny said:


> True for both men and women, Traveler.  How about all the mass shooters out there?  Probably applies to most of them, maybe all.  And as far as I know, they have all been men.
> 
> Your statement that men who have had emotionally hurtful encounters with feminists not having a shining view of feminists is also probably true. But why limit that statement to feminists?  What if someone has had emotionally hurtful encounters with, say, Italians early in their life? Does that justify a lot of big, sweeping negativity toward all Italians?  (Nothing against Italians here, in general I love them. Just an example.)
> 
> Saying, "I have had some crushing experiences with feminists" is very different from saying, "Feminists are; " and then equating an entire social philosophy with the Nazi party and the KKK.




Yes, all of that may be true. BUT when you read what world famous feminists have to say about wanting to destroy the family unit, do away with marriage and commit near genocide on men it does tend to make one a believer. AND let us not forget that not one single feminist has condemned the quotes in post #91.


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 13, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Yes, all of that may be true. BUT when you read what world famous feminists have to say about wanting to destroy the family unit, do away with marriage and commit near genocide on men it does tend to make one a believer. AND let us not forget that not one single feminist has condemned the quotes in post #91.


Excuse me, I have said I disagree with many of those quotes. I just don’t reach the same conclusions as you do.


----------



## James (Mar 13, 2018)

We are into the third wave of the feminist movement. 

The vocal and radical group that appears to define this wave are the so called Gender Feminists. Although this group holds onto some of the elements of Equality Feminism, they man shame, refuse to accept the inherent differences between the two sexes and support the social re engineering of males.  

While some feminists acknowledge, denounce and separate themselves from this movement, just as many do not because they believe that you can't have one without the other.  They believe there is no division therefore only one label applies, feminism.

So at the end of the day you will have some that will agree on what it has become and some that will disagree what it has become.

I'll be on the side of what it has become.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

Shalimar said:


> I may not agree with these statements, but I am not willing to tar and feather a whole movement ...
> 
> Every movement, religious and secular, has its share of strident opinions ...





Shalimar said:


> Excuse me, I have said I disagree with many of those quotes.





Pardon me , Shalimar, but you did *not *say you disagree. You said you *MAY *disagree. That is different from saying you disagree And, it is a far cry from outright condemning those hateful statements. You also said "... with *many *of those statements. Many ? But not all ? Which ones do you agree with ? Hmmm ?

In any event, getting you to even say that much was like pulling teeth. You sound like an apologist for those famous feminists when you said, "Every movement, religious and secular, has its share of strident opinions".

I repeat, not one single person has outright condemned all of those hateful statements. NOT ONE !  

Egalitarians ? Supporters of men ? Sorry gals, I just don't buy it. All of this talk about being egalitarians is just the same old feminist party- line wrapped up in a new package with a pretty ribbon. 

Bottom line ? The feminist agenda of hating men has not changed one iota. Oh, sure, men may be useful to feminists occasionally, but down deep, where it really matters, you continue to blame men for all of your problems. 

Personally, I think that the loyalty of "sister-hood" takes precedence over any other consideration.


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 13, 2018)

Justin Trudeau, the PM of Canada, is a self-avowed feminist.

Therefore, he must hate himself since he's a male. 

See the little error in your logic?


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

SifuPhil said:


> Justin Trudeau, the PM of Canada, is a self-avowed feminist.
> 
> Therefore, he must hate himself since he's a male.
> 
> See the little error in your logic?




There is no error in my logic, thank you very much. He is just a smart politician. Exactly the same as JFK and Bill Clinton who never missed an opportunity to lift a skirt in private even though they were married.


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 13, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Pardon me , Shalimar, but you did *not *say you disagree. You said you *MAY *disagree. That is different from saying you disagree And, it is a far cry from outright condemning those hateful statements. You also said "... with *many *of those statements. Many ? But not all ? Which ones do you agree with ? Hmmm ?
> 
> In any event, getting you to even say that much was like pulling teeth. You sound like an apologist for those famous feminists when you said, "Every movement, religious and secular, has its share of strident opinions".
> 
> ...




Personally, I think you expect total compliance with your perspective, anything less results in posts such as this. We are under no obligation to agree with each other, sad that there seems to be no room for respectful differences of opinion. As for my 

loyalty, first of all, I am loyal to my conscience. Unlike you, I see the totality of humanity as something which I devote my life to serving. My first loyalty there will always be to the children. It is my way of paying it forward. I was spared where  the rest were not. If I ever had a victim mentality, that was destroyed in the killing fields of childhood. It diminishes those I serve, 

particularly the brave male survivors of the Hell Of War, when you label therapists such as myself with manhating rhetoric. These soldiers, in full dress uniform, along wlth their female colleagues, stood for me while I was comatose in the hospital. No greater honour could be paid to a civilian. Lawn Darts, j’t’adore!


----------



## James (Mar 13, 2018)

Traveler said:


> There is no error in my logic, thank you very much. He is just a smart politician.



He used to be a part time drama teacher.  It shows.


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 13, 2018)

James said:


> He used to be a part time drama teacher.  It shows.


Wow. Politics are verboten, I shall hold my tongue.


----------



## James (Mar 13, 2018)

Shalimar said:


> Wow. Politics are verboten, I shall hold my tongue.



Nothing political,  just a comment with regard to his former employment "before politics" and how great he was/is as a drama teacher.  He will always have something to fallback on because he knows his stuff.

If I was ever into that spectrum I would Def sign up for his classes.


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 13, 2018)

James said:


> Nothing political,  just a comment with regard to his former employment "before politics" and how great he was as a drama teacher.


Smoooooth, mon cher Canuck, verrry smooth. Lulz.


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 13, 2018)

The Taoist philosophy that I have made a part of my life explicitly states that there is no separation between male and female. They are incomplete without each other. 

Within each there is a little of the other. 

Therefore, to come down on feminists is in effect destroying your own male self. I believe many here can easily see that unfortunate event taking place right here, right now.


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 13, 2018)

James said:


> Nothing political,  just a comment with regard to his former employment "before politics" and how great he was/is as a drama teacher.  He will always have something to fallback on because he knows his stuff.
> 
> If I was ever into that spectrum I would Def sign up for his classes.


Handsome and charming. A dangerous man. Loll.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

SifuPhil said:


> The Taoist philosophy that I have made a part of my life explicitly states that there is no separation between male and female. They are incomplete without each other.
> 
> Within each there is a little of the other.
> 
> Therefore, to come down on feminists is in effect destroying your own male self. I believe many here can easily see that unfortunate event taking place right here, right now.




Haha You might want to trying explaining that to the multitudes of man-hating feminists.  Good luck with that one.


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 13, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Haha You might want to trying explaining that to the multitudes of man-hating feminists.  Good luck with that one.



Does the term "broken record" come to mind? 

Or, rather, the mantra of the child that insists that he is right even when he's playing in the middle of the freeway, totally naked. 

You're not the emperor, but you ARE totally revealed here.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

SifuPhil said:


> Does the term "broken record" come to mind?
> 
> Or, rather, the mantra of the child that insists that he is right even when he's playing in the middle of the freeway, totally naked.
> 
> You're not the emperor, but you ARE totally revealed here.




You are welcome to think whatever you want.  If you choose to believe you can read my mind then by all means continue your little fantasy.


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 13, 2018)

Traveler said:


> You are welcome to think whatever you want.



I did't realize I needed your permission in the first place. 



> If you choose to believe you can read my mind then by all means continue your little fantasy.



I don't believe I can read your mind, but I DO believe I can see what you write. 

And _that_ speaks volumes, even when it is _un_written.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

Just how far are some of the lunatic man-hating feminists willing to go ?  Sarah McDivitt Woods tops the cake for absolute looney- toons.

The self avowed feminist "scholar" has written a lengthy piece entitled, "JESUS WAS A RAPE BABY".  She explains in some detail how God was the first rapist. Yeah, you read that right. God, was the first rapist.

Her personal take on The Bible story of the Virgin Mary is that since Mary was 14 or 15 years old, she could not possibly have given informed consent since she was a minor. She continues by saying that God was not only a rapist he was also a pedophile. And, get this, God also set the stage by encouraging all men to have their way with any unmarried girl/woman at any time he so chooses.

Sarah McDivitt Woods gets my nomination as the feminist nut case of the month.

Please don't make any assumptions about my thoughts regarding religion. I am just the messenger.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

SifuPhil said:


> I did't realize I needed your permission in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Haha you are truly a funny, funny man. I like jokes. So, you do read minds after all. Unwritten words, indeed. Haha
Phil as you are a late-comer to this debate may I ask if you happened to read my post #91 ?


----------



## Ruthanne (Mar 13, 2018)

Just to show how much each person has posted in this thread:
[h=2]Who Posted?[/h]

Posts 48Traveler

Posts 18Smiling Jane

Posts 18James

Posts 15Shalimar

Posts 14Warrigal

Posts 11Olivia

Posts 10Ruthanne

Posts 9Gary O'

Posts 8Sunny

Posts 6SifuPhil

Posts 2hearlady

Posts 1Stormy

Posts 1C'est Moi


----------



## Olivia (Mar 13, 2018)

Traveler, I've had it with you. As far as I'm concerned, you know longer exist. Unfortunately, there are many out there just like you. You can take that as a compliment, if you  like, but I don't think you're that happy a person. And I don't have to read your mind to know that. So, fire away if that makes you feel good.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

Ruthanne,

What is your point, please ?


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

Olivia said:


> Traveler, I've had it with you. As far as I'm concerned, you know longer exist. Unfortunately, there are many out there just like you. You can take that as a compliment, if you  like, but I don't think you're that happy a person. And I don't have to read your mind to know that. So, fire away if that makes you feel good.




haha I've heard you say the exact same thing before. You seem to be drawn to me for some reason. You'll be back.


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 13, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Haha you are truly a funny, funny man. I like jokes. So, you do read minds after all. Unwritten words, indeed. Haha



As in music, the pause between notes can be as expressive and revealing as the notes themselves.



> Phil as you are a late-comer to this debate may I ask if you happened to read my post #91 ?



Yes, I read and re-read the infamous Post #91. The thing is, quotes taken out of context can assume entirely new meanings. We have to ask ourselves, _why_ did the speaker say what they did? Was it truly a heart-felt conviction, or was it to get traffic to their books/magazines/whatever? Did they just want some press?

I could post a ton of quotes from the "Red Pill" crowd demeaning women, but outside of that crowd they would mean nothing.


----------



## Olivia (Mar 13, 2018)

> haha I've heard you say the exact same thing before. You seem to be drawn to me for some reason. You'll be back.



You're right. I've been drawn to you just like someone who has been drawn to a snake dancer. Sorry, but that's over now. I'm just sorry about how much you're going to miss me.  Try to cope.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

Sifuphil you are a man, right ?  If so, let me ask you a simple question. Why are you NOT outraged at the quotes in post #91.

If you are a man, you should be outraged.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

Olivia said:


> You're right. I've been drawn to you just like someone who has been drawn to a snake dancer. Sorry, but that's over now. I'm just sorry about how much you're going to miss me.  Try to cope.




See ? I was right. You did come back.


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 13, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Sifuphil you are a man, right ?



The last time I checked, yes.



> If so, let me ask you a simple question. Why are you NOT outraged at the quotes in post #91.



I think I addressed WHY I am not outraged in my previous post - it's all sound and fury, signifying nothing. 



> If you are a man, you should be outraged.



Oh, goody, now I'm getting Man Lessons! Yay! 

Will you teach me to walk like John Wayne, too?


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 13, 2018)

SifuPhil said:


> The last time I checked, yes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Philly, if you were any more manly, I should have you stuffed and mounted, and charge admission to view such an anomaly. Say, do I smell formaldehyde? Would you like some special tea?


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

SifuPhil said:


> The last time I checked, yes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




If you decide to argue the case on it's merits, I'll be happy to oblige. If not, then I have no time to engage in bickering


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 13, 2018)

Shalimar said:


> Philly, if you were any more manly, I should have you stuffed and mounted, and charge admission to view such an anomaly. Say, do I smell formaldehyde? Would you like some special &#55356;&#57205;?



Well, listen up, pilgrim ... that there is a mighty keen idea. *wipes nose*


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 13, 2018)

Traveler said:


> If you decide to argue the case on it's merits, I'll be happy to oblige. If not, then I have no time to engage in bickering



Translated: I give up.

Sorry you can't run with the big dogs ...


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

:trolls:


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 13, 2018)

Traveler said:


> :trolls:



Why? Aren't you hungry? REAL men get hungry, ya know ...


----------



## Shalimar (Mar 13, 2018)

Careful Philly, “resistance is futile, you will be absorbed.” Welcome, Phyllitus of Borg. Lmao.


----------



## Sunny (Mar 13, 2018)

> If not, then I have no time to engage in bickering



That's got to be the funniest quote in this entire thread, Traveler!  Your posts are virtually the _definition _of bickering.

Just out of curiosity, have you ever been even the tiniest bit wrong about anything (and admitted it?)


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 13, 2018)

Traveler said:


> Just how far are some of the lunatic man-hating feminists willing to go ?  Sarah McDivitt Woods tops the cake for absolute looney- toons.
> 
> The self avowed feminist "scholar" has written a lengthy piece entitled, "JESUS WAS A RAPE BABY".  She explains in some detail how God was the first rapist. Yeah, you read that right. God, was the first rapist.
> 
> ...



I see what she is trying to do and I reject her logic. 
I have never heard of Sarah McDivitt and I'm guessing that she is no theologian.

Gotta go now. It's playgroup morning.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

Warrigal said:


> I see what she is trying to do and I reject her logic.
> I have never heard of Sarah McDivitt and I'm guessing that she is no theologian.
> 
> Gotta go now. It's playgroup morning.




She says she has a Masters in Divinity at Harvard University and was a Minister at some church.  If interested you can Google her,   Sarah McDivitt Woods.

Yes, I also find that ironic. A minister who appears to hate God. Quite strange.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

Sunny said:


> That's got to be the funniest quote in this entire thread, Traveler!  Your posts are virtually the _definition _of bickering.
> 
> Just out of curiosity, have you ever been even the tiniest bit wrong about anything (and admitted it?)




You appear to be baiting me, but I'll bite.  I'll answer with the following quip:  "If a man speaks in the forest, and there is no woman present to hear him, is he still wrong "?


----------



## Dragonlady (Mar 13, 2018)

> women already have total, or near total, control of the ****** arena. A  man might try for sex, but it is always the woman who makes the final  decision.


Traveler, you've made this comment or one similar in other posts. I'm curious to know what you would have males and females do differently and how you would remedy this issue?


----------



## Warrigal (Mar 13, 2018)

Traveler said:


> She says she has a Masters in Divinity at Harvard University and was a Minister at some church.  If interested you can Google her,   Sarah McDivitt Woods.
> 
> Yes, I also find that ironic. A minister who appears to hate God. Quite strange.



I have googled "Jesus was a rape baby" which happens to be the provocative title of her article. It is a lot more intelligent than you give her credit for. Read it in context https://medium.com/@artscisarah/jesus-was-a-rape-baby-98e652f2d8f8

And yes, she is a theologian

_Sarah Woods is a feminist scholar, theologian, chaplain, and previously ordained minister in the United Church of Christ. She holds a BA in Religious Studies from the University of California at Santa Barbara and a Masters of Divinity from Howard University._


----------



## Sunny (Mar 13, 2018)

Well, remember, the God in this story is probably the same one who demanded that Abraham sacrifice his beloved son to prove his devotion and obedience to God, and just as he had the knife poised to kill his only child, God said, "Never mind, I was just testing you."  (Not in those exact words but that's the gist of it. Read Genesis.)

How would we feel about a human monarch who did that?

So maybe the problem isn't with God, but with the limited understanding of those who wrote the Bible? After all, all this stuff was written thousands of years ago by flawed human beings. So give God a break; He's probably innocent of both crimes.


----------



## Ruthanne (Mar 13, 2018)

Ruthanne said:


> Just to show how much each person has posted in this thread:
> *Who Posted?*
> 
> 
> ...





Traveler said:


> Ruthanne,
> 
> What is your point, please ?


There is no point...


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

Dragonlady said:


> Traveler, you've made this comment or one similar in other posts. I'm curious to know what you would have males and females do differently and how you would remedy this issue?




Reasonable question.  I don't think there is any easy remedy possible. Having said that, I'll explain my thinking. for it is a matter I've given much thought to over the years, ever since I was hired by one of my professors as her assistant in a research study on human sexuality. 

Before beginning, however, nothing I say in the following is meant to imply criticism or blame. I am merely attempting to look at this dispassionately. 

My mentor first gave me a stack of books to read on, human sexuality, down through the ages. She then had me study the mating behaviors of dozens of widely different cultures. Under her tutelage, I learned that males need females far more than the reverse. (There are, of course some exceptions)

As one example out of hundreds, there are many extremely poor villages in India. In such villages it is not at all un-common for men to be so poor that they can not possibly support a wife. They have come up with an extremely unique solution.  Several men, often 3 in number, pool their resources and then approach an unmarried woman of child bearing age. The men then jointly propose marriage to the woman. If the woman accepts, she then has 3 husbands to support her. 

Down through history men have had to impress marriageable females with their abilities to provide, not only for her, but for any ensuing children as well. As near as I can tell, this practice goes back to the dawn of recorded history. There exists numerous cuneiform clay tablets from the time of Hammurabi (1,800 B.C.) which describe how men courted females by offering her greater and greater amounts of goods and treasure until she, finally, makes her selection. 

Today things are different, but not by much. A man who is financial secure has a much better chance of finding a bride than a man who is poor. As a matter of fact I just got done reading a recent study on this very thing. Young college age females were asked if they might consider marrying a man they liked, but did not love, IF that man was wealthy. Approximately 70% of the young women answered, yes. 

Women, of course, do not speak of this in such raw terms. Instead they use the euphemism, security. Everyone knows that one of the biggest causes of arguments between husband and wife is over money matters. 

While there is no easy remedy to true equality between males and females it wouldn't hurt IF females asked males for dates and/or proposed marriage at roughly 50% of the time. This would certainly take a great deal of pressure off the males. It also wouldn't hurt if females learned what it was like to be rejected by their prospective lover. After all, men are rejected more often than they are accepted. Though I suspect that Tom Cruise, Matt Damon and Johnny Depp do not get rejected much. 

Every once in a while I hear of a woman who is the one who proposed marriage. But I think this does not occur at anything approaching the 50% mark. Actually, one out of twenty or 5% is more likely

Of course with me, at age 71, it is entirely a moot point.


----------



## Traveler (Mar 13, 2018)

Warrigal,  yes I read the entire article, several times in the last few days.


----------

